a game i should have lost so why didnt I ?

Heres a game  played were my opponent explottied a new move i tried but still couldn't pull out the win where did he go wrong?? I was wanted to know how to beat this move even though i'm the one who played it.

black probably just needed to build up a better attack on the queenside.

the question is how though one idea is a possible alkhine's gun on the queen side  that should work.

tripling on the c-file wouldn't have worked if he did that i would have attacked first to reduce his attack.

I was fatally attracted to that c5 move for years and years and have only recently been cured. It's no good. It's not immediately refutable (at least not to the best of my knowledge) but it's not a strong move. It basically puts the ball in black's court -- he controls the opening or closing of the c-file. He plays a5 to prevent you from hogging all the Queenside space, and then he can open the diagonal for his bishop when he wants to with b6, and White now has no way of opening the c-file -- putting pressure down the c-file with the rooks, is a major part of QGD type openings for White.

You can keep playing that c5 idea... god knows I did! -- but against strong players it fails. That's my experience.

There are two ways to combat an early c5: ...b6(this works if the pawn can't push to c6 and if the DSB is undeveloped), and a prepared ...e5-e4 advance(with the idea being to either break the pawn chain or start a kingside attack). Usually, you will want to go with the ...e5 plan, but sometimes ...b6 works.

thankyou I use to play it like crazy to but stopped and just brought the idea back up now i know how to combat it.

It will take white a long time to exploit his queenside space and what will be only 2 files to operate on the queenside.  That is the idea behind c5 -- even bad ideas can be good if the opponent ignores them, so this is what black should be aware of.

a5 was simply a bad move -- black should play e5 right away and be sure to maintain the tension (don't advance or capture).  Then build pressure on d4 and or build pressure on the kingside.  Black should be able to dictate the tempo now because like I said white's idea is too slow.  If black gives white time though, the idea will work.

It's funny I wrote my response without even looking at how Black responded to c5... he played against it in a pretty typical way.

But, @orangehonda: In no way is a5 "simply a bad move" -- there's nothing wrong with a5 -- you can play e5 first, or not, there's nothing wrong with playing e5 there either.

I guess you're right.  The reason I thought it was terrible, was after assessing the position after c5, I wouldn't have even considered a5.  My initial impression was that it was bad so I didn't even look at it -- looking at actual moves, I don't see anything wrong with a5... although I think the only reason it made sense is because of white's a4 (which I do think is bad... or at least a move that makes no sense.)  The way black played in the game, he had a nice advantage for sure.

To fight the c5 idea in general, I think e5 makes the most sense -- the other break with b6 is of course also worth considering depending on the position, like others have said.

Almost every good player that has posted in the Forums has not spoken highly
of the c5 move.

thank everyone but there's a c5 variation in the slav:chamellion variation is it ok if I played it in that or the same idea's remain.

Jeez c5 sure seems ok for White there -- Just goes to show as soon as you think you know something someone points out the exceptions and contradictions.. I don't really know why the c5 is effective there -- but that ...a6 variation is new to me as well.  Maybe someone will explain.

a6 is just used to for a b5 advanced. but also can anyone provide some analysis of this game.

Even bad ideas are dangerous if the opponent doesn't recognize what's going on.  c5 as played in the game isn't a losing move, but it unnecessarily gives black an easy way to play without mentioning at least equality already.  If black does nothing then white would even get an advantage out of c5, but that doesn't change it's objective evaluation.  I don't think you'd be able to find this move played by any strong player in any serious game.

I'm not too familiar with the slav, I briefly googled the chameleon variation and it seems like it's where black has played a6 which would make c5 make a lot more sense.  In the given game it only makes sense if black ignores his pawn breaks for... well, half the middle game or longer while white finishes development.

Even though development is about equal (I guess black is a little ahead actually) with less space black's pieces can handle an opening of the position more easily (less squares to cover).  So c5 really is inviting b6 more than I realized at first.

The possible fork at e4 invites e5... I'm not sure which pawn break I'd favor now actually.

To answer the original question -- I don't see anything wrong with black's play until the Bb4 thing which made no sense.  (Well, I guess besides effectively burning a tempo by playing Qc7 when he evidently planned to play b6 and Qxb6 right after).

So instead of 14...Bb4, either rook to the c file, or c5 immediately makes sense.  But even after the bishop trade and c5 cxd is played look at the position with all the heavies + knights.  Black has a small but permanent advantage in structure (white's pawns on d4 and b3).  It's time for his technique and maneuvering to come out and massage that advantage into a win.  In a tournament game, or correspondence game, this is the type of advantage you should be willing to dig deep with, and exploit it for 50 more moves and make your opponent suffer.  (But keeping both dark bishops helps black in an endgame because of the pawns I would think).

So anyway, even having reached the final position before the repetition, I wouldn't be afraid to trade off both sets of rooks and start grinding out a near endgame.  Maybe black was rated much under you and considered a draw a good result?  Or maybe like most class players endgames are a mystery so better to draw now and start a new game   Either way the answer to the thread's title may just be along the lines of "black was a chicken" because after having at least a small advantage through the entire middle game, he gave up, which is why you didn't lose