Hmm does black want an open centre against the two bishops? General principles suggest no but there are actually some chances against the e4 square.

Think the moves useful for enabling Kf2 rather than anything else.

I think Na5 with Nb3 would have been more usefull

Ahhh... if only he hadn't played a4, that bishop could have gone there! I've said that already, never mind...

! Yay closed centre = -+

Closed centre (yay!) and white might as well have skipped his 30th move, remember to make sure no moves are wasted...

Of course. Be2 does not do anything for white.

! Now if g4 then cant black just ignore it as gxf exf gives black the perfect e6 blockading square and if white pushes to g5 then Kf7! with Kg6 to follow threatening to win a pawn forces h4. Now black plays the knight to b3 when Bd1-xb3 is not possible due to letting the king in on the kingside. then black can easily pick up the a pawn with Nb6. Note that black must keep the kingside open for the threat to occur shoring up the kingside (closing) would leave a likely drawn ending.

Now the king should be moved to f7 to threaten to infltrate on the kingside if the light squared bishop comes off. Followed by Na5-b3 and Nb6 this should be decisive.

Unfortunately that's not going to happen, because white has nothing useful to do with his white bishop, so he's just going to leave it there. A more adventurous choice for white would have been g4, after gxf5 exf5 white gets a passed pawn. Not a particularly impressive one, but it's a start. Sadly now he's played h4 g4 is no longer an option.

As I stated I would prod a bit on the kingside with the king but this is still at least the correct plan...

Yep, tag's got some idea what he's doing!

The 'threat' Ba3 is met with Bxa3 Nxa3 Nb6 Bd1 Kf7 with Kg6 and Nb3 to follow.

Unfortunately for White, it's too late for 34.Ba3 owing to 34...Bxa3 35.Nxa3 Nb6, picking up the a-pawn.

Bang! 34...Nb6 is the caper.

??? Arrgh! Simply: Bishop is crap. Knight is good. Do not exchange!!!

I'll get one of SC's more heavily armed members on the case.

Thanks for that good piece for bad piece... I needed some help !

This looks drawn to me now. Black can actually pick up the a pawn instead of Nb8 playing the king over to a5 asap. White's only defence is to play Nd2-f1-e3-d1-b2 and Bd1 to protect the pawn. black then plays Ba3 and can pick up the pawn (the knight will be pineed) However, black cannot make progress because the white king can shuffle back and forth not allowing the king in.

Correct..thats the plan

Can't white give up the a pawn (trading all the pieces in the process) and draw?

Worth a look, sure! After 41.Nb4 Bxb4 (how else to save the a-pawn?) 42.cxb4 Nc6 43.Kc3 Black would probably have to manouevre his K all the way over to the Q-side in order to release the knight for the trek to h5 in order to attack the g3-pawn. It's some trek - 8 moves if Black doesn't move his a-pawn: Nc6-a7-c8-b6-a8-c7-e8-g7-h5. Meanwhile, White is threatening at once to establish a passer for himself: 43...Kf7 (say) 44.b5 axb5 45.axb5 etc. After all that's happened so far in the game, White would have secured an edge by 41.Nb4!

A bid for victory maybe? White would seem to have a safe draw with some passive defence like 42.Nf1 (keeping watch and ward on g3), then moving the bishop back and forth between c2 and d1, exchanging on b3 if the enemy knight lands there. Black has absolutely no breakthrough that I can see... As for the sac, although I consider it equally unsound in the long run, the alternate sac might have been a better practical choice, as the bishop on g4 would have been attacking the vulnerable e6-square, with some prospects of setting Black interesting and difficult technical problems.