Aggressive sparked game #2

This was a game played between to members of my club who met in real rated tournament play for the first time. White was the top seed and playing black was a club memeber who was 100 or so lower rated than white. The ONLY reason this ended in a draw was because of time otherwise black would have won with ease.

wow which spectator were you chessmaster and did you play in the tournament cause the game your showing is the game I played I'm the white player and OMG  that knight fork at the end would have destroyed me.

The game  has all the factors a attacker would look for in a game.

I think both played atleast 2000 stregth.

lol no thanks for spotting that out I agree white would have been better.

was that statement really nesscarry or are you joking

Well other than the last mistake what else did I miss.

title is misleading.

how ?

The game is not aggresive even though it arises from a gambit line. There is also not much of an attack.

whats considered a good attack to you then ?

The slow building of well-positioned pieces , and then the forced opening of lines. The use of tactical opportunities i.e. pins, skewer to add the the attack. Forced loss of material. Simplification and winning.