Rapid Game Recap: White against the Sicilian Najdorf
On dealing with an unnecessary loss, or, Why Chess is actually a very emotional game.
Time Control: 15 minutes + 10 second increment per move
White: Me (2093 lichess rapid)
Black: 2250 lichess rapid
I happened to get matched up against a player whose wins against me knocked me down from my highest rating on rapid, so I was eager to play a good game and start evening up the score.
The Opening
1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 d6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 a6 6.Be2
I enjoy this variation for its strategic depth, and it avoids a lot of the sharper ideas in the Najdorf, so the theoretical load is relatively light.
6…e5 7.Nb3 Be6 8.f4 Be7 9.g4 exf4 10.Bxf4
When Black goes for this Be6 idea combined with exf4, often White can go for opposite sides castling and enjoy a stronger presence in the center. The d6 pawn is weaker than the e4 pawn.
10…Nc6 11.g5 Nd7 12.h4 Nde5
13.Nd4?
This was a mistake. 13.Qd2, simply preparing to castle, was a better choice. I have no need to fear 13…Bxb3 14.axb3, since castling is still safe, as I have time for Kb2 afterward.
13…Nxd4 14.Qxd4 Qc7 15.O-O-O Rc8 16.Rd2?!
This is an awkward spot for the rook, but it does allow my knight to move to d5 at any given moment.
The Middlegame
16…O-O 17.h5 Qa5 18.a3?
Played after a few minutes of searching for a move. I was considering 18.Nd5, but was worried about the a2 pawn and my king’s position — however, after 18…Bxd5 19.Qxd5, a2 is covered and my position still keeps all its trumps.
18…Rc7 19.Nd5 Bxd5 20.Qxd5 Qxd5 21.Rxd5 Rfc8
22.Bd1?
22.c3 was the obvious choice.
22…Rc4 23.Re1 R8c5 24.Rxc5 Rxc5
I think here my opponent could have played 24…Nd3+ 25.Kb1 Nxc5, improving the knight and attacking the e-pawn twice.
The Endgame
25.Be2 b5 26.Rd1 a5?
This loses an important pawn. Black chose the wrong side of the board for counterplay. Black should push his pawn majority on the kingside via g6 and try to create a passed pawn and activate his king.
27.Be3 Rc8 28.Bxb5 Nc4 29.Bf4 Rc5
This looks like a threat to win the g-pawn, but the black knight is hanging after 30.a4 Bxg5 31.Bxg5 Rxg5. Had I seen this, I would have played 30.a4; instead I opted for a rook trade, which in light of my bishop pair and queenside majority should still lead to a win.
30.Rd5 Rxd5 31.exd5 Ne5 32.h6?!
Materialistic. I was trying to save the g5 pawn by provoking a capture on h6. I should have set my pawns on the queenside in motion via a4, or I could have played Kd1 (stepping out of checks from g5). My move doesn’t lose the game, but it also doesn’t make any meaningful progress. This position is where the trend of winning the game begins sharply reverting to a draw.
32…Nf3 33.b4 axb4
34.axb4?
A mistake made under the consideration of my low clock time (I’m under a minute here vs my opponent’s six). The idea which I saw first and should have gone for was 34.a4. Black cannot play 34…Bd8 without dropping the d6-pawn, after which I have just created another passed pawn. These sort of little tactics are hard to see under time pressure in a long game where you have to switch to “blitz mode”. I think I would have seen this idea intuitively in a blitz game, which is paradoxical.
34…Nxg5 35.hxg7 Kxg7
Generously improving my opponent’s king for him.
36.c4?
36.Bd3, moving out of the way of the b-pawn so it can advance was the obvious idea.
36…h5
37.Bd7?
37.c5! dxc5 38.Bxc5 and either black lets a pawn advance or loses the knight.
37…h4 38.Bxg5?? Bxg5+ 39.Kd1
The win is no longer in sight. Opposite color-bishop endgame, this is a theoretical draw in most cases.
39…Kf6 40.Ke2 Ke5 41.b5 Bd8 42.Ke3 Bb6+
43.Kd3??
Somehow it has not registered to me that my queenside pawns can be captured with no ill effect to the result. For instance 43.Kf3 Kd4 44.Kg4 Kxc4 45.Be6! Kxb5 (45…fxe6 46.dxe6 loses for Black) 46.Bxf7 Bd8 47.Kh3, and it is impossible for either side to make progress. This is difficult to see with under 30 seconds on your clock, but I should have intuited my way through to the end result. White is safe even down a pawn:
43…f5??
Black misses his opportunity to win the game outright via Kf3, escorting the pawn. My bishop will be sacrificed, and then black escort the f-pawn.
46.Be8 Kf4 45.Bh3 h3
0-1 (???)
I resigned here, because the h-pawn was “unstoppable”, and I was under so much time pressure, and to me it was a foregone conclusion black was going to win anyway. However, my choice to resign was the blunder.
46.Ke2 holds the draw, because after 46…h2, the bishop is protected on f3 and stops the promotion on h1.
T. I. L. T.
I should have quit playing chess for the evening here.
Of course, after I lost this game, I analyzed in a rushed pattern with stockfish to find my mistakes quickly, wrote some negative self-talk to myself in the analysis, and then moved on to the next game ASAP, wanting to avoid sitting with my choice to resign a drawn game. And, of course, that game I lost a piece quickly in the opening and resigned shortly thereafter, realizing I was feeling the tilt. I finally quit playing. But I still didn’t deal with my emotions until the morning after.
This is one of the hardest parts about chess: dealing with emotions. On the outside and to neophytes, chess is known as a game of “logic”, chess players are compared with computers as these calculating geniuses. The game is supposedly “pure logic”. But ask any actual chess player and you will find this is not true. Moods swing faster than a queen can travel from one side of the board to the next.
The reasons I lost this game or made bad moves were a combination of tactical blindness, psychological pressure due to being low on time, and especially my emotional state — the way I felt about the game dictated the way I played, and the way I resigned. The trend had started in the late endgame, where I was making poor choices, and I squandered the win. This frustration led to me playing differently — suddenly I was trying to save my ego before the position had turned to a theoretical draw. I had really wanted to win this game and was starting to feel dejected because my opponent had some say in the matter. Plus, I was excited about the prospects of blasting past 2100 rating again. In short, my emotions affected my play negatively.
The lessons learned here are plentiful, both on the board, and in my mind, but only now can I write them down:
Tactics, tactics, tactics. My opponent played so many inaccuracies and I missed how many times I could have overloaded his pieces.
Pawn structure doesn’t always matter. I made some moves to save superfluous pawns or stop them from being doubled, which wasted time that would have been better spent elsewhere, such as improving or developing other pieces.
I have to get better at switching to “blitz mode” when under time pressure. I only switch successfully about 50% of the time. Had I done this, a lot of tactics I would see instinctively might have materialized over the board.
I have to sit in the feelings of loss, learn to accept the loss immediately, and become as objective as possible. Not doing so jeopardizes my ability to enjoy the game and to make good choices afterward. I feel I’ve recovered after this loss, but what would be better is to recover immediately, the sooner to be ready to learn. I can avoid the damaging effects of tilt if I become better at this.
Hopefully I take these lessons with me into every game I player hereafter, but I’m sure there will be repeat learning opportunities.