Slav game

1.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.e3 Bf5 { the bishop can be won with Nf3-h4 but Then I get good activity with my rook } 5.Nf3 e6 6.Be2 dxc4 7.Bxc4 Nbd7 8.0-0 Bd6 9.Bd3 { seems like a mistake. I trade my bad bishop for his excelent one and get another free tempo. } Bxd3 10.Qxd3 0-0 11.e4 { I think this is premature and the pawn becomes weak. } e5 { In case of a queen exchange the endgame favors black whose 3-to-2 queenside majority will be more dangerous than white's 4-to-3 kingside maj. } 12.dxe5 Nxe5 13.Nxe5 Bxe5 14.Qf3 Dc7 15.h3 Rfe8 { attacking e4 } 16.Re1 Re6 17.Bg5 { stockfish likes this move, but why? I don't see its idea other than getting the bishop off the back rank. } Bxc3 { with superior q-side structure the endgame is much clearer for black. } 18.bxc3 Rae8 19.Rad1 h6 { provoking the bishop and stopping any backrank themes. } 20.Bh4 g5 { I thought this weakening of my king would be fine and I thought this would win the e4-pawn by force. } 21.Bg3 Qe7 22.e5 Nd7 { here my calculation was inaccurate, but 20...g5 was the strategic blunder that allowed it. } 23.Qh5 Kh7 24.Kh1 Nxe5 25.Bxe5 Rxe5 { here it dawned on me that I had lost. } 26.Rxe5 Qxe5 27.Qxf7 Kh8 28.Rd7 { and here I resigned }

I would really appreciate any criticism and feedback, I played black.

With comments:

Without comments:

The lessons to draw from this game is that you played the opening very well and gained equality swiftly while your opponent made some inaccuracies.However later in the game you seemed to be making some tactical mistakes without realising it i.e Nxe5 and blaming it on an obscure strategic mistake which was not exactly true. The strategy of h6, g5 was probably not optimal but it did have some tactical ideas which you did not take into consideration i.e the pin on the e file. Probably the best way to improve is to try to find a concrete answer to why you lost and then analyse instead of ignoring the tactics and blaming it on some mystical force.

Keighley wrote:

The comment that the opening was well played is just wrong. Bf5 in this move order is just bad: 5.cxd5 cxd5 6.Qb3 and Black is already in difficulties.

Can't I just 6...Qb6?

Happy_spartan:

Thanks for your excellent post. I'll start doing tactics puzzles and improve my calculation.

I am not expert in the Slav but I didn't know about that variation:

If Keighley could further highlight the deficiencies of 6...Qb6 then it would be beneficial to the analysis.

19. ... nxe5 winning a pawn looks incredibly straightforward, and computer analysis confirms its good for a big advantage.  H6 instead is a blunder (by failing to spot free material). G5 misses the free pawn again.  The computer doesnt hate G5, but humans should really, really have a good reason for playing such a potentially weakening move.  Leaving aside the free pawn, you didnt have a good reason to play a move like g5.

24.  ... nxe5 is a huge blunder of the traditional sort; nf6 instead (suggested already) is approximately equal.

Positionally, I wouldnt get too hung up on 4. . . . Bf5 and whether its good or bad.  You lost this one because of tactics.  I suggest practicing tactics at Chesstempo.com with a free account.  (Like tactics trainer here, but more and less limited free features.)

Ok, in the future I will play e6 and later put the bishop on b7

Actually, there's plenty to analyze.  Black definitely gets some activity for the pawn after 7.Nxd5 Nxd5 8.Qxd5 e6.  GM Alex Lenderman plays this stuff with Black.  It's definitely risky and not recommendable to players like OP.  Other instances of the Bf5-Qb3-Qb6 dance are much safer.  It's good to practice & know how to play either side of that type of middlegame (either having the doubled b pawns or playing against them)

I just noticed that in the original post 3.Nc3 and 4.e3 were played, but somewhere along the line someone changed it to 3.Nc3 and 4.Nf3.  That makes a big difference.  (the previous paragraph assumes we are talking aboth the standard move order 3.Nf3 Nf6 4.Nc3 Bf5)  No N on f3 provides Black with some additional options e.g.