Previous year she had a blunder streak (10 lost pieces in 14 games, although she managed to score 8/14) so she played in a very cramped way. Although she didn't blunder this year she played unusual passive which costed her six games. I trust she will get past this psychological barrier. To be honest, I'm already afraid of her. Behind the chessboard, that is.
Ninth game 4.5/9
I played the GPA and was an exchange up. The problem was that black had a mate threat if I would try to cash in, and he would lose a piece if he tried to break out. 1/2 - 1/2
Eighth game 4/8
I tried to ape Karpov with the Queens Indian defense against 1.d4 Nf6 2.Nf3
I soon equalized. The balance was never broken: 1/2 - 1/2
Seventh game 3.5/7
I played with white the Alapin Diemer gambit against the french defense. I score bad with this gambit lately, so it will be the first one I will replace with a more solid opening.
Black defensed correctly without panicking. I had great pressure, but I didn't want to make the desicive knight sac since that would be a gamble and I don't like that.
I clearly felt that there are 3 extra weapons that a defender has against a gambit of questionable soundness. If he plays well. These extra weapons are:
- The endgame, since he is a pawn up.
- The trade of pieces. The gambiteer must avoid the trade of pieces at all cost since it diminishes his advantage. Often this cost is too high.
- Time. This was the only game I was in time trouble because as gambiteer you MUST find the best moves otherwise the advantage slips away.