Games from the Clubhouse: Frustration Edition (Updated)

Today Jim McTigue and I got into another French Defense. It was a Classical line, I believe, and at some point Jim got in Nd6, but a bit prematurely. Things were going my way when we reached the starting position below. I goofed up, as I'll explain, and then lost my cool and missed a clear win.

Afterwards we got into a prolonged analysis session with Connor and Norm, and perhaps Paul briefly. Ideas were kicked around, holes were found in this idea and that idea, but I was convinced that after ...Rf2 I had a stone cold won position. Then El Supremo plugged the position into his cellphone, and Stockfish began busting one idea after another.* Now came the claim that WHITE was winning.* GRRR.

Anyway, I've run it at home now, and it looks like claims of White's advantage are overblown - Black had an advantage through most of the critical parts, though not always a huge advantage. Still, quite frustrating. I'm putting the analysis in the window below. One thing I didn't add: if White plays 4 Qb4 to cover the d2 square, then Black gets in the cute shot 4...Rcxc2!!

If someone with a faster computer & better analysis comes up with anything, post it in the comments below and I'll add it to the body of the post if it changes anything. Man, what a miss!

* These sentences have been edited.

UPDATE: Paul Leggett has commented; he writes:

I think the challenge with this position is that one is tempted to evaluated statically, based on structure and types of pieces, when the reality is that it is about tactics and development. Statics can be assessed quickly, whereas dynamics often take time to full appreciate.

The idea of ...Rxc2 in response to white's Rf1 move is simple if one looks at what the Bd3 was doing, but we have to train ourselves to think that way (I don't do it naturally, but I am working on it). IM Martin Weteschnik has a method he calls "Status Examination" where recommends looking at what each piece is doing individually. In this case, after Rf1 the Bd3 is overloaded- it is protecting the Rf1 and c2 pawn at the same time. At that point the tactic becomes easy.

That said, I doubt I would have noticed it, either.

I am starting to see a pattern of overloaded defenders in my tournament games and at the club, and I think it may be a neglected tactical motif. We all tend to focus on forks, pins, skewers, etc, but the essence of all tactics is the double attack, and an overloaded defender is highly susceptible to it.

I decided to run the game through the Fritz "full analysis" mode, using Komodo 8 and allocating 5 minutes per move. All of the comments are from Fritz/Komodo, including the comments in English- I added nothing.

It seems that black was clearly better, and that white's only salvation was in the repetition available after black left an escape hatch for white. Here is the link to the game.

The extent of my evaluation was that I was threatening mate in one and was certain I could find a way out of the checks! What I missed, ultimately, was the Qb4+ idea. Pure blindness on my part, and another manifestation of my biggest weakness as a player: I keep overlooking ideas for my opponent. (For the record, Komodo largely confirms prior analysis, so that should be the bottom of this particular position. The resulting endgames, though....)