Sunday, June 17, 2012

John Palermo Game #1

Here is the first game from the tournament (G/55, 5 sec delay).  I had White, and it went into a Benoni.  I misplaced a couple pieces in the opening, but still ended up with a decent position.

At the end, I had all his pieces cramped up on the queenside, and I started dreaming of a kingside attack (roll the pawns, swing the rooks over).  Problem is that I missed that his Qc7 cleared the b6 square for his knight to come in and his queenside pawns just ran me down.  If I play b3 there, I'm totally fine.

Questions (other thoughts welcome of course!):
- After 12 ... a6, pros/cons for immediately reacting with 13. a4?
- Anything better than liquidating the minor pieces after 17 ... Ne5?
- Shredder didn't like my 24. Qc4.  I was worried that he was going to sac a pawn with 24 ... c4 in order to get that beautiful c5 square for his knight, and he'd probably control the c-file as well.  Was that really a "threat", and what should I have done there?
- What should the plan be after I go back in time and play 26. b3 like I should have?

I'm not too disappointed in this game, really.  I got a decent position against a player 250 points higher than me, from a totally unfamiliar opening (I don't study openings hardly at all, and almost never see the Benoni).  Going over it afterward, he didn't seem particularly happy with his position until I screwed up with g4, so that's comforting at least.

Opening notes from Richard Palliser's "Play 1. d4!".

1 comment:

  1. Interesting game. I'm not familiar with playing the Benoni structures, so will limit kibitzing to say that 13. a4 seems fine to me. The usual drawback of a4 is that it can leave b4 open for a Black knight to use as an outpost, but that isn't a consideration here, since the Nb8 can't get near it. Preventing the ...b5 push, which looks doable, then would be White's focus on the queenside.

    While I'm a big proponent of intensive opening study (including looking at model complete games and focusing on early middlegame plans), the post-game study approach I also think works quite well, since you're likely to remember your own games/analysis better than a book game. Good way to build opening knowledge brick by brick.