Annotated chess game

Which is the only reason that I'd also take this way. Just recently, I prevented someone from castling by doing something similar, and I don't remember who it was against.

What a scattered looking position!

But a dangerous one to try to exploit. Black has good defensive positions to use here, white has to play carefully

I'm inclined to think White has rather the easier position. For the moment Black's king can't castle, and White has a small edge in development. Sorting out White's Q-side might be a bit of a task, though.

True, but black has the pawn. Chances are balanced

The threat is 14.d6! I like to test out threats by imagining it were White to play in the present position. So: play a 'nothing move' for Black: 13...a6(??) 14.d6 Ne5 15.Qd5! Qxd6 (I can't see anything better: the knight is pinned) 16.Qxd6 exd6 17.f4. Wins a piece for White. There being no direct means of blockading White's d-pawn, Black has recourse an indirect...

What I also like is that the R is centralized which brings white closer to controlling the center.

I have a feeling White might be more interested in the a2-g8 diagonal than the pawn on b4.

I don't see how it would be a discovery, or masked battery, as ION calls it.

14....Bf5 15. Qxb4 Nd3 16. Qb5+ and white is OK.

Yes. 14...Bf5 15.Qxb4?? Nd3, oops. Or 14...Bf5 15.Nd2 0-0 16.d6ch e6! and Black's position would be looking pretty solid. ++++++++++++++++++ Response to charleshiggie Not... quite: 14...Bf5 15.Qxb4 Nd3 16.Qb5ch Qd7 17.Qxd7ch Kxd7 18.Rd1 Nxc1 19.Rxc1 Bxb2 wins the exchange for Black. If you like I could tidy up this whole comment.

If you know what your opponent intends, it is often quite a good idea to examine the consequences of preventing that intention being carried out. This goes further than obviating threats, but can lead to subtle strategic battles. Black intends ...Nd6 to blockade White's d-pawn. How about preempting that notion: 16.d6! e5 17.Nd2 0-0!? 18.Bxe5 Bxe5 19.Rxe5 Qxd6 20.Re5 ... 'Unclear', as they (used to) say.

ION's first sentence changes my thought process even more. And, it brings me back to what Ken was alluding to. That was, at the end of our second training game, he said that I needed work on assessment. The main thing to fix, of course, was sleep deprivation. But, after seeing this comment, I realize that Kenneth_fiore_3 was also alluding to this. And, it goes along with what GM Susan Polgar always emphasizes to her students which blends with what bhidragon calls KKQ assessment of asking yourself if you can be checkmated or checked, and if so, how serious. And, then, can your Q be captured. But, with Susan it's the same idea, but, "You must ask yourself, what does my opponent want?" And, that goes with trying to figure out your opponents intention before you make that very move.

It turns out that after all White DID prevent the immediate 16...Nd6, as this would have been the outcome: 17.Bxd6 Qxd6 18.Ne4! Qd8 (...Qd7 is no better and probably worse) 19.d6 e6 (...e5; Qd5) 20.d7ch Bxd7 21.Nd6ch Kf8 (...Ke7; Rad1) 22.Qf3ch, with 23.Qxb7 to follow.

17.d6 must still have been worth a look, with the idea 17...exd6 18.Bd5, and active piece play in the centre. A dynamic balance would have still characterised the position.

To prevent white from playing 18.d6 ION mentioned about that, but I didn't see the point of it since black could play, instead of ...exd6 ...e6. Now, I realize that with that comment and the move played, this would pose as a serious problem for black. So, since I have more to learn here my question is how?

18.Bg5 might have been worth consideration, threatening 19.Nxd6 Qxd6 20.Bxe7. After 18...Rf7, though, Black seems to be comfortable enough: [a] 19.Nxd6 Qxd6 20.Re4 ... (Preparing to double rooks, but also preventing ...Bd4) 20...Bd7 (20...Bf5 21.Rxb4!) 21.Bf4 ... (Preparing 22.Rxb4, though White might consider playing the move at once. The refinement here is that the insertion of this bishop move seems to induce Black to an exchange sacrifice, as a Q move instead leads to 22.Rxb4, and the initiative in White's hands. Maybe.) 21...Rxf4 22.Rxf4 b5! and suddenly those Q-side pawns are looking very dangerous, especially in association with all those open files and diagonals for Black's bishops. Or [b] 19.Nc5 Bf5 11.Nxb7! ... (with the idea 11...Nxb7 12.d6!) 11...Qc7 12.Nxd6 with a dynamic balance: all those rooks and bishops; all those ranks and files!

This is the natural looking move, and, as it develops an unused piece, probably the best. But, the Exchange sac having featured in some earlier lines, I wonder whether it might 'go' here? 18...Rxf4!? 19.gxf4 Bf5 and now 20.Ng3 Bd7 unclear; 20.Nxd6 Qxd6 - either way, White's structureless structure probably balances Black's slight material deficit.

There is a 'Queen sac' buried in the 20.Nxb7 line...

And, I would've missed the Q sac here, so how does this line go, ION?

20.Bg5, threatening 21.Bxe7 looks like a possibility.

He could have taken 20...Qxd6 instead, and this ... might ... have been the sequel: 21.Nxb7 Rxc1! 22.Nxd6?? (of course, 22.Rxc1 is the right move, but Black seems to be doing fine after 22...Qe5 23.Nxa5 Qxb2) 22...Rxe1ch 23.Bf1 Bh3. OK, not really a Q-sac.