Had he but known it, White had developed a tremendous attack: he had only to find the decisive continuation here: 20.Nb5!! Apart from the attack on the a3-bishop, here's the plot: 20.Nb5 cxb5 21.Bxc5 Kf8 22.Rxe8, etc, winning material. To minimise the damage, Black would have had to shed the bishop, leaving Black the queen against 2 rooks and a minor piece.

Instead, 21.Kf8 would have permitted this move.

23.e4 would have been stronger than the text, true, but there seems to be no real improvement on 23.Bxa5.

Now, with 25...Bg3, Black would be back in the game, though White would still have an edge.

All that does is to place White on the alert for his back rank. But 27...Bb4 might have been a better defence. Now, White might as well exchange bishops on g6, then double the rooks on the b-file.

29.Rbb8! would have been a winning move. But Black has been defending strongly, and White had to be clever about to proceed. Also 29.Bh5+, with similar ideas in mind, would also have been strong. Exchanging on d3 would have left Black with almost equalising counter-play. So does the text move.

Black's active queen might give Black a little bit of an edge, here.

Not a lot in it. By allowing his queen to be cornered and harassed, Black has brought White a winning game once again. 36...e5?? was the losing mistake...

White returns the compliment. The annotator correctly identifies 23.Ra3! as the way to go. However, Black once again misses his chance.

the annotations were good and clear but what a poor game. I would have expected better from Black as the higher rated player of the two. Whit's mistakes were excusable because of his low rating. I would like to read your comments on a better class of game. regards, John

As it transpires, the final position is dynamically about level. Black has counterplay after 41...f5, freeing the bishop on g7, but White is reasonably well placed in defence. For the time being, the a-pawn is barely relevant. It is true that the game was a bit seesaw towards its close, but I think it is unreasonable to be over critical given the underlying tactical complexities.