Quote:
Originally Posted by hoyasaxa
Its interesting that you say that Dire, I always thought that Bh3 move was a fundamental idea vs. a fianchettoed bishop. Could you talk about that a little more?
Getting rid of the Bg2 is by default a pretty good plan, especially once f4 has been played since it leaves white with tons of light square weaknesses and sometimes difficulty getting his share of the center. But the problem was just the specifics of the position. After 12. .. Bh3 13. f5 black is suddenly facing alot of pressure. I saw f5, but I missed 13. .. Bxg2 14. Kxg2 gxf5 15. Qh5! After 15. exf5 or pretty much any other move, black is doing very well. But 15. Qh5 leaves white with a serious initiative. 15. .. fxe4?? immediately loses to 16. Nf6+ Bxf6 17. Rxf6 with Rf1 and Nxe4 ensuring white a decisive initiative.
And I rejected the 'obvious' attempt with 15. .. Nxd5 16. cxd5 Ne7 simply because I thought white looked very good after 17. Rf2. My defensive plan with 15. .. f4/etc was fine, but both sides were left walking a very fine line, and I was the first and last to slip with 19. .. Kh8?
The point being that none of this is possible without Bh3. So thanks to that one subtle but huge inaccuracy I went from having a very good position to struggling to stabilize the game. My opponent did a great job of pouncing on that mistake.