nice!  i see - i was thinking it was some secret analysis methodology like IA or DPA or, IDEA, whatever that is.

i was stupid going into an opening variation i knew little about,i have done my best.

Paul is methodically placing his pieces on the right squares ala Karpov...your initiative might fizzle out soon.

So lovely to read all your passion for the game (of chess) in this line!, me too can't wait seeing Matt returning to it... :-)

received your move :-)  did look things over mostly but likely to make move on tuesday.  mostly just checked my plans and yours and then checking my lines.

1300 participants in the team tournament I am at!! played and won against a NM and an expert.  great fun, some people I know, and really strong players there, hope to play a professional tomorrow. :-)

I remember for sure 36.Nb1 was a move I had given very much attention to.  Very distinctly, I remember analyzing that move, and I was excited by what I saw, but of course, this was the case in every line.  Will take a look at my AN later.

Btw, I found a few new ideas on how to play the positions from white, and perhaps a similar yet distinct method of counterplay from Black. I did not really look at that game after I played it, I played on intuition and then used the engines to verify, yet, there was just so much material to go through and transpositions and strange lines, and human ideas to check, principally to make sure I can keep your King under wraps.  And then there was the consolidation methods, and can I allow White to take b5, with the knight.  Plus in the way you conducted the attack, there were all these transpositions possible and subtle differences on a full board on how to play.  There were these lines where I could allow or maybe force h3 and then sacrifice the bishop and the engines would give massive scores for white, but Black's long term compensation was formidable, however, usually White had a way to consolidate, not simple, but a way.

I did not play the board normally against Om and Ruben, I chose slightly inferior approach to mix things up against them after I felt a move or few were not completely the best, and it cost - well against Ruben 12.Rg1 is a draw too simply, against Om I misunderstood something and I complicated things to a loss instead.    Interestingly it seems like I punish myself when my opponent plays, if at some point inaccurately, I try to punish them too quickly, if only to make things more complicated, at the cost of my position or if their approach in reality has enough merit, I have to concede that fact and simply readjust myself to a new assessment of a position, and play the best moves, and allow perpetual check if that is the most appropriate result, which should have the case in both of those games and earlier.  However I found some good lines to play for a win as white from both those games.

At the moment, I'm taking a break from playing chess as my recent chess has been an exercise of game after game my opponents making incredible technical mistakes given their playing standard and then me contriving to lose via gross oversights and time pressure.  I've dropped at a least a dozen consecutive promising or winning  games against masters or higher largely because of nerves, fatigue, and playing into non-theoretical positions and taking too much time to outplay my higher rated opponent and then not seeing the whole board in my time trouble.  It's the type of thing that nettles me, after a few such games and more so after many such games.  Which is a huge shame, as the quality and artistry of the game as well as the result, it all goes away, and because in a long control, it seems I would win these games and I do exceptionally well at standard controls, yet maybe I play in these three times a year, but I must work out how to prepare to avoid these unnecessary losses at shorter controls, how to truncate my calculations in quick controls, and to play positions in a time scramble. Such is my dilemma in quick controls.  There has to be a change in how to make decisions, it's a different chess - especially for a player like myself who thrives in complicated positions and calculations, there is no time for this, I have to figure out how to play at each part of the game.

Intuitively, I agree.  I had many ways to try to do things however and it was not clear to me how White proceeds on everything.  In the end I chose one plan to go to in depth, the one to maximize my piece activity and reduce your number of good plans, and it worked out in my analysis concretely, the game is on a knife's edge, mostly for me at the very end in the text.

Also if you do not trade off the g3 knight the sacs on e4 and d5 are in some cases very promising and worth remembering.  It's not very clear.

ok in all these lines there are squares, targets worth checking

black: c7, a6, b5, [??? on h5]
white: X [square] h3, X g4,  f3-e4-d5 chain,

and a lot of manuevering pieces.   what made it seriously tricky my a8 rook, c8 bishop and e8 knight they already are fairly important for the defense. and i really wanted to be able to move that e8 knight, plus i had to be on the lookout for nh3 or ng4 to block things up maybe at a different point.

Paul, have you looked at 32...h4 with the idea of Rg3?  It's really quite dangerous, especially with the King on h2. In which case taking on g3 usually loses, and when the pawn gets to g2 White is losing these positions even when the entire queenside falls.  That would have been most interesting.  with ideas of sacrificing on h4 and taking on h3 if nf3 and taking on f3.  Because once f3 falls, e4 will fall or a knight comes to g5 and it looks fantastic for me.  There are so many variations to check.  also the d7 knight goes to f6 and sacrifices itself on e4 g4 or overloads on h3 via Nh7-g5.  I thought I saw a way to consolidate things, but I realize I was mistaken in my analysis.  White has counterplay on the queenside of course and can take b5 too, but it's crazy... once Black gets a pawn on f3...

EDIT: 33.Qh1 may spoil my fun however, likely White's best... may even transpose to the game.   In fact I think it does.  In which case I should check my 35th move which is natural but after the knight trades things were more forcing for me.