And just to be facetious. 

Briscoe,C (2232) - Greet,A (2453) [C86]
95th ch-GBR Liverpool ENG (6), 02.08.2008

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 a6 4.Ba4 Nf6 5.0-0 Be7 6.Qe2 b5 7.Bb3 0-0 8.c3 d5 9.d3 Re8 10.a3 h6 11.Rd1 Bf8 12.Nbd2 Be6 13.Nf1 Qd7 14.Ne3 Rad8 15.Ba2 Qc8 16.exd5 Nxd5 17.Nxd5 Bxd5 18.Bxd5 Rxd5 19.c4 bxc4 20.dxc4 Rxd1+ 21.Qxd1 e4 22.Ne1 Rd8 23.Qa4 Ne5 24.Qc2 Bc5 25.b4 Bd4 26.Bb2 Qg4 27.h3 Qf4 28.Rd1 Nc6 29.Kf1 Qe5 30.Bxd4 Nxd4 31.Qc3 Kh7 32.Nc2 Nf3 0-1

Revenge being a dish best served cold.

Tops  

MNb wrote on 01/11/09 at 11:15:26:

And that he wrote a good book!

For the record, here are a few of my thoughts regarding this game:

1) I had already beaten the same opponent using 8...d5 at the British Championship. It was obvious that he would have prepared something in response this time round, and for this reason I opted for something different.

2) The knight on a5 is not such a big problem - the regrouping to f7 is absolutely standard as owners of Marin's book will know. Giving up the a-file is also quite normal - a slight concession, but it shouldn't matter too much as Black controls enough queenside squares to prevent an invasion.

3) Not to take anything away from Chris, but this was, to put it mildly, an off day for me. Paradoxically, I think part of the reason for my downfall was that he actually didn't play the early middlegame very well. The move g3 is not something White would normally wish to do, and he also wasted a tempo playing Bh6 and later Be3 as well as using a considerable amount of time on the clock. Unfortunately these factors led me to overestimate my position, whereas in reality Black was still no more than equal. I should have continued playing solidly, but instead tried to 'punish' him and got into trouble. 23...fxe4 was a bad decision (instead a knight transfer to f6 would have made sense) and from that point on I just played horribly.

Finally, I didn't take offence to the title of the thread although there has clearly been some sort of mixup with the wording. I agree that the request was a little odd - perhaps the poster somehow heard of the result and opening of the game but was not aware of TWIC (not to mention the tournament website)?

I think we can safely say that the result of this game had very little to do with the opening.  Black tried to play a fairly traditional piece regrouping (well-known from the Chigorin variation since at least Rubinstein's time) but mishandled it a bit and allowed W to establish something of a bind, but he was stil pretty solid until he allowed it to slide very quickly with a series of errors towards the end of the game.

In short, Briscoe played a good solid game and Greet had an off-day.  Sh*t happens

Here are my observations of this game:

1) In the opening, White saved a tempo by avoiding the move h3. The extra move Qe2 is not brilliant but it makes a later a4 more effective and also allows White to connect the rooks more quickly. 

2) The problem of Black's passive queen's knight plagued Black during the early middlegame. By the time Black manoeuvred his knight to the somewhat useful f7-square, White had secured control of the only open file on the board and thus held an advantage.

3) I think 24...Nh5?! wasn't the best move, as a position where White had a superior bishop vs. knight resulted. Stronger seems to be 24...Bg4 or 24...Bf5, the latter exchanging light-squared bishops to reduce the influence of White's central space advantage owing to the d5-pawn.

In any case, a win against a Worrall expert with the white pieces certainly bodes well for the system, although it is unclear if White can secure even a faint edge in the 8...d5 variation (someone who owns Greet's 'Play the Ruy Lopez' could confirm or disprove this).

Andrew Greet wrote a nice book on Spanish using Worral Attack. Last week a 2200 player (white) beat him using this variation. Does anybody have the game ?