Can anyone help me in understand this game? • page 2/2 • Game analysis • lichess.org

b6 was played for several reasons. Though there was not followup to the idea.

White's queen-bishop battery is not really dangerous, but it does prevent the knight from moving, unless you weaken your pawn chain for the darksquares. So, that lightsquare white bishop is annoying and has to go. Black needs to exchange pieces to have room and freedom to move its pieces.

Black does need to develop the knight and the bishop ASAP. The bishop is useless in d7. So, not there.
If it goes to e6, it allows white to play e4. So, not there. cant go to f4 cause it dies, g3 will be met by f3 and it would have to go back to c8. You really dont want to pull it back to h5-g6, it would have wasted 4 moves just to get traded, and the same result was achieved in 1 move: Ba6.
If it goes to b7, which is not really a bad square per say, it will still have a hard time being useful in the near future as it is blocked by its own pawn and the pawns wont move for a long time, if they do at all. So it was a6 or b7. But he should have just traded it as he played Ba6 after.

If he developed the knight first, it only really had 1 square at that time. a6. d7 was too slow as it would have to be rerouted to f8 and then to g6. And white could have actually traded the bishop there, as the knight moved 3 times just to get captured, though white probably wouldnt have captured it anyways, as the knight was kinda frozen there to begin with, it doesnt have good squares to jump from g6. While in essence, the maneuver to reposition a knight to a good square is advised, all the movements would have been for nothing, the knight is as useless in b8 as in g6.

Black wanted to develop the knight to a6, so he could reroute it to c7 and it could have better options from there, either e6 or even b5-d6 (previous move from the bishop to leave the square available). Note that if they traded lightsquare bishops, e4 was not an issue if the knight ended in e6. So thats why the bishop was developed to a6, to trade the bishop and develop the knight with a tempo. or at least without losing one. Just developing while recapturing.

The issue is that white doesnt have to capture the bishop, and if black traded it, the queen would have been controlling a6 and the knight still cant go to the desired square.

Another option was to play b6-a5, to trade the bishop either way and the knight having a square in a6 because it was protected by the rook, But it would have been met by Qb3 to target the backwards pawn, and the rook would have ended up in c1 and followed by Knight b5. It was a nasty squeeze.

I hate the d4-c4-Nc3 structure. It really cramps you badly. Thats why i play 1.d4-Nf6 2.c4 c5 3.d5 b5 and end up in a Benko gambit structure.

Trading the bishop IMO was the best plan for black to have some breathing room.

10. b6 was played for several reasons. Though there was not followup to the idea. White's queen-bishop battery is not really dangerous, but it does prevent the knight from moving, unless you weaken your pawn chain for the darksquares. So, that lightsquare white bishop is annoying and has to go. Black needs to exchange pieces to have room and freedom to move its pieces. Black does need to develop the knight and the bishop ASAP. The bishop is useless in d7. So, not there. If it goes to e6, it allows white to play e4. So, not there. cant go to f4 cause it dies, g3 will be met by f3 and it would have to go back to c8. You really dont want to pull it back to h5-g6, it would have wasted 4 moves just to get traded, and the same result was achieved in 1 move: Ba6. If it goes to b7, which is not really a bad square per say, it will still have a hard time being useful in the near future as it is blocked by its own pawn and the pawns wont move for a long time, if they do at all. So it was a6 or b7. But he should have just traded it as he played Ba6 after. If he developed the knight first, it only really had 1 square at that time. a6. d7 was too slow as it would have to be rerouted to f8 and then to g6. And white could have actually traded the bishop there, as the knight moved 3 times just to get captured, though white probably wouldnt have captured it anyways, as the knight was kinda frozen there to begin with, it doesnt have good squares to jump from g6. While in essence, the maneuver to reposition a knight to a good square is advised, all the movements would have been for nothing, the knight is as useless in b8 as in g6. Black wanted to develop the knight to a6, so he could reroute it to c7 and it could have better options from there, either e6 or even b5-d6 (previous move from the bishop to leave the square available). Note that if they traded lightsquare bishops, e4 was not an issue if the knight ended in e6. So thats why the bishop was developed to a6, to trade the bishop and develop the knight with a tempo. or at least without losing one. Just developing while recapturing. The issue is that white doesnt have to capture the bishop, and if black traded it, the queen would have been controlling a6 and the knight still cant go to the desired square. Another option was to play b6-a5, to trade the bishop either way and the knight having a square in a6 because it was protected by the rook, But it would have been met by Qb3 to target the backwards pawn, and the rook would have ended up in c1 and followed by Knight b5. It was a nasty squeeze. I hate the d4-c4-Nc3 structure. It really cramps you badly. Thats why i play 1.d4-Nf6 2.c4 c5 3.d5 b5 and end up in a Benko gambit structure. Trading the bishop IMO was the best plan for black to have some breathing room.

Lucky_2612

#12

Thanks @Alientcp for your suggestion. You explained so deeply