The chess horizon

"But it is also very unsatisfactory for a master to play only one opening; his opponents will be well prepared for play against him, and above all his chess horizon will be too narrow, in many positions he will simply play by rote."

Botvinnik, in the Foreword to 100 Selected Games

OK, he was writing about master tournaments, and I don't follow his recipe, but the conclusion is valid at all levels. The last bit - the chess horizon - is what really counts. On which note we come to round three, where I had black against Richard Jennings (175/1924). He is a system player, and seemed to be thrown by my very first move! He decided to play something different, but that gave me the chance to transpose into a good version of a standard structure which he apparently didn't understand. His position didn't take long to fall apart:

My repertoire is no more likely to generate Benoni positions than my opponent's, but at least I knew the basics. (The Rios book mentioned in the notes is well worth your time.) My assessment wasn't perfect - the positions with a pawn on e4 were unfamiliar to me - but it's obvious that White's rooks have no business on c1 and d1 with the centre closed. I get a crushing attack even if he doesn't give a piece to the cause several moves later, and to be frank both players should have been more awake to this. In sum, White's mistake was not to mishandle the Benoni-style position, but to allow it in the first place.

So, a victory for (limited) erudition, and now I was on 2/3. So far the signs were very encouraging, but there was a long way to go. Next up, a rematch that I could probably have done without.