Chess-wise, my main goal for this term is not personal - it's just to keep the Bristol University A-team from relegation. If we can consistently get good attendance then we should be alright, but that's easier said than done. For our first match of the term - a critical home match against Clevedon - I was on board 3, and that might well be as low as I get from now on. Most of our FIDE-rated players now have grades, so on paper it looks like we had slightly the weaker team (212f-182, 193-176, 164-171, 147-175, 159-155, 128f-152), but I thought we had good chances. I had black on board 3 against David Peters (171), who has been on excellent form in the league for the last couple of seasons and jumped up from a grade in the 140s. But his openings have looked a bit ramshackle in the past (he lost to us last season in 13 moves) so I was cautiously optimistic, even without the ability to prepare.
My title for this post is a homage to My 60 Memorable Games, in which Fischer searches all over a smooth win against Keres, trying in vain to locate the decisive mistake. This is a mirror image: I had a nice position from the opening, but it's not clear when it faded into yet another draw.
After some nervy moments, we emerged with a 3-3 draw (DLDWDD) which doesn't help us that much - but it could have been worse. Every point counts! I am disappointed to turn in my usual half-point, but at the same time I'm unapologetic: I have never been much of a gambler, and if a higher-graded player offers me a draw when I think my position is inferior and the match situation is promising, then of course I will take it. Relegation scraps are decided by fine margins, even in an 18-match season.
I am getting to know this structure quite well, although that doesn't mean I really grasp it yet - my understanding was that if white rushes in with e5 then usually black gains a substantial advantage, but somehow it didn't work out that way this time. White was able to defend d4 sufficiently, and I couldn't see anything useful for black to do after that. It's strange, because white was already on shaky ground after his opening choice. In the Classical KID, black allows a Knight to be driven to an awkward square at e7 in order to provoke the closing of the centre; here white has voluntarily misplaced the piece without getting any commitments from black. Yet black gets only an initiative, and nothing tangible. Maybe this is the difference between playing white and black: an opening inaccuracy by the opponent makes your position either +/- or =, depending on which side you are, which is a big difference.
No-one learns that much from 20-move draws, and indeed I am probably more confused after analysing this game than I was before! Fritz doesn't really seem to understand what's going on either, but my gut instinct is that there was never that much. Probably the one move that I would pick up on for criticism is 10... b5 - charging headlong down the board feels satisfying, but I realised almost as soon as I made the move that it's a brazen weakening. For white, the important moment was 13. cxd4; it's too easy to reflexively take back, but if he stops to look for alternatives, then it becomes obvious that 13. exf6 preserves some promising options.
Anyway, I can't complain too fiercely about easy draws with black, and especially since I hadn't played for a few weeks beforehand; for once I didn't exhibit suicidal time management. At the same time though, if we are going to stay up then I will need more than halves. Our target matches are mostly in the first half of this term, but they are interrupted by our next game on Tuesday, where we take on title candidates Horfield A.
No comments:
Post a Comment