Annotated chess game

1.d4 and 1.e4 are both good choices and it's pretty much a matter of taste. Although 1.d4 is generally considered more positional than tactical, it can be just as tactical as 1.e4, and 1.e4 can be just as "slow" as 1.d4. This move allows white to maintain positional pressure a lot longer, but nonetheless, black has his chances too, especially with sharp lines such as the KID and the Grunfeld. Just use whatever you feel comfortable with. Whether it be e4 or d4, the fact is, the better played side wins.

I'm no expert on the QG, but surely this way of declining the 'gambit' is better than the more common e6, because it doesn't block in the white bishop. If someone would explain why e6 is considered better, i would appreciate it.

I do not know the QG well, either, but here are some guesses... a) Much like in many old school main lines of the Caro-Kann, the f5 Bishop can get trapped awkwardly outside the pawn chain after ...e6 and b) the Bishop is commonly developed to b7, after ...b6 and ...c4, which is a strong placement. 2...e6 creates a solid pawn structure without releasing any tension. Personally, though, I prefer the Slav: 2...c6 vs. the QG... And if I am off-base in my analysis, please correct me.

maybe because after 3. cxd Qxd 4. Nc3 white develops with tempo and trades a c pawn for a d pawn...just a guess.

That's why black would respond 3. cxd Nf6 and come out decently. I don't understand why not this bishop move either...but GMs can't be so wrong...

I don't think the bishop move is wrong...it serves a clear purpose. It isn't necessarily better than e6 though, which stabilises the pawn chain, opens up the DS bishop (c5 is considered to be bad for white in most variations). The problem with the LS bishop after e6 can be resolved later, often with b6 and Bb7. This is a nice system because black has about ten clear, straightforward and solid moves to make and when you eventually play c5 the LS bishop can be a real asset. At the end of the day, the choice here is one of taste and how well you know the ideas of each setup.

... Especially with Black's central pawns arranged as they are...

This isn't necessary from black; this pin was offering no real threat, and there's no way you can be sure this is the best square for the bishop. Better would have been c6, a common 'book' move in QGD games to consolidate the d pawn whilst handing the d8-a5 diagonal to the black queen. As the knight can easily be developed to d7, taking away the potential c6 home for it is a small price to pay.

Agreed. 5. Bg5 is not really a threat: d5 is well protected. And Black has the option of making the non-committal developing move, 5... Nbd7 -- and non-committal moves are generally preferred over a committal move like 5...Be7.

Dean gets aggressive by moving a piece twice in the opening before castling? Will GB be able to take advantage?

what about Qb3 ?

GB is graderguy; if you want to find out where GB comes from you'll have to ask the man himself. Moving the bishop for the second time shows why Deans 5th move was wrong.

Keep on letting him move the same pieces over and over, grader -- develop!

Agreed with Ethan, dean is wasting valuable time. There were plenty of reasonable developing options e.g. c6, Nd7, Nc6 or maybe even g5 to set up a pawn charge on the kingside.

Wow, he's wasting precious tempo and exchanging both bishops for knights, your advantage will be nearly decisive.

Was there anything against 8...g5 9.Bg3 Ne4 - ?

You can always undouble with cxd5 if you don't like it.

Doubled pawns don't really mean much unless it means the opponent has a pawn majority on part of the board, in which case the opponent would probably win if it went to a King vs King endgame. They're not too bad Grader, so you shouldn't worry about getting them too much.

Agreed. There are also many pieces still on the board. This disadvantage is practically meaningless. It only really matters in an endgame, which you are far from. Plus, you have the two bishops, better space and development, etc. In the Nimzo-indian, white will usually accept the doubled pawns, and in such a case, he is at no disadvantage.

Moreover, they are well-placed central pawns. This position is just fine for White.

Although it won't seal this fate, this move isn't very good. The queen hasn't been given any decent options and it doesn't even break the pin. 10. g5 might have been alright for an attack on the now castled kingside, but if black wanted to focus on development first the same kind of options i mentioned on 8 would have been fine.

I don't like this move. I am a firm believer in maintaining the tension as long as possible, and this move seems to clarify a bit too early. It also gives Black a strong pawn on d5, which controls White's holes at c4/e4... I much prefer waiting and tempting Black to capture on c5, instead, if possible.

Grader unknowingly sacrifices the exchange. A dubious decision, but this get's black's strong bishop off the board, gives white the two bishops (and in an endgame, two bishops + a rook are often equal to two rooks and a knight), and a strong queenside presence. This is a mistake, to be sure, but I don't think it's fatal.

Don't make excuses for him Ethan! Losing a rook for a bishop without a good reason is bad whichever way you look at it. With these guys games being less than perfect, there is still a chance for grader, so no it isn't fatal, but it's still damaging.

A horrible oversight nonetheless, but I still think you are slightly better here.

I think I'd rather have the Black pieces after 12...Bxb1 13.Qxb1 b6 ...

At this point, I'd have traded him sides in a New York second. rt4sm is right, there is no excuse for sloppy play like that!

I never knew self-loathing could be so entertaining!   Black is better, sure, but White's still in the game...

Your position is only slightly disadvantageous -- don't be discouraged just because the score says -2 for you! Seriously, his queenside still has two pieces at home, he's got to address the threat to the b7 pawn, and he's not castled yet. Your developmental edge and central presence counts for a lot!

Grader been talking about this, sacrified a rook for it, but it hasn't actually achieved anything for him. That must be irritating...

The way he's talking, this was what White envisaged several moves back. Maybe he was anticipating something happening with Ne5 at some point. But Black is fine, it seems to me.

Here is what I was thinking, but you have to pretend his White Bishop does not exist (because apparently I believed it did not): 12. Rb1 b6 13. Bb5+ c6 14. Bxc6+ My reasoning was that it would disrupt his pawns queenside. Sometimes weak pawns over there turn to my advantage in QP games, lots of open space in some lines. I guess it never hurts to foul up someone's pawns (unless you throw away a rook in the process!)