This was the 3rd round game that I played as black in my school tournament a few weeks ago. It started out as a kind of Sicilian with white playing both Bc4 and c3. I was very pleased with my position after 4. c3 d5. For some reason, I'm very comfortable with pawns on d5/c5 in Bc4 lines. I think I like the minor piece play that usually arises around e4 and d4.

He played d4 fairly quickly after d5 and I traded pawns to isolate our d pawns.

After we both castled, we got to this position with black to move:


From here, I came up with the plan of Na5 and some swaps. I decided to trade a bishop for a knight in order to create a pawn weakness that I could attack later. After Bc2, he ended up with a backwards pawn on c3, and I popped my knight into c4.


We eventually got to this position. I played a6 to stop threats after Bxf6, Qh7+, Qh8+. He played a4 to stop my threat. I think he could have gotten a good position from Bxf6, Qh7+, and Ne5. I didn't give this enough consideration during the game, so I probably should have played Re4 to stop all the threats on h7.


Here he had just played Nd2, and I played Be2, picking up the exchange. I think he just missed the fork. After this it was just technique.

What do people think about my general plan to get an edge in pawn structure and try to exploit that? It worked out, but I think white had some chances that he missed.

Thanks for reading, and I'm looking forward to your comments!

Na5 c4 is a good plan, but at move 20 you have 2 choices you either win the quality with BxR or a piece with NxN and to simply go NxN as to be much better, even simple math B=2 R=5 So you are gettin 2 points otherwise N=3 you get 3 points and still have all the attack in the position, but great game you never gave your opponent any real chance

Yeah, we talked about that after the game too. During the game I was looking at a lot of lines where he didn't swap queens and in almost all of them the right move was NxR. I was pressed for time too so I figured that taking his rook would leave him with a lot less play because the knight didn't have many good squares and his rooks could have theoretically gotten him some counterplay. So yeah, probably should have taken the knight, haha.

Thanks for the feedback on the plan too!

Was just browsing the game again, and when you play the 16.a6 what was the idea?

After 16. Qd3:


Believe it or not, this was one of the moves that I spent the longest time thinking about. I spent 5 minutes in a G/30.

In one line he plays Bxf6, Qh7+, Qh8+, Re1+, and then I don't want Ba4+ to get my rook, so a6 prepared b5 as a reply to this.
After ...Kd7:


I think in retrospect that this line with Ne5 instead of Qh8+ would still have been strong for him, so 16...Re4 closing the diagonal was probably best here instead. I liked a6 because it gave me a lot of flexibility and in some endgames

But that was the idea behind a6, haha.

The other lines I considered were g5 and Re4. I didn't want to trade my bishop for his knight so I ruled out Bxf3 fairly early - just a matter of preference. It would have messed up his pawn structure, but I really like bishop play and keeping pieces on the board as long as possible.

ok deep idea behind a6 lol