I have tried Bc5 myself, though without knowing any mainline theory behind it

I rarely play the Ruy Lopez - too much theory behind it. The main lines tend to be theorised well past 20 moves; some of the lesser lines seem to peter out too soon into 'nothing' sort of games - particularly the lines I use to like (Marshall, Schliemann, Alapin Gambit, Siesta...). I'll still try them from time to time...

Marshall is very dangerous. I having been toying with the move order: 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 a6 4.Ba4 Nf6 5.O-O Be7 6.Re1 O-O 7.c3 b5 8.Bb3 d5 To avoid anti-marshall lines. I have yet to play it online because no one will play Ruy Lopez with me   they all play philidor

Nope!   But it was worth looking around for something better, given that Black doesn't have to recapture with the King. One possibility was to develop by 10.Nd2; another by playing 10.Qh5 Qe7 11.Bg5. But there's nothing wrong with this exchange. White obtains a lead in development.

It seems to be stronger than yourself, Joanne... but I wouldn't have made this move too, for the same reason as ionadowman mentions

Don't ask me (ok, nobody had...  ), I would have gone for Qh5 or Qf3... The point being that for white is quicker to play Rd1 than for black to put a rook on d8. Of course there are more moves in between... and white has to develop. The try is that Bg5 is stronger if it causes something on black's game say a N pin, or to push away the black queen, since any other place is worse. Black has not a quick attack on the queenside, so the fight is to occupy the kingside. White can do it first with Qh5.

I guess it's no use to try to fix e4 with Nd2 in order to go for f4. The thematic center break here don't seem to lead to much. I can try this Cordel line... if ever it happens that I revert to 1...e5 - which is not likely to happen - too much theory behind it!

The I take it you don't play the Sicilian then  

11.a4 Nf6 12.a5 is worth a try. Black can't take on e4, as 12...Nxe4 13.Re1 is clearly good for white.

Also, an Expert wouldn't allow doubled up pawns without a very good reason!

One discovers that double pawns are strong or weak in the context of the overal situation. In this instance, Doubled pawns would, if anything, strengthen Black's hold on the centre squares, and the half-open a-file is a fixed asset that might or might not become significant. Firthermore, Black will have got rid of White's 'good' bishop, at the same time catching up in development. Jo does well to consider alternatives. Personally, I like her choice, but whether it is really better than 13.Bxb6 is moot.

This position is dead level. One of the problems - for both sides - is to come up with a plan. Clearly, it will involve pawn advances. But these are potentially weakening. The pieces will have to help in such a way that the position doesn't get invaded and the advanced pawns attacked from flank or rear.

I like this attempt to force an attack!!

In response to 21...Nb7, 22.Nb3! was well chosen, to reopen the options to advance to c5 or a5. Instead of 21...Nb7, 21....c5 might have been more troublesome for White whilst she casts about for a plan.

Both sides now have a weak pawn on the Q-side: White's at a3, Black's at b6. Although Black's seems the more vulnerable, the squares his pair controls (b4 and c5)seem handier to come at. The position appears to be dead level, still.

Good. Black has no points on the c-file by which he can invade White's game. White can consider simply playing the rook up and down b1 and b2 and leave it to Black to come up with something. Such a policy has its risks, but if White is alert to possibilities opened up when Black tries a different avenue of attack, she is ready to exploit any weaknesses that might energe in Black's game.

Black's only way of intrusion is through the f4 square - White can keep her king around there to prevent intrusion

Black could potentially invade via c5, guarded at the moment by White's knight. I'd certainly try 32...Kd6, here, with this idea in mind: 33.Kd3 (say) Nc5ch 34.Nxc5 Kxc5 35.Kc3. As it transpires, this position would still be drawn: there seems to be no way Black can force a zugzwang position. I am forced to conclude that Black might have been better placed not playing ...f6, and chosen 30...Kd6 instead, in he expectation that White would go in for the exchange continuatiopn as in the game. Compare these two positions with White to play: Pawn on f6: w Pawn on f7: w What results? The latter seems much more favourable for Black, as he has ...f6 in reserve. What he should do is close up the K-side, keeping ...f6 back as his 'zugzwang move' that will force the White King to move off the c3-square.

This is a very subtle insight! Thanks, ion!

A good result, Jo. At no time were you at any disadvantage. Strong players will often go in for level endgames against less experienced opponents in the expectation of outplaying them in that difficult phase of the game. Often it works. But every now and then (as I can attest, having twice had to settle for draws against Jo) the plan comes unstuck and you have to go halves.

A wise game I would have thrown away with mistakes, trying some risky attack line that would have gone into nothing but weaken me. Well done, Jo.

Nice game!!! Well done!!