Unfamiliar territory: Black in a Nimzo-Larsen
Posted: Sat Dec 26, 2020 9:16 am
I'm really missing OTB chess as probably a lot of people are, but I'm trying to play some decent games online. Here's a correspondence game I played with Black over the course of a day (!). I can't recall facing the Nimzo-Larsen before and I misplayed the opening losing a pawn. I got it back and then ended up in a middlegame that felt playable and enjoyable and the resulting ending was drawn.
My own analysis, without looking much at an engine (so it's possible that I've missed something):
After 8. ... c5 and the exchanges, White has the d4 square for a knight. I spent time in the game wanting to exchange it for my dark-squared bishop (which didn't seem to have any targets on that diagonal), but White could recapture with the e pawn and I didn't like that they'd then have a majority on the queenside of connected pawns that looked like they could be dangerous if they advanced. Maybe f5, trying to grip e4 was better.
11. ... Be4 - I don't think it was really necessary to give up the bishop pair. Just Nc6 continuing development or Qa5 to try and get the pawn back seem like alternatives.
18. ... Rad8 - I was avoiding moving the knight for the moment, as maybe it belongs on d5 or e5. With 19. ... a6, I wanted to see where the bishop would go. If Bc4, I was intending Ng4 and then Ne3.
21. ... a5 to avoid White's pieces using the b5 square, while also giving me the b4 square for the knight. White ended up with an advanced pawn over the next few moves, but I reasoned that it was a weakness that I could target and tie down their pieces.
29. Rc2. I immediately found myself relieved as I thought Rd7 might be strong, but ... Bxc7 30. Nxc7 Rd8 looks OK. I didn't see Bd5 with Bb7 to follow and now don't see a way I could have prevented it.
My own analysis, without looking much at an engine (so it's possible that I've missed something):
After 8. ... c5 and the exchanges, White has the d4 square for a knight. I spent time in the game wanting to exchange it for my dark-squared bishop (which didn't seem to have any targets on that diagonal), but White could recapture with the e pawn and I didn't like that they'd then have a majority on the queenside of connected pawns that looked like they could be dangerous if they advanced. Maybe f5, trying to grip e4 was better.
11. ... Be4 - I don't think it was really necessary to give up the bishop pair. Just Nc6 continuing development or Qa5 to try and get the pawn back seem like alternatives.
18. ... Rad8 - I was avoiding moving the knight for the moment, as maybe it belongs on d5 or e5. With 19. ... a6, I wanted to see where the bishop would go. If Bc4, I was intending Ng4 and then Ne3.
21. ... a5 to avoid White's pieces using the b5 square, while also giving me the b4 square for the knight. White ended up with an advanced pawn over the next few moves, but I reasoned that it was a weakness that I could target and tie down their pieces.
29. Rc2. I immediately found myself relieved as I thought Rd7 might be strong, but ... Bxc7 30. Nxc7 Rd8 looks OK. I didn't see Bd5 with Bb7 to follow and now don't see a way I could have prevented it.