In round 2, I was paired against a 163, Alex Freeland. Irritatingly, it was a downfloat after he lost in the first round (all 9 games yielded a decisive result) but such is life. Sometimes I wonder half-seriously if my name, alphabetically late as it is, somehow incurs the wrath of arbiters and makes them want to give me tough pairings, but we all have our own excuses.
After hearing him talking to a friend (before he saw his pairing, lest it seem I was the victim of an underhand trick!) about playing the Scotch Gambit, I remembered the ease with which I gained the advantage against that opening in the first of two Gupta-Young school games. So I decided to dispense with my usual 1... c5, and played 1... e5. Unfortunately, he had a different gambit altogether in mind, and after that early surprise, I never quite recovered my composure.
Despite what I said above, my improvised conduct of the black side of the King's Gambit was not the cause of my defeat; indeed, I had a more than tenable position at that point. But Freeland's play was energetic, keeping up an initiative. It is here that 2. f4!? becomes important - it is perhaps due to my surprise at just what was on the board that I was more put out than usual by the advance of the white forces, culminating in 16. Ne5 and the futile exchange sacrifice that followed. After missing my solitary chance to cobble together some genuine compensation (20... Be6), my opponent played precisely to finish me off rather easily.
Happily, I quickly started winning again in the evening round, playing as energetically as did the victor of this game.
No comments:
Post a Comment