Should white have traded rooks? Or the bishop with the knight?

This game I really flunked up, and I want to avoid it next time. I was winning in the beginning of the end(game) by a passing pawn, but then it turned out to be a forced draw because I couldn't threaten to promote on both sides.

 

So there were two factors I was suspicious of: Was it because I traded off the rooks which made the situation worse? Or that simply I haven't made the best use of my knight and king in the endgame? Thanks!

Anyways, here's the whole game (I will not make any self analyzes because I didn't have the time since this was posted at late night): 

Hey!

Yeh since white willingly gave himself the isolated e-pawn you need to use that against him.

A good rule of thumb is that if your opponent has weak pawns, you want to keep rooks on because it makes it easier to attack them.

Therefore, I'd prefer 20...Rae8, followed by slow tripling of your heavy pieces on the e-file to pressure his pawn.

Where in China are you anyway? I'm up in Jinan in Shandong province 

Another Mason Attack (1. d4 d5 2. Bf4). That opening seems to unusually popular on this site recently, unless I just never noticed it before.

()

http://www.chess.com/forum/view/game-analysis/rook-for-bishoppassed-pawn---i-lost---how-better

()

http://www.chess.com/forum/view/game-analysis/confusing-game

Thank you, a rook development into the central files was much better than my move. The question is: How can I improve my attack on that e file?

Actually, I now live in the States (NYC BABY!), I'm originally from Chengdu, Sichuan province.

I myself do not pay attention to openings at all, because I plan to work on them later on after I improve on middle and endgames. But which side does the Mason benefit more?

Sichuan food is the best in China. 

A-Ha! (you get that reference?) We get that a lot from foreigners, we have one of the most complex dishes (95% spice!), and it's one of the most delicious, but if you want to be healthy. Go try Yue cruisine instead.

Not only that, most of our old recipes were far more classic and better quality than the fake ones we have today.

The line evenutally turns into the London System.

The most common move order is with 2.Nf3  followed up with a 3.Bf4 later.

However, some believe 2.Bf4 could be a slight improvement in getting into London System against 1.d4 d5 structures.

http://www.chess.com/blog/X_PLAYER_J_X/london-system

Agreed. I didn't respond to the OP's question because if he reads the material at the links I provided his questions will be answered. Here are two more links:

()

"This is an alternative move order of the London System, not the Mason Attack."

--ThrillerFan

http://www.chess.com/forum/view/chess-openings/queen-pawn-game-mason-attack

()

Chess Openings: London System

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WtBMFWuwv1E

I've been in China since 2012 and have tried ALL cuisines (Yue included) and obviously there are tons of delicious dishes, but as a lover of spicy dishes, Sichuan still has my vote. Especially Sichuan huoguo! 

I also like Hunan, Dong bei,Henan and various others...soo much good food here.

By the way, if I wanted to be "healthy" I'd cook at home, since NO food in China these days is 100% safe haha! 

I don't think anyone has ever done this Mason's attack on me. If you ask me the person playing this should have just played e4 and played the Italian. The Italian probably would have been more of an interesting game. I don't even know why it's called the mason attack it's not even an attack. The pawn being targeted by whites dark squared bishop isn't going to fall very easily. This opening I think is a poor sideline. Apparently this sideline didn't warrant a chapter in my book of d4 sidelines.. Like the trompowsky I don't think this opening really offers any kind of opening advantage, though the trompowsky might be a little better than this opening... Maybe more than just a little... A friend of mine likes to play the trompowsky because he says the dark squared bishop usually ends up becoming useless otherwise. At least with the trompowsky he can trade it off... Not the best idea I think but anyway he likes to get rid of that bishop for my knight because the knight provides a good defensive role, taken away and that role is not filled... The way he plays is he tries to get a knight on either a4, c4, f4,or h4 depending on where you castle among other things, and tries to overload that pawn with other pieces like the queen and maybe adding a rook. Of course I've seen it a million times so it doesn't work on me anymore but he still likes to get rid of my knight for his bishop early on... Anyway, I don't think this is a good opening. If you must play d4 and must develop your dark squared bishop you should play the trompowsky instead, or the levisky attack. There may be a system one can use to exploit the advantages if there are any in this opening but heck if I know what that is. You didn't provide commentary so I am left to guess what your thought process was with each move. It seems to me you where just trying to trade pieces. I think it has been noted that your opponent had a weakness you could have exploited if you kept the rooms on the board, which is enough reason not to blindly trade pieces as I think you did just hoping you would come out better later... That's not the way to play chess. You have to create your own chances and only trade when it benefits you. Even if you kept trading pieces as you did you could have still won had you not blundered away one of your pawns, forcing your opponents king to keep an eye on it allowing you to keep both your wing pawns instead of losing them due to your king having to stop a passer. Don't get me wrong the opening I don't think is bad per say... It just, in my opinion, like the trompowsky, doesn't do anything to provide an opening advantage, which is what you want as white, having the extra tempo. You did seem to come out ahead though, even with the mindless trading. You must have gained an extra pawn somehow and I didn't see. Oh well, if that's the case, then you should really be thinking of what to do if your opponent doesn't blunder away a pawn in the opening when analyzing this game. There are better d4 openings, the queens gambit, your probably better off learning that then some sideline that didn't even warrant a chapter in my book. But to put the capstone in this, I don't really care what you play. If you still want to play the Mason attack go right ahead, it's just not seen so much at the higher level and I think your wasting your time learning it. It's more of an opening to do to catch your opponent off guard, particularly in bullet or blitz.

I do not know whether or not they call it a sideline.

However, I do know the name does not stay as Mason Attack.

You may have it in your book under a different name.

Check your book again under the chapter of London System.

It is part of the d4 family tree.

I wrote an article about it.

http://www.chess.com/blog/X_PLAYER_J_X/london-system

Trompowsky is a cousin line!

I 100% agree with the unsafe part of Chinese products, because they are all contaminated. The hot pot is technically not Sichuanese anymore, but Chongqing, although the culture and tradition is originally Sichuanese.