I hadn't spotted you had annoted this game. It does show that any false slip and .....sob....

What is much less common is this advance in relation to the location of White's DSB (dark-square bishop), and his d-pawn. Black's game looks like a fairly 'normal' sort of development - non-committal and steady; White's already looks a little strange and awkward.

White should have played 3. e5. Playing 5.d3 and then 6. e5 which needs to be followed up with d4; White has wasted many tempii.

Apart from the black e and d pawns and White e pawn, this almost looks like a different opening from the french. Both players have fianchettoed the queens side bishops. Very unusual for French.

With one exception: the Guimard Variation - a long-standing favorite of mine. That the knight gets in the way of the pawn in that line is a downside, I accept, but there are compensations. One usually gets in the pawn break anyway, the knight having moved on betimes.

Wasn't 7.f4!? an option?

Yes, 7. f4 is playable.

Testing whether Jim really wants his knight to go to d6. After 10.Nd6ch Bxd6 the d6-pawn would be a prisoner on death row.

Methinks Jim is playing in a very provocative style - odd-giving, almost. White's position looks rather uncomfortable, to me.

You are right. I was fairly uncomfortable now....

I definitely would be...

The question is: why did White play the pawn to c3? An oversight? Possible - we all have our lapses from time to time. But maybe White wanted to free up the centre for himself - the e3-square in particular. Maybe he just underestimated the consequences.

11. c3 or 11. c4 was necessary to allow the knight on a3 to come back to the center via c2. White's position is looking dire after 13 moves! A nice French toast!

I try not to move before understanding the position. That is not to take anything away from my opponent who battered me! Evidently I didn't understand the position

White has to count on this possibility whenever he advances the e-pawn to the 5th rank without support from a pawn to either flank-rear. It's hard to imagine that White deliberately sought out the situation he's in at the moment, which indicates he went badly wrong somewhere.

It couldn't be helped anyway. Probably White wanted to 'fix' the situation on the Q-side, and see what he can salvage on the other flank. He's not out of it yet!

The other consequence of inducing the b-pawn forward: this is not a bad square for the knight.

Can a high-rated player tell me why black moved the dsb to e7 and not d6, which is more aggressive, attacks h2 and forces a weakening of the white king-position?

I'm not high rated, but no, I cannot see a good reason. But see: suppose 17. ... Bd6, 18. Nc4, Bxh2+, 19. Kh1. Black has to think about the possible g3, trapping the bishop, and the need for black to sac it Bxg3, fxB, Qxg3. That provides black with a good compensation for the bishop (3 pawns and a wide-open king!), but black has no other pieces to support his attack, being possible only a perpetual check with the queen. If Nd4, Bf3xBg7, and this means black has to do further and long manouvering to get steam... in the meanwhile, his good pawns on the queenside keep unactive, and white can easily bring in the Ra1 to control black's queen. So I don't see a clear win. ------ If white defends from 17... Bd6 with g3, it weakens the white's bishop on f3, true, but white can always exchange it with Bg7. If white defends with h3, the check in h2 will be pointless (unless with the plan to sac it as before, if white wants to trap it). Otherwise, black has to retire it, where it can be exchanged. So it is not a winning attack. ---------- Black probably wants to use his dsb to control the game from f6, reinforcing the threat that the c3 pawns represent, and this seems to be much more coherent with the advantage he has. He didn't do it, actually, but the intention is better. This bishop is a strong piece, and black correctly doesn't want to exchange it. ----- I'm not sure, of course...

It seemed unavoidable to exchange the bishops, for black. A pity that a battery over g2 can't be set anymore, but, as we saw, it is probably not the winning plan.

Anthough well placed, the c4 knight is currently useless. White probably expects Bf6 (to be considered even before castling, IMO), and gets out his bishop in order to control it via e5 (N of B d6 doesn't help white). But the next move shows white had not such a plan.

Either 20. Bd3 or even Nd3 would have been better. White clearly overlooked the weakness of b3 after this move. The lost tempo with Bf4 costs him the game.

The fact is, White couldn't completely stymie the Q-side. The Queen has all too few squares available, and hasn't time to shore up his crumbling defences against the infantry assault Black is about to launch.

Not a bad idea. Still in possession of the 8 pawns he started with, Black is not only 3 pawns ahead, but the enemy rook on b2 is quite without any sensible move. The threat is 27...Rxc4 28.dxc4 Ba3, winning a piece.

A puzzling decision, to be sure. Unfortunately 28.Qxd4 Bf6 is even more horrible, if that's possible. At least this exchange offers a slender chance of freeing the b2-rook... Maybe...?

White played overconfidently and not well, but it must be said that black exploited very accurately his advantage. We all know how easy is it to lose it...