 |
| Black has just played 40...Qe7-e2 |
*****
*****
*****
*****
*****
*****
*****
I saw that 41.Qc5 leads to a simple draw, but instead I played 41.Qe3!?, reasoning that Black would probably play 41...Qc4, when 42.Qe5 is also a draw, although Black has to display a modicum of care.
Instead the game went 41...Qxe3!? 42.fxe3, which I had assumed, on general principles would be at least equal, and might well favour White as Black's pawn-structure is inferior.
However I had failed to properly take into account one of the most important factors in a pawn-ending, ie the activity of the kings.
After 42...Kf6 43.Kf2 Kg5 44.Kf3 Black keeps complete equality with 44...f5, but my opponent tried for more with 44...Kf5!?
Objectively this may be inferior, but I was worried about allowing ...Ke4.
I found the correct 45.g4+ hxg4 46.hxg4+ Kg5 47.e4 dxe4+ 48.Kxe4, while noting that after 48...Kxg4 White is a pawn down.
Following 49.d5 f5+ I faced a critical decision, although I did not realise it.
The game continued 50.Ke5? f4, after which both players queened and I failed to hold a pawn-down queen-and-pawn ending that endgame tablebases show is a draw.
Correct is 50.Kd4 f4 51.d6 f3 52.Ke3, which leads to 52...Kg3 53.d7 f2 54.d8=Q f1=Q.
 |
| As in the game, both sides have castled, and Black is a pawn up - but only temporarily |
*****
*****
*****
*****
White can continue 55.Qd6+, after which White will win the h pawn.
True, the resulting position is drawn, as the Syzgy tablebase shows, but the difficulty of Black's position can be gauged from the fact Komodo14.1 believes White is winning.
Throughout this ending I repeatedly misassessed the position, varying from undue optimism to undue pessimism, and rarely resorted to detailed concrete analysis.
LESSON: David Bronstein summed up the dangers of this type of faulty thinking when he said that "to lose one's objective attitude to a position nearly always means ruining your game."
No comments:
Post a Comment