Reaching the Nimzo-Indian opening which at the time was my favored opening against 1.d4. In CFC games, I am an undefeated +1 with the Nimzo, begging the question "why did you switch?" Another article for another time :)

A rather passive move vs. the Nimzo. Main line is either 4.e3, the Rubinstein variation, 4.Qc2, the Classical variation, 4.a3, the Samisch variation, or 4.Bg5 the Leningrad variation. I had already played a rated game in this exact same line vs. Robert Bowles in 2000 in which the game continued 4. ... Nc6!? 5.Nf3 O-O 6.Rc1?! b6 7.Bg5! d5 and White got a good position but I eventually won :) Luckily, me and Fritz found an improvement after that game...

Fritz recommended immediate action in the center, but I preferred the text move, helping develop my bishop and preparing ...c5

A developing move, but I wonder about a move like a3 forcing me to give up the bishop pair

A tough decision for me. I ended up capturing with the bishop so i could keep the isolated pawn which would be a target for my defenses and give me some attacking chances. If I would have captured 10. ... bxc5 I would've had an isolated pair of pawns and would've had to spend more energy defending them.

I remember thinking..what did I miss? Then I realized that there was no killing tactic and that he was just trying to transfer his knight to d4 and take advantage of the outpost. A very good plan, putting the knight in front of my isolated pawn so no pawn can scare it from it's dominant square in the middle of the board.

Two can play this game :) A very good square for the knight at this point. At this point, I saw that I had the space advantage and plenty of opportunity for kingside attack. I actually visualized the attack that follows, which would be nothing for a good player but for a patzer like my I was quiet satisfied.

I think this is an error. How can I *not* sacrifice on f2?

Worrying about the threat of ... Ng4

Not recognizing the threats that are building up, and moving a solid defensive piece away from the action. I believe that exd4 would've put up a little more resistance by not opening up as many lines.

It felt right at the time, but Fritz evaluates this as a blunder.

Looking to sac on h3 and bring all my remaining pieces into the attack

Fritz preferred 19.Rf1

I was swept up in the moment and had a brilliant victory in my mind. After all this, how could I not take the pawn on h3?

Again better was 20.Rf1 or 20.gxh3 Can you find the mate in 3?

I couldn't over the board (shamefully, Fritz found it once I got home but I figured that after losing his queen he would resign soon enough

I was shocked! Afte all the good play I had mustered up so far, I was going to be forced to retreat my queen, give back the initiative and possibly lose some material. But after a short think, a moment of inspiration hit me and I came up with this...

My best over the board combination

I'm up two exchanges and two pawns, so it's just a matter of picking up the pieces from here, right? If I wasn't such an awful player, I would just write "and from here it's just a matter of technique", jot down 5 or 6 more moves and write down 0-1. At this point I was in shock that Hugh hadn't resigned yet, but I had figured that there was no way I wasn't getting a point out of this game.

Planning on saccing back the exchange for another pawn

Worst move on the board...not seeing the fork. Almost any other move would've won. If you thought that was bad, you ain't seen nothing yet. I'm almost ashamed to put the rest of this game on the Internet, heck who am I kidding I am ashamed to put the rest of this game on the net...

I just stared at the board and couldn't believe what a bunch of stupid moves I had been making and that my brilliant, overwhelming position had fallen apart so quickly. So I took a little walk splashed water on my face and had to decide what I wanted to do. Materially we were even (if you took the traditional approach and counted a bishop as 3 pawns), but with passed pawns on both sides of the board, even I knew I still had a winning position because I assumed that the king couldn't be on both sides of the board at once...could he?

They criticized this move in the skittles room afterwards, but I figured that since the a-pawn would queen on a dark square, that would be the one I would try to promote.

Perhaps 43.Kf5 would be a bit better

Since it appears that he was going to pick off my queenside pawns, I decided to switch gears and try to take advantage of my advantage on the kingside

One of the worst moves on the board...making my job much easier.

They didn't care much for this move in the skittles room, but i thought it was clever. In all likelyhood, the a-pawn was going to be picked off so why not allow it to be taken by the bishop, which allows me to get my act in gear.

Forcing me to go where I want to go

50. ... h5! was winning.

At this point, I thought there was no way he'd have enough time to capture the b-pawn and still come over and try to save the day with his king...was I ever wrong :)

Proper was 52. ... h4 creating a passed pawn and making it one square further away for White's king to come. Why did I play 52. ... hxg4? Probably because I wanted to try and queen on a dark square (see above) since he had the light colored bishop. Another case of overthinking...The moves that follow may not be the most exact, but there is still no way for White to stop promotion

Find the losing move...

Allowing the draw. After 60.Kxf4 there is no way to promote. Correct was 59. ... Kh2. After 60.Bg2 g4+ 61.Kxg4 Kxg2 62.Kxf4 it is just a simple won king and pawn endgame. What a horrible ending to a well-played game by me (well the opening and middlegame anyways).