Annotated chess game

Again 17...a5 is the way to go.

Waste of a move. 20. Rfc1, Nc5??; 21. dc5 wins easily. So there is no need for retreating at this moment.

Another weak move. The correct move is 20...Qb7, to free up Nb6 and reestablish control over d5.

Is it just me, or does 22. g4?! make any sense? It adds pressure to the attack, and it doesn't look to me like black has any counter play to take advantage of the weakened king.

Well it is obviuos... he is defending c6. The problem is that now 22.d5, ed5; 23.Qd4 wins the game. Edit: (jamesxc) No, 22.g4 is not necessary/advisable here. White spent a lot of energy on the queenside pressure, so queenside and center is his playground   why weaken your own position? You never know if things are going to turn around in a chess game.

Again 22...Qb7 is the best move.

Looks good, but that pin is pretty strong. I'd be inclined to reverse the move order and play 24.Bf3 first. If 24...Qb7 25.Bb4 Rg8 26.Bd6 Nd5 27.Bxd5 exd5 28.Nf3 (not 28.Qxf5ch Bg6)

What about 26. Bxd5 exd5, 27. Qxf5ch?

What about 26. Bxd5 exd5, 27. Qxf5ch? Answer: 27...Bg6, and a skewer.

I really dislike Black's last moves. He is creating permanently bad Bishop for himself without real need to.

It all depends what plan you have in mind, and which minor piece you wish to trade for Black's only well placed piece. In this closed in position, I'd as lief trade bishop for knight and see what I could do with the dark squares that Black has left so invitingly ... inviting. The knight would come in handy there. From e1, the knight can easily reach g5. Oh, and the passed e-pawn would just be money in the bank...

Somewhere hereabouts I think I really would have played Bxd5 exd5 Nf3. Black would have had for practical purposes no play at all. Sure, It would be White's "good" bishop being given up, but it happens to be one of those peculiar situations in which the "bad" bishop, with its superb posting, is performing a more useful function than the "good" bishop: You have here a good "bad" bishop, and a (moderately) bad "good" bishop.

Just one little comment - usually a Bishop is called bad when it is inside his pawn chain (behind it). Bd6 is outside the pawn chain so this is why it is not considered bad anymore.

I love all positions. Give me a difficult positional game, I will play it. But totally won positions, I cannot stand them. (Hein Donner)  

Finally he played a6   but still the advantage is firmly in White's hands.

37.Bd5, ed5; 38.e6, Be6; 39.Rc6 looks like an easy win.

Agreed. Sooner or later, White ought seriously to have thought about the exchange on d5. More than likely the bishop pair, or possibly the good bishop/bad bishop dichotomy had their influences on White's thinking, which then made it very difficult to find a continuation. Another, rather radical, idea might have been 36.Qe2 with the idea of sacrificing on h5: e.g.36.Qe2 Na6 (say) 37.Bxh5 Nxc5 38.Rxc5 gxh5 39.Qxh5 Rh8 40.Qf7ch Kh6 41.Rxd5 etc. If 36.Qe2 Rh8 37.Bxd5 (that exchange again!!) 37...exd5 (37...cxd5 38.Be7 etc) 38.e6 Be8 39.Qe5ch Kg8 40.Qf6... (I haven't gone into it in much more depth than this, but it seems to me that White will win at least a pawn with the 36.Qe2 line).

White would have been better off not advancing the b-pawn, instead waiting for Black to advance, whereupon White locks up the position: ...a4, b4 or ...b4, a4. In the latter case though, White ought - yep! - to knock over the d5-knight, else ...Nc3 will be embarrassing.