Gameknot analysis is shown here ..... game

i never accept the gambit.. i prefer one of the indian defences, or occasionally b3 if i am looking for a draw,or e3 if i have a death wish

I thought I'd get a decent attacking game out of the position. The 'isolani' is a long term strategic liability in itself, but there are upsides. One is that while it exists, it controls the e5 snd c5 squares, which might come in handy for a knight, say. The other is that under its shelter, White can bring out his pieces into aggressive action.

As it turns out, although White's 6th move is OK objectively, it proved to be a psychological mistake.

As an evan's gambit player on occasion this structure looks like one I might have as white with a couple of minor changes that would turn out to make all the difference. I like these ideas for white, who has a lot of attacking chances and pressure on f7, b7 and sometimes e7 with a Ba3 type move. On the other hand if black can solve their problems they often reach and equal or favorable endgame relatively easily after that.

At the time I was less fussed about the Queen exchange than I ought to have been. We are so much closer to an endgame, attacking prospects for White have been truncated, and the strategic weakness associated with the isolated d-pawn come more into focus. I now think White had conceded too much, despite the lead in development.

I felt I had got something back by saddling Black with an isolated pawn of her very own, but it is less a liability than it looks.

This is fine for black I think but maybe black could have tried for more. One idea might be to try Bg4 and give black isolated doubled pawns for the bishop pair. Dangerous and possibly double-edged and with analysis it might be shown to be poor but I think this is very tame and heading toward a draw already. Both sides have isolated pawns and haven't yet castled...might not now that we've reached the ending. Very intersting. On the other hand as black has lost a lot of games against white reaching this position must feel reasonably good.

I don't know what archduke was looking for, but I'd say just play 12.Ng5 and omit the tempo losing Ke2.

I played Ke2 to bring the rooks into action and keep the king in the centre. White's big problem is that bally Black knight on d5. In that respect, Kenneth is probably right, though what to do with the following move becomes the question.

White is ahead in development and has the rooks linked and since the Q's were exchanged, white was better at this point, Blacks King move was a good move here

16.h4 is not as good as rook centralisation 16. Rac1

I had a vague plan to make something happen on the K-side, then switch, if I had to, to the other wing. The problem for White is that Black hasn't many weaknesses, and those that exist are hard to come at. Having said that, an alternative plan was to begin on the Q-side, and there I might have gone for Rhc1 and Rab1.

now black has her rooks linked, although the idea of centralizing rooks is a good plan as suggested by ken

I don't mind h4 actually but I wonder if g3 and then centralizing rooks might have been better. Right now a piece is tied down to the h4 pawn and black has 3 possible targets to play against. With g3 black has only one target and white might be able to take advantage of having slightly more space. Pretty close to even with white to be ever so slightly preffered I think.

According to the GK engine White's 19th was a mistake, and I am forced to agree. Better would have been 19.Ne5ch Ke8 (alternatives lose the exchange) 20.Nc5 ... (attacks on b7 and e6) 20... Nxe3 (or ...Bxc5 at once) 21.Kxe3 Nd5ch 22.Kd3 Bxc5 23.dxc5 ... I can't think how I overlooked this line. It would have solved the problem of the IQP, my knight would be no worse placed than Black's, and Black would have still been saddled with the IKP. Even though these amount to just a whisker of an edge - no more than that - the position would have been something to work on.

That's a pretty accurate and clear sighted assessment Jo. Possibly the smarter option for White might have been Rd1, but I don't think White could have made significantly better progress.

I was exploring that rd1 also but now R on f1 seems just as good

I did spend some time looking at 27.Rf7, here. It might have served to retain the initiative, and forcing Black onto the defensive. "What then?' was proving less easy to answer.

Black might just respond with Red7 with no real way for white to make progress. I think this is a draw already really.

I had hopes here that the pawn ending might offer something. The K-side is closed down for good; no one is going to break through on that wing. My king was much closer to the centre and Q-side. Perhaps a minority attack might open up opportunities?

getting close to a draw with just pawns

The question was whether the situation could be crystallised out in my favour on the Q-side.

32.Kc5 Kd7 33.b4? b5 34.a3 Kc7 zugzwang! Yarooh! After 33.a3 b6 or 33.a4 b6 There is never going to be any breakthrough for White.

There is no edge at all for White: there is simply no way to break through. At last I was persuaded that any attempt here on to force the issue was more likely to lead to my head being handed to me, on a platter, surrounded with watercress. Didn't have the appetite for that. Jo had offered me the draw a few moves earlier, but I thought to test whatever resources were remaining.

great game thanks for sharing!

Perhaps black can try b4 b5 and if cxb5 Kxb5 and go after the a pawn for a little swindle? Black can easily stop this idea and as has been stated this is a totally drawn position, but I might have tried to see if that would work. Nice game with a good discussion about the positions.