[Event "Koelle 2017"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "2017-11-16"]
[White "Heath Gooch"]
[Black "Bas van Riel"]
[WhiteElo "1794"]
[BlackElo "1832"]
[Result "0.5-0.5"]

{500MB, Bas-PC} 1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 Bb4 {(BvR) The very sharp Winawer variation of the French opening, which become a hot topic of  the opening discussions after Michael Tal (white) defeated the reigning world champion Botwinnik in the very first game in their match for the World Championship in 1960, using this opening.
At the time, I had become fascinated (and very competitive) in chess, whilst at secondary college. At an early stage, I had decided to focus my chess-studies on an understanding of the openings. My argument being that the most efficient and quickest way of beating an opponent is to know more of the openings and obtaining an early advantage as a result. In contrast, I considered the study of endgames a waste of time and energy (I also found it boring), as I hardly ever extended my games into endgames. So, the Winawer variation appealed very much to me after the Tal-Botwinnik game, and I made it one of my standard openings, both playing it with the white and the black pieces, if a had the opportunity. As a peculiar footnote: I have very rarely, not even in my younger years, played the Winawer with white nor with black. Except for some notable and memorable exceptions. However, lately, against Patrick Cook, I did play (2x with white) a modern variation of the Winawer. Because of Patrick's crazy-looking, yet tantalising concept (7.Qg4, O-O?!) was new to me, I decided to revisit the Winawer theory again, and got 'hooked' once more. Hence, my 'invitation' to Heath (by playing 1...e6) to have a go at the Winawer with black.} 4.e5 c5 5.a3 Bxc3+ 6.bxc3 Qc7 7.Qg4 Ne7 8.Qxg7 Rg8 9.Qxh7 cxd4 10.Ne2 Nbc6 11.f4 Bd7 12.Qd3 dxc3 13.Nxc3 a6 14.h3 {(BvR) I haven't been able to find 14.h3.. in any of my books or databases.} Rc8 {(BvR) Perhaps, it looks like chaos, but at closer observation the plans for both white and black are well defined: white needs to complete his development and his defence along the c-file; he has an extra pawn on the king side, which could become very dangerous, once white manages to get his house in order. Black has a pressure game for his sacrificed pawn on the queen side, plus a powerfull rook along the g-file.} 15.Bd2 Na5 {1.15 my time, after 8 minutes thinking. Heath 1.27} 16.g4 {BvR) 1.20 (Heath' time). The move facilitate the development of the white bishop.} Nc4 17.Be2 {(BvR) 1.14 (Heath' time)} Qc5 18.Bf3 Nxa3? 19.Rxa3! Qxa3 20.Nxd5 {(BvR) suddenly white is +1.33 ahead} Qxd3 21.Nf6+ Kf8 {(BvR) 21..Kd8; 22.Ba5+, Rc7 was, obviously, no option for black.} 22.cxd3 Bc6 23.Bxc6 Nxc6 24.Nxg8 Kxg8 25.Kf2 {(BvR) +0.90 advantage} b5? {(BvR) the previous valuation was based on 25...a5; Now, after the mistake 25...b5? it suddenly jumped to a lost (for black) valuation of +1.73. Moreover, it allows white to simplify and swap rooks after the sensible and good reply 26.Rc1..} 26.Rc1 Ne7 27.Rxc8+ Nxc8 {(BvR) here I paused, and took stock. I have two connected passed pawns, which I can support with a strongly positioned knight on d5, where it covers a number of important black squares (eg e3, c3, b4). My king is poorly placed, and it will be unable to support the passed pawns on the other side of the board, as it needs to stop white's kingside wall of pawns, when it start marching up. The worst part of my position is that both my 2 pieces and all my pawns, have very limited options, and white most likely can drive me into 'zugswang', which is a position in which my only moves will be bad ones, eg giving away material. For now, I decided to leave my king on the king side, meanwhile trying to make 'a nuisance' of my knight. Heath, quite obviously, has to try and neutralise black's passed pawns by centralizing his king.} 28.Ke3 Nb6 29.Kd4 Nd5 30.Kc5 {(BvR) more direct would have been 30.f5..} b4! 31.f5? {(BvR) But now 31.f5 (+0.95) is a (serious) mistake, as black's knight will go on a mini-rampage. White should have replied with 31.Kc4, a5 (+2.14) etc} b3 32.Bc1 Nf4! 33.Kc4 Nxh3 34.d4 Nf2 35.fxe6 fxe6 36.g5 Kf7 37.Kxb3 Kg6 {(BvR) Fritz tells me that Kg6 is not the best move, improving whites position from +0.85 to +1.52. Perhaps because the king would have been more centrally placed where it was on f7. Instead, immediatelly 37...Ne4 is suggested as the best move for black.} 38.Ka4 {(BvR) again, my engine disapproved of this move, reducing white's advantage to +0.59, without me understanding why. Perhaps, white should not have worried about the pawn on a6 and instead gone for 38.Kc4, Ne4; 39. d5? I 'asked' Fritz to analyse this position (valued at +1.52), but it 'dilly-dallied for a long time, without making any progress whatsoever. I, therfore assume that it is a theoretical draw from here on.} Ne4 39.Ka5 Ng3! {(BvR) Now white will also lose one of his pawn by force.} 40.Kxa6 Nf5 41.Kb6 Nxd4 42.Kc5 {(BvR) this oversight does not make any difference for the end result} Nb3+ 43.Kd6 Nxc1 44.Kxe6 {(BvR) After 44...Nd3; 45.Kd6, Nxe5 and 46. Kxg5 draws. 
In conclusion: after wasting a good opening experiment, due to a momentous 'lapse of some sort' by me, Heath was very alert capitalising on his fortune and resulting advantage.
 As I mentionned in the introduction, I have never been a fan of endgames, but in this case, I continuously played 'best moves' from move 26 until the end of the game (move 44). Of course, helped by Heath's decisive mistake on move 31. His was a very subtle error, compared to the gross misdemeanor, I had committed earlier on move 18, which changed a favourable to a loosing position. Although beforehand, I was hoping and had the intention to win, I feel relieved to have escaped with a (lucky) draw. I am still undecided, whether I do deserve the draw, based on the way I played. I leave this to others to judge.
I enjoyed playing this game against Heath, as he is a challenging opponent. After three games played between each other, our personal standing now stands at 2-1, with one win for Heath and two draws. I am afraid that I got to do some serious work here...} {#d}