Then as now, I had the white pieces against Paul Spiller (now 153) albeit I was on a new high of board 4 as a result of absences. They meant that our grading advantage was not as convincing as we would have liked - 187-187, 180-164, 168-e177, 162-153, 156-151, 162-167. In our previous game I faced a Scandinavian, which I played very badly, and had to acquiesce to an inferior position and fortunate draw after only 19 moves. I really wasn't up for a repeat, and so I decided to have a little experiment:
I think the best that can be said for this game is that at least I won. And I needed to; somehow a very promising match position exploded in time trouble and we were left to rue the early draws on the top boards, as we could only come away with DDDWDL. Clifton are edging into the distance, one point more every week; we've drawn every match since Christmas. But a profitable week for me; two disappointing draws from October converted to wins in February, and my performance is finally back over my grade, indeed it's 180 for my last 10 games. What a difference in confidence a string of wins can make!
One can tell I'm not used to white in the English (blitz chess 'strategy' just isn't the same), as I missed a tactical shot I used to see all the time (6. Nxe5!) and pursued a faulty plan with 10. Na4?!. For once I can confidently offer a diagnosis though - my difficulties came from misjudging the position after he allowed 11. Nxc5; I underestimated the value of his central bind in relation to my harmonious pawn structure and pair of Bishops, and the stereotyped ...Nd4 soon had me casting around for a constructive move. But I clung on, and when black went from slightly better to much worse with 21... Nxe2+, I gradually turned the screw and achieved a winning position. Naturally time trouble meant the concluding moves were anything but accurate, but my advantage was big enough for it to be beyond serious doubt; here at last, the gains I made on move 11 became relevant.
Incidentally, I think that both players in this game can be labelled pessimistic; after his Knight landed on d4 I was quickly overcome by despair and started playing some very passive moves, such that I was soon rather worse. Fortunately black was too slow with his draw offer in this game! I would speculate that he was only prompted to give up N+B for R+P on move 21 because he feared the loss of a pawn on a5 - he didn't give his compensation enough credit, although I concede that this idea rests on black seeing the variation with 21... Be6 22. Bxa5 b5. Whatever made him play it, it was the turning point of the game. My reputation for accurate endgame play has deservedly taken a battering ever since I started playing, but after this game I realised something: many of my dropped (half-)points come from freaking out at opposition counterplay, real or imagined, and losing my head, leading to blunders. When it's a case of raw technique (as here up until 45... Rhh1) and the opponent has nothing to make me panic, I can grind away rather well - one can see this trend in the ending against Barron as well.
I didn't see anything here to convince me that 1. e4 isn't still "best by test." Leaving aside black's dodgy move order, he was able to play an unimportant, unchallenging line, and yet despite playing a series of natural, thematic moves, I got at most nothing out of the opening. But still, in true Fischer style, something to think about if ever you have black against me - I'm now only almost certain to open with the King's pawn...
Our next match, a tricky fixture for the A-team at home to Bath, happens to fall on my birthday. Nonetheless, I shall be there!
No comments:
Post a Comment