Thank you very much.
Both 
-for the book suggestion
(altough I can't get the title in the near future, so any other suggestions for book titles are welcome!) 
-and the analyzis.

Yes, I don't analyse specifics enough. That's exactly the case.

In the meantime, I have given the position to my engine for a longer time interval... Yes, it also says the position is very complicated. 
I should not have allowed the opportunity for the opponent in the first place... [That is usually my virtue (not allowing this kind of attacks) but this time... It unfortunately counted that he had played this kind of Old-Indian(-like) positions for many-many years, while it had been the 1st time for me to face it over-the-board.] Actually, I prefer 6.h3 (and later g2-g4 when facing the KID--just the opposite of how I builded up the position against this Black set-up.)

If you fall for speculative gambits too easily, it might suggest that you think too generally and don't analyse specifics enough.

Some people fall into this.

Maybe you need to calculate variations deeper at the board, and also to study your opponents candidate moves more (or rather, to examine a greater number of your opponents possibilities).
If an opponents sacrifice is unsound, it takes a lot of hard work to prove it. 
Also, make sure you use your extra time on the clock to the full when defending difficult positions.
Don't get lazy!! (though not necessarily saying that you are).

I lost a game from a promising position today. I was White against a 2150-player, on 2nd board. (team championship)

1. Nf3 Nf6 2. c4 d6 3. d4 c6 4. Nc3 Bg4 5. e4 Nbd7 6. Be2 e5 7. Be3 Be7 8. O-O
O-O 9. d5 Qc7 10. Nd2 Bxe2 11. Qxe2 Rfe8 12. Rfc1 Nf8 (which is a novelty, nobody in my databases had played 12..Nf8)


From the position the game continued 
13.f3 Ng6 14.g3 Qd7 15.Kg2 h5 16.b4 h4 17.Qf2 Nh5 18.Nb3 Rf8 19.c5 etc etc etc
I think my 13th move was especially out of place. (I wanted to free my knights from the defence of the e4P. Yet that might have been unnecessary at that point.)

My opponent had been playing the Old-Indian and this Old-Indian-like (w/ ..Bg4) defence for 15+ years at least, regularly against stronger (2300+) opposition, while in comparison I have been playing 15+ games (~40, actually) per year only since 2006...

O.K., the game went on, and all of a sudden my opponent sacrificed an e7B + f8R (two pieces!), which resulted in the diagram position:

This is "+-" for me (White) already (too much sacrificed material), but I failed to find good defensive moves and collapsed on the kingside (dangerous g-pawn and my unsafe monarch) very soon. 
Besides, in the position I had 30+ minutes more on the clock than the opponent...

I really don't like it when I have to defend in this kind of tense situations. Maybe my considerably weaker results with Black also indicate something. I care for prophylactic moves, but when I fail to suppress something and the opponent starts playing according to some dubious yet sharp plan, I feel under uncomfortable pressure. 
This opponent sensed this deficiency and started playing very boldly. Somehow not-too-strong players more often try playing in this fashion than FMs do, and then I may be in danger...

The main reason for losing this game was disorientation though, I was feeling sick by the 4th hour of the game. BUT. Even under these cirtumstances, I should have put up stronger resistance. (I still had plenty of time, compared to him.)

Please someone tell me what books to study in order for me to get better at defensive play in these kinds of tense positions.

HoemberChess wrote on 07/19/10 at 10:04:29:

Very brave that you deviated from Vera Gonzalez-Quezada Perez, CUBch 2008, where Black played 16...Nf6 and allowed a forced draw. As far as I can see, but I don't know the theory very well, 16...Rf7 is a novelty.
While 21...Nxf4 is without doubt an improvement I am not sure if "Black has no difficulties". Perhaps it's equal, but there still are White's passed pawn and pair of bishops to deal with after 22.a4 Nxc4 23.Ne2 Nxe2+ 24.Bxe2.

@S_F:

These are not so big of a problem, I think. There are _bluff_ elements (therefore risk), in deed, but preparation, _preliminary knowledge of the opponent_, will balance the issue to a certain extent.

This repertoire, as I intend to use it, mainly requires me to know against 1.e4 and 1.d4:
-after 1.e4 the whole C-K (what I have studied and played mostly)
-the French from move 3. (I will at times throw in the defence against the king pawn's move as well, when I know the opponent chooses 2.d4) But again, 2.e4 is not a very probable continuation from a 1.d4-player below a certain level of experience.
-the Sicilian ("only" the aforementioned open variation and the ..Qxd5 Alapin with early ..e6 and ..Nc6), but that's even less probable after these initial moves. Given the time I have to study openings between tournaments, by the time someone (probably not an IM) first tests me in the Taimanov OTB, I will have many ideas in the familiar positions that I have met in blitz and thematic correspondence games.

I felt it would be a sin not to include these three substantial defences to 1.e4, in two cases at least the "main lines", after preparation to the specific opponent. Actually, I have both studied and had some experience with each. I would feel I miss something excluding any of them.

Besides, versus 1.d4 I still can choose. (1..e6/1..Nf6) I will know whether the opponent prefers QP-openings (and which one).
1) I already know a little about the course of games with d-pawn openings after 1.d4 Nf6 2.Nf3 e6. (That's what I studied in the past.) Besides, 1.Nf3 Nf6 and only now 2.d4 is not very probable. (1..d5 2.d4 would be more reasonable.)
2) As to 1.d4 e6 2.Nf3 c5 3.e4, it's unlikely from an unsuspicious opponent to switch to a 1.e4-opening here, when at move 2 he still allowed Black to rule that out.

Databases will have me applying different defences to 1.e4 and 1.d4, which will be mostly to my advantage. Opponents won't know for sure, unless they read this thread, what my reasons are.

Doesn't make much sense to me.  Why would you have a repertoire featuring the French as Black, but willingly transpose into the Sicilian Taimanov after 1.d4 e6?! 2.Nf3 c5?! 3.e4

Your repertoire would require BLACK to learn the Sicilian Taimanov (and other Sicilian variations), the Caro-Kann (Panov-Botvinnik) and the French.

I thought the idea of a repertoire was to build consistency and reduce the work load.  This repertoire multiplies the work load.

I intentionally colored this post, in order to distinguish it from the rest of the thread. (It has not much to do with them.)


What do you think of this Black repertoire?
I know, it's already a very stupid question. (One has to like it, study it, and everything will be all right eventually.) Besides, the majority of my threads have been about Black's _initial_ move-orders... (But that is not going to last for-ever!)


I have not chosen them after particular GM-games to my liking (I have no heroes in particular), as many do, but instead I firstly took a few defences I had studied and then tried for my move-orders to
- be _sound_
- be most _flexible_ (and cannot be tricked into something inferior)
- allow as many _transpositions_ between the rest and my type of positions as possible.


Thus, I think it is now not so easy for any White to sensibly get me out of the following repertoire:
(While my motto was, "flexibility is above all things", or somthing like that.)

1.e4 e6 (or 1..c6 at times)
  2.d4 d5 
    3.Nc3 Nf6 4.Bg5 Bb4 
    3.Nd2 Be7 
    3.e5 c5 4.c3 Nc6 5.Nf3 Bd7 //I need good books on 5..Bd7    

1.d4 e6 (at times starting with 1..Nf6, but opting for the same main-line defences)
  2.c4 Nf6 
    3.Nc3 Bb4 //a foundation of this repertoire, many ideas from Khalifman's "Karpov repertoire"
      4.Qc2 c5 //for which I still need a book... I don't know where to start looking if I play 4..c5 in reply to the Classical
      4.e3 c5 
      4.Nf3 c5
      4.g3 c5       
      etc
    3.Nf3 b6 (or at times 3..Bb4+) //I am in abundance of books for the second player
    3.g3 d5 4.Bg2 dxc4 5.Nf3 Nc6 //open Catalan ideas from Palliser's Tango    
    3.a3? c5 //can easily transpose to the English or a C-K/Panov
  2.Nf3 c5 
    3.c4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6>>transposition (1.c4 Nf6 2.Nf3 c5 3.d4)
    3.e4>>transposition (Sicilian/Taimanov)
    3.c3 Nc6 
      4.Bf4 Qb6 //anti-London
      4.e4 d5
        5.exd5 Qxd5 (Sicilian/Alapin w/ early ..e6 but that's similar to a Caro-Kann/Panov)
        5.e5>>transposition (French/Advance)      
  2.e4>>transposition (1.e4)

1.c4 Nf6 
  2.g3 c6 3.Bg2 d5 //can transpose to 1.Nf3 Nf6 2.g3 d5
  2.Nc3 c5 3.Nf3 e6 4.g3 b6 5.Bg2 Bb7 6.0-0 Be7 etc  //I'm going to use Shipov's 500-page Hedgehog-book 
  2.Nf3 c5 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 e6
      5.Nc3 Nc6 
          6.a3 Qc7 
          6.g3 Qb6 //book Beating Unusual Chess Openings
          6.e4? Bb4
      5.g3 Bb4+ 
          6.Bd2 Qb6 //book "d4-dev" by Cox
          6.Nd2 Qb6 //Cox's "d4-dev"
          6.Nc3>>transposition (NID, as I play it)
      5.a3 Nc6 (or 5..d5) 6.Nc3>>transposition (5.Nc3 Nc6 6.a3)
  2.d4>>transposition (1.d4)

1.Nf3 Nf6 
  2.g3 d5 3.Bg2 Bf5
  2.b3 d5 etc
  2.c4>>transposition (1.c4 Nf6 2.c4)
  2.d4>>transposition (1.d4 Nf6 2.Nf3)
  
  
In addition, when I have both the time and opportunity to prepare against a certain opponent I can still surprise them with the Sicilian/Taimanov, and also the more-technical "..c6+..d5" constructions, such as after 
*1.e4 c6 //C-K, which is very useful to have in one's repertoire (and I do already) because of the wide variety of possible transpositions to the rest (An 1.e4 c6 can still transpose to a NID, an English/Symmetrical, etc, on the way.)
*1.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 //I already played it in the past
*1.c4 c6 //I have played it, too; can transpose to 1.e4 c6 2.c4
*1.Nf3 d5 //it's nothing special now, compared to what's been written above; lot of transpositions

  
In the process of constructing the repertoire, there were very "painful moments" where I had to leave out positions (opening sequences) I had played with success in the past, for example, among many other things, the King's English with 4..Bb4, so as not to be redundant in replying both 1.c4 and 1.Nf3. That's why it lasted me so long creating it.
All in all, not so easy to digest, but if I don't cease to be interested in the positions above, I will hopefully have enough time to master all of it after initial defeats, I think. I have a lifetime to do so.


Is there anyone here with preferences to which mine resembles?
(Please, drop me a PM, I have questions...)