A look in the mirror

From a didactic perspective, I often find that one-sided demolitions can be some of the best games to blog. The post before this one is a good example, in fact. It's the same reason why the games of the old masters retain their instructional value: you can view their plans as though in a vacuum, since they were often much stronger than their foes and faced no real resistance. However, such games are rare between well-matched opponents, and muddled contests littered with mistakes have their place too. Games like this one, for example.

Having reached 3/4 I was quite surprised to be paired against 1688-rated Archie Flavell, but in his own words that rating is from trashy league games (an admirable sentiment!), and the more I looked the less I trusted it. Despite the enormous rating disparity, and the battle being called off early, it was still a real struggle crammed with instructive moments:

[Event "London Chess Classic U-2000"] [Site "?"] [Date "2024.12.02"] [Round "5.7"] [White "Flavell, Archie"] [Black "Young, Daniel J"] [Result "1/2-1/2"] [ECO "B94"] [WhiteElo "1688"] [BlackElo "2063"] [Annotator "Young,Daniel J"] [PlyCount "57"] [EventDate "2024.??.??"] [SourceVersionDate "2024.12.02"] {On paper, this was an excellent pairing given some of the alternatives. Flavell seemed to have no experience of serious tournament play at all, and students don't usually improve as meteorically as younger players. However, since he had gunned down two much stronger opponents already it was clear that things were not going to be so simple. Those games looked very chaotic (King's Indian fans should check out Volovich-Flavell from the previous round) so I aimed to play a steady, normal game and hope that his lack of experience might show in a simpler position. However, dullness on demand has never been my strong point...} 1. e4 {(1:30)} c5 {(1:30) See what I mean! I could only find a scant few 4NCL games to prepare from, and had no idea what would follow on 1... e5. By contrast, he'd played a Grand Prix/Reversed Dutch formation against the Sicilian more than once, and I didn't feel that an opening for kids could threaten Black. Only in the postmortem did I discover that Flavell had come to the same conclusion.} 2. Nf3 {The grown-up move. I had put some thought into what to do in this case, but it was at the edge of my preparation and it soon shows.} d6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 Nf6 5. Nc3 a6 6. Bg5 Nbd7 {Instead of my usual 6... e6: I very rarely play this move, but I wanted to escape preparation as quickly as possible. And since self-praise is going to be in short supply in these notes, this was a good choice! There are some subtle differences to the mainline, and Flavell promptly trips over one of them.} 7. f4 Qc7 8. Qf3 h6 9. Bh4 $6 {This natural move falls foul of a thematic Najdorf idea, capitalising on White's weakened central dark squares - one of the big draws to 6... Nbd7 for Black. In light of what follows, White should prefer the cramping 9. Bxf6 Nxf6 10. f5, when Black still has work to do to prove he can complete his development.} g5 10. fxg5 {(1:30)} Ne5 $2 {(1:28) It is here that the game starts to go seriously off the rails. When I was younger I could reconstruct sharp theoretical lines over the board even if I hadn't looked at them for some time, but alas this is a skill that fades with the passing of time. Really, of course, I should have checked this line because I'd planned 6... Nbd7 as a contingency before the game. The move played is by analogy with some other ...g5 lines in the 6. Bg5 complex, but here it drives White's queen to a better position and immediately places me into difficulties.} (10... hxg5 $142 {is the correct move order, and after} 11. Bxg5 {the unstereotyped} Qc5 12. Be3 {and only now} Ne5 {The point is that Black is able to drive White off of the c1-h6 diagonal with tempo, so that} 13. Qe2 Neg4 14. Bg1 Bh6 $44 {prevents White's king escaping the centre. Black has excellent compensation for a pawn here, as his pieces are visibly more active and he gains good counterplay from the open h-, g- and c-files. From 150 games in the database, White has scored just 31 percent.}) 11. Qe3 Nfg4 12. Qd2 {This is the difference: White keeps the c1-h6 diagonal under lock and key.} hxg5 $6 (12... e6 {As the computer points out, Black has a good chance of regaining the pawn this way, with ...Ng6 to follow (just not the immediate 12... Ng6?! 13. Nd5). However, White can just let it happen with} 13. O-O-O (13. gxh6 $143 $2 {is too greedy; after} Bxh6 {White has to allow the trade of dark-squared bishops with} 14. Bg5 Bxg5 15. Qxg5 {, when} b5 $44 {promises Black good counterplay - besides the open kingside files, ...b4 and ...Bb7 will turn his fire on the isolated e-pawn.}) 13... Ng6 14. Bg3 hxg5 15. Kb1 Be7 16. Nf3 Qd8 17. Bc4 $16 {: Black's g-pawn has become a liability, his control of e5 is in doubt and he is still a long way from completing development.}) 13. Bg3 $2 {The only thing that Flavell can really be criticised for in this game is showing a (supposedly) stronger player too much respect. In the postmortem not even he was sure why he didn't just take the g-pawn, which would have left me nothing to show for it since 14. h3 follows. Well, we've all been there (me more than most) and it's just a lesson that has to be taught by experience.} e6 {I could tell I'd been let off the hook. After taking the pivotal d5 square under control, Black hastens to bring his queenside pieces into play, not even stopping to retreat the g4 knight whilst the h-file pin endures.} 14. h3 Bd7 15. Be2 {(1:18)} O-O-O $2 {(1:12) A good idea but a bad move order, offering White a curious possibility. I should have first safeguarded f6 with 15... Be7, when 16. O-O-O Nf6 transposes to the game whilst avoiding the next variation.} 16. O-O-O $2 {Strategically beyond reproach, however there is a chance tactical possibility based on the unprotected f6 square.} (16. O-O $142 {In general terms, White has no business castling kingside: Black already has open lines there, the h3 pawn promises some more in time, and ...Nf6-h5-f4 is an enticing circuit. But if we look at concrete variations, other arguments can be made. Firstly, Black must now retreat the g4 knight at a moment when the f6 square is unavailable.} Nh6 {Secondly, the white rooks now have easy access to the queenside, where Black's king isn't as safe as it could be either, and this is emphasised by the amazing quiet move} 17. a4 $3 {, preparing to sacrifice a piece on the empty b5 square. What's really surprising is how powerless Black is against this plan. If he tries a forlorn counterattack with} g4 {,} 18. Ncb5 $1 axb5 19. axb5 b6 20. Ra6 $18 {, followed by Rfa1 and Qe3 with a decisive attack. That h6 knight is really missed from the defence! This wasn't an easy variation at all (17. a4 is difficult to see from afar, let alone assess) but it does highlight that Black's king is not safe in this variation even after escaping to the queenside. This becomes a theme later on.}) 16... Nf6 17. Nf3 $14 {Here I had to stop and think for a while - 25 minutes, as it turned out. My gut feeling was that I was alright, but this was maybe relief tinged with the hope that I could outplay my lower-rated opponent in a vaguely equal position. What in fact should be said about the very tense position that has now arisen? Black's ultimate goal in striking out with 9... g5 was to win control of the e5 square, and in this he has succeeded. Either he has a great outpost for the knight, or White will exchange on e5 and Black's pawns will control all of the central squares. He has almost completed development, and if left in peace he can hope to generate play on the open kingside files starting with ...Rdg8. On the other hand, neither of the unhappy pawns on g5 and especially d6 are an adornment to my position, and, as the last variation vividly illustrates, my king is less than secure. In what follows it turns out that these factors, particularly the last, are the more significant.} Nh5 $6 {Stylistically typical: forcing events. White does not duck the challenge though, and plays to punish me for the loss of time.} (17... Bc6 $142 {would be nice to play, reinforcing d6 and pointing at the e4 pawn, however I rejected it because White wins a pawn with the forcing sequence} 18. Nxe5 dxe5 19. Qxd8+ Qxd8 20. Rxd8+ Kxd8 21. Bxe5 {. And yet this is the computer's preferred line! White has problems with the defence of e4, and after the un-pinning} Rh6 22. Bd3 Bb4 23. Re1 Nd7 $44 {has good activity in return for the pawn deficit.}) 18. Nxe5 dxe5 (18... Nxg3 $143 $2 {White's dark squares often trouble him in Open Sicilians, so I was captivated by exchanging the bishop off, but I had to resist: after} 19. Nxf7 Nxh1 20. Nxh8 Ng3 21. Nf7 $18 {Black loses further material.}) 19. Bxh5 $1 {White trades off the lesser half of his bishop pair in exchange for time, rather than let the knight settle on f4. Black has problems with his dark squares on the queenside, and that is the bishop which White needs to keep.} Rxh5 20. Qe2 $6 {(54) It's so enticing to gain a tempo against the loose rook, but the queen is better placed on f2. From there it keeps the backward f-pawn under observation, and also aims for f6 from where it can place the e5 pawn under pressure.} Rh7 {(42)} 21. Kb1 Bb4 $6 {Quite a vacuous developing move; I wasn't sure what to do here and the text move, bringing a piece out for its own sake, soon turns the dark-squared bishop into a target.} (21... f6 $142 {is a better move, anchoring the e5 and g5 pawns as well as restoring the h7 rook's communications with the queenside. After} 22. Bf2 Bb4 23. Rd3 {now has} Bc6 $11 {followed by ...Rhd7 - compare this with the next variation. If Black can activate his pieces then the two bishops and the isolated e4 pawn offer good long-term chances.}) 22. Rd3 {(The tricky 22. Rd4!? is also worth considering)} Rg8 $2 {Much too optimistic: Black is playing on the wrong side of the board. Since any threats on the kingside are a long way off, shoring up the queenside remains the priority.} (22... Bc6 $2 {was the move I wanted to play, but it doesn't work:} 23. Rxd8+ Kxd8 (23... Qxd8 $144 24. Bxe5) 24. Qd2+ $16 {wins the g-pawn. Therefore I chose to remove the rook from d8, in order to prepare this idea. However,}) (22... Rhh8 $142 $14 {is a safer way to do it, keeping the rooks involved in the defence.}) 23. Rhd1 Bc6 24. Bf2 {Once I saw this idea I stopped feeling optimistic about my position. The dark squares around my king are exposed, and the clumsily-placed bishop on b4 struggles to assist. Worse, since White has been gifted the d-file to himself, my king has nowhere to run should the enemy pieces infiltrate. For example, if the White queen checks from a8, I can't block with ...Qb8 because of Rd8+! winning my queen.} Rhh8 {After examining 24... g4 to no avail, I was forced to conclude that the rooks had to rush back towards the centre. Admitting the loss of time may hurt Black's pride, but they don't award points for consistency!} (24... Kb8 {is Stockfish's attempt to defend, with the point} 25. Qe3 b6 $1 {: Black is more than happy to sacrifice a pawn in return for the trade of queens, because then White's counterplay against his king is neutralised and Black's long-term advantages become the major factor in the position. Alas, it's all for nothing since White can ignore the 'gift' and play} 26. a3 (26. Qxb6+ $143 $2 Qxb6 27. Bxb6 f5 $44 {does not frighten Black: he has two bishops and easy play with his rooks on the open files, which are suddenly well placed now that the danger to the black king has been removed.}) 26... Bc5 27. Qd2 Bxf2 28. Qxf2 Kb7 29. Rd6 $16 {. White remains in control of the d-file, since trying to challenge it with ...Rh8 and ...Rd8 would merely hang the f-pawn.}) 25. Qe3 $2 {(38) This is what I'd feared - White has set his sights on a7, with the Qa8+/Rd8+ combination I mentioned earlier in mind. I still thought that this had to be stopped, by radical means if necessary, however this is not so. Therefore Stockfish prefers to lead on the g1-a7 diagonal with the bishop, shortening White's reach and targeting b6 instead.} (25. a3 $142 Be7 26. Be3 Rd8 27. Qf2 {28. Bb6 is now a big threat, and if} Rxd3 28. Rxd3 Bd8 {White can force the opening of lines with the thematic Sicilian move} 29. Nd5 $1 exd5 30. exd5 {Black can't retreat the bishop because of 31. Rc3, so White regains the piece at once.} Kb8 31. dxc6 Qxc6 32. Qxf7 Qxg2 33. Qe6 $16 {Black has preserved material equality, but the continuing insecurity of his king combined with the weak e- and g-pawns promise him nothing but suffering.}) 25... b5 $2 {(13) Further loosening the pawn cover around my king was the last thing I wanted to do, but I believed that Qa7 had to be stopped and that there was therefore no choice. However, similarly to 24... Kb8, Black has an opportunity to stem the bleeding by jettisoning a pawn, and I was again blind to this possibility.} (25... Rd8 $142 {Seemingly this just tees up the Qa8+ tactic I've already mentioned, and don't forget I'd just played 22... Rg8 precisely to avoid it. But Black intends} 26. Qa7 Rxd3 27. Rxd3 b5 $1 {to evict the white queen from its post. 28. Qe3 is too passive to place Black in much danger, and after} 28. Qxa6+ Qb7 {White has to consent to a queen exchange, giving Black the positional compensation for a pawn already discussed in the 24... Kb8 variation.} 29. Qxb7+ Bxb7 $44) 26. a3 Be7 {Now White has a big chance.} 27. g4 $2 {Unfortunately for him this is too careful: there was no need to solidify the kingside, and White's chances are tied up with Black's compromised queenside. Once again, a stock Sicilian sacrifice is the way forward.} (27. Nd5 $142 $1 {Black's goose seems to be cooked here whatever he does: his pieces are too passive, and his structure too cavernous.} exd5 (27... Qb7 {Refusing the piece is no help owing to} 28. Nxe7+ Qxe7 29. Rc3 Qc7 30. Rdd3 $18 {with the decisive threat of 31. Rxc6}) 28. exd5 {Once again Black has to return material because of the Rc3 pin, but on} Bxd5 29. Rxd5 Rd8 30. Qe4 Kb8 31. a4 $18 {begins to strip away what remains of the black king's protection.}) 27... Rd8 {Not before time!} 28. Na2 Qb7 $2 {But this gives White a fresh opportunity. It was more prudent to follow through on my last move and start chopping wood on d3: exchanges ease the danger to my king, and they also amplify White's static weaknesses on h3 and e4. Instead, impatiently targeting e4 straight away leaves my king in jeopardy. But...} 29. Nc3 $2 {(White draw offer!?) This offer is not unlike taking the money on "Who Wants to be a Millionaire?". Though Flavell regretted it afterwards, it does put the question to his opponent, and winning games in which his opponents refused a draw then overpressed went on to become his calling card. Luckily for me, I judged him by his play rather than his rating. I'd obviously wanted a win, and in a simplified position my sounder structure and two bishops could have their say. But I reluctantly decided it was too risky to play on with 9 minutes for 11 moves and a vulnerable king. From a tournament perspective drawing this game was not disastrous, but losing it would have been.} (29. Nc3 {After this move, equality is a fair assessment (though that's not true of the position a half-move earlier). If I had played on I would have started by trading all of the rooks.} Rxd3 30. Rxd3 Rd8 31. Rxd8+ {In the postmortem we looked at} Kxd8 32. Qf3 f6 33. h4 gxh4 $6 {(a better and more active defence is 33... a5, mobilising the queenside pawns)} 34. Bxh4 $14 {, and I decided that I had been right to accept the draw. However, things could have been a lot worse...}) (29. Nb4 $142 {Flavell ruefully pointed this out to me the next day. Black has nothing better than following through on his threat of} Bxe4 {, however his king continues to plague him and} 30. Rc3+ Kb8 31. Nxa6+ $1 Qxa6 32. Rxd8+ Rxd8 33. Qxe4 Rd5 34. Rb3 $16 {is grim for Black. Keeping the b-pawn alive will be a struggle, and it's not only the king in trouble: Black's pieces are far away from the fixed kingside pawns. If my opponent had found this, or rather stuck it out past the point of resistance (29... Bxe4), my prospects would have been bleak.}) 1/2-1/2

Like me, Flavell seems to have started competitive chess as a sixth-former. After being ambushed in the opening, outplayed through much of the game and saved only by some missed tactics and shaky nerves, it did feel like I'd played a younger version of myself. He even dared to take me on in a Najdorf of all things. For a long time I was bulletproof on the black side of that venerable opening, but opportunities to play it are becoming increasingly rare and my lack of practice showed.

Good preparation accounts not only for what has been but also for what might yet be, and 6... Nbd7 was a premeditated emergency exit which proved its worth when my opponent straight away walked into a known trap. Alas, I couldn't remember what the trap was! It's true you can only look at so much, but that was a big miss and made it painfully clear that I can't always rely on piecing it together at the board. The lapse doomed me to a difficult game, even after unaccountably being given the gambit pawn back, since my king was a permanent concern.

In large part the game was a tale of me defending poorly and Flavell playing good, sensible moves but nevertheless failing to take his chances. 16. O-O and the ensuing piece sacrifice on b5 is an early example, albeit not a trivial one, but most of my troubles stemmed from abandoning the d-file. I was trying to defend without concessions, whilst rushing to begin activity of my own on the kingside, and so I didn't see the opportunities to offer a pawn to defuse things. Ultimately I had to waste time retracing my steps, allowing his play against the queenside dark squares to become menacing. Had he played either of the Nd5 sacrifices in the notes (he mentioned the idea in the postmortem...) or found the Nxa6+ deflection after 29. Nb4, my write-up of this game could have looked very different. Misfiring calculation was my saviour in this game, though it was nice to be on the other side of that for a change.

It's a rare day when I accept a draw from someone nearly 400 points lower-rated, particularly when the board is full of life. But I've never forgotten the 2017 Major Open, when I fought tooth and nail to get to 5½/6 and had nothing left in the tank when I played the top seeds at the end. When you're at the sharp end of a tournament it's best viewed not as a series of isolated games but a holistic construction, and it would be too easy to ruin the whole edifice with one rash moment. I don't regret taking the draw, but it's a delicate decision and I'm sure some readers would have kept playing. A better question is why Flavell wanted a draw in the first place, however I will offer a defence from personal experience: along with the wider challenge of getting nervous against higher-rated players, it is something we all have to grow out of. For those of us who began serious play relatively late, sometimes it takes a while. When I was younger I used to offer inexplicable draws all the time, but at some point I stopped without making any conscious effort to do so.

This brought me to 3½/5 - still not bad, but if I wanted to keep pace with the leaders I needed to keep winning games. A grittier effort was called for in the next round, and after another opening fiasco I had to dig deep.