i am sorry to hear that you had some problem concentrating during your game , that probably was the main reason why you did not do so well during it, maybe next time you would do better
Thanks for the analysis, it was a quite interesting game to look at

For the opening, you were indeed correct about me not seeing much about the morra gambit, and that is also the main reason why i declined it, the probability of attacks quickly made me hesitate to capture the c-pawn. Instead, I decided to go with a line that should not be common (I guessed during the game due to its appearance). Of course, educational because i did not want to fall to far behind in the opening. The undermining of my central pawns was very successful for you, I believed they were quite weak and decided to give up to protect them and tried to get a faster development preparing for an attack.
About the idea of castling in this game, as you said, i agree that castling queen-side would have been a much better choice because it gets away from all the potential threats from everywhere. If i was you, however, i would probably castled king-side as well, the main reason is because the c pawn looks quite weak and c file is half open. Still, you tried your best to answer my threats.
For the move Qd3, i feel a bit sorry for your mis-concentration during the game, as i was watching the other video you made during the game, i hear silence. Maybe some paper rattling, not sure. Those gave me a signal of you were quite unfocused during the game, it must have been a bad day for you , i am sorry about that.
In this video, you questioned about why i did not capture the b pawn. The reason was, since I already started my attack, and I did not want to get to the endgame because you had a passed d pawn, I decided to go for a harder push and try to force you to play some inaccurate moves (because of the amount of calculation needed), i also pushed a little bit on time to make you have even less time to think, it has worked a few times, so i chose to try this strategy again. However, this is not recommended due to the chance of YOU making a mistake instead.
So that is also why i did not capture the knight on e2, exchanging a rook for two knights. I did not want an endgame where you have a passed pawn, that makes me nervous and gives you some chances to win. Of course i did not want that to happen because i do not believe in my endgame skills and instead believe in my middle game, plus i had much more time than you did, i decided to push on and go for the all-in push.
Thank you very much for letting me finish the game, that is something i would never bother to do, from that i can tell you are very friendly to others and let them to see their success. This is something i learned from this video, normally i would just resign immediately instead of what you did.
Thank you very much for the analysis, good luck in the future!

Kamus, I cannot decide whether you just lost interest in the game after he played 3..d5 or just a few moves later.

I am sure that you put too much importance into opening prep. Did you just lose heart because he was not willing to play ball in the opening? Hard question I know. Playing 5.c4 is a Punish black type of move.

The biggest issue is that you put yourself into a situation where the questions being asked where not so easy to solve. The value of a position is meaningless if the questions seem too hard - so what, if the computer always has a good answer? You sounded to me like someone in an exam who feels the questions are too tough, so just stops even trying to answer them.

I see little or no value to be taken from going over this game in a chess sense. You do need to be a bit more practical about what positions you are willing to enter. Ducking the issue of playing a good move because the position it leads to is too impractical to play correctly, unless your a computer or Kramnik, is a pretty smart choice in my book.

Thanks Pobble. I think you got it right, as usual. Somehow, I lost heart after 3...d5. It wasn't just that he avoided my prep but that he chose a variation I was completely unprepared for myself- (and for that, there is no excuse- I should have boned up on the declined variations too) and when he did that, I suddenly felt very, very tired. I couldn't get my brain to calculate and I felt just useless. Still, it was an important lesson even if it was in what not to do and I will soldier on. Do I take it that you consider 2.d4 an impractical choice against 1...c5? At any rate thanks for taking the time to comment.

Great overview of your game, sorry that the result wasn't better for you.

3...d5 is probably the worst way to decline the Morra gambit, d3 and Nf6 are both better. Nf6 just becomes an Alapin after e5 and cxd4 (though white can also play e5 and Qxd4 to give the position its own flavor). d3 becomes a Maroczy bind that is particularly good for white after c4, Bxd3, h3, Nf3, etc. It is better than some of the standard Maroczy bind positions because white hasn't put a piece on d4 where it can be swapped off.

Anyways, hope that the game wasn't too depressing, and hope that you keep playing the Morra!

Kamus, I would never tell you to stop playing the openings you so much enjoy. In your game, early on, you put yourself under a lot of pressure to find moves which had to avoid accidents, all in the hope of some far distant endgame with an extra pawn. Your own gambit openings play this little pressure kettle game on your opponents, but here in this game, you switched sides.

Gambits exploit the fact that in the opening, king safety and minor pieces are worth more than in the middlegame or ending. Fact - in the first few moves, maybe up to move 12-15 - knights or bishops are worth more than rooks. Minus a pawn is even an advantage! Only once the kings are safely tucked away in their beds and the family of pieces have all arrived to join the party, do rooks and how many pawns you have gain value and importance. Think about all the openings traps which mate absent minded kings or capture silly deluded rooks resting on corner squares in the first dozen moves. Common sense will tell you that a trap to win a pawn in the first dozen moves is just a gambit of sorts - intended or not. In the middlegame a pawn minus is just a blunder.