I'll accept that there is something perverse about me exploiting someone else's nerves to win a chess game, but you have to use all of the tools at your disposal and they include knowledge of your opponent. Besides a sly draw offer to plant the seed of doubt, the most important psychological moment was probably 29. Bg5+, resolving to defend actively. Black seemed to panic in the face of my semi-threats, and once you start playing passively it can be hard to stop. I got a winning position surprisingly quickly, although converting it took a long time and at the board I was convinced I was making a total hash of it.
I've had this ending twice in serious play, and like its predecessor this game was fascinating to analyse. When you mention opposite-coloured bishops the first word that comes to mind is probably 'draw', but no! They are fiendishly difficult, but a principle I learnt from Dvoretsky's endgame series on Chess24 is worth repeating. Only when they are the last pieces on the board do fortresses become the dominant theme of the position; otherwise the initiative is the most important thing. That is why all the variations after 29. Bg5+ miraculously hold together, which is a relief since I played the move more on instinct than calculation. Before then, Pollack had played well and had deservedly equalised, although I could have squeezed more from the position and still think that White's chances are perceptibly better.
Those Swiss pairing gods (and not only they) had certainly noticed me by now, and for round 8 I was duly placed back on the titled treadmill. But I was going to be Black in a Najdorf, so how hard could it be...?
No comments:
Post a Comment