28 July 2012

Annotated Game #56: Training game - King's Indian Attack

This training game (against Chessmaster personality "Turk") was the first time I had faced 1. g3 and perhaps the innocuous start by White made me more aggressive than usual, as I chose a somewhat dubiously threatening line with 5...Bc5 instead of transposing to the normal Caro-Kann line versus the KIA.  An inadvertent pawn sacrifice from Black makes the early part of the game interesting, where White needs to be careful in order not to give Black too much activity and developmental lead.

Positionally, Black is unreasonably fearful of having a two-pawn center and as a result does not achieve an optimal set-up in the middlegame.  I had worried that the pawn center could be too easily undermined by White, but analysis shows this was not the case.  This judgment error is a good example of  how an uncritical preference for a type of position (or against one) can lead to less effective play.

Around move 30 my calculation and judgment began declining rapidly when Black was faced with a menacing White pawn mass on the queenside.  At least I had a bailout into a drawn position, rather than fully collapsing into a loss.  "Turk" had played a typical computer handicap move on move 20 to give me the advantage, so I guess I just ended up returning the favor.

The training game was useful for highlighting the individual calculation and judgment errors mentioned above in the opening, middlegame and endgame phases, so was successful from that perspective.

1 comment:

  1. Hi ChessAdmin,

    Interesting game.

    24...Rxd1+ liquidation seems to make sense being a piece up but I guess the uncoordinated pieces and relative weak pawn structure make it a wash.

    Maybe something like 24...Qd7 puts more problems to White.

    I played the KIA as White a lot and it didn't seem to offer a whole lot of advantage. Here White plays a strange variation as in my games most KIA white's play is in the center and Kside. Though Black didn't seem to have a lot of trouble getting equality.

    ReplyDelete