We've recently been playing some games on the Paradox wargames Forum, via PM. Here's a game of mine against one of the better players.
I am playing Black in a Sicilian Defense, Prins variation... a version of the Maroczy Bind. I made a rather dubious pawn sacrifice to break the bind... and then the game went completely nuts.
1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 d6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 Nf6 5.f3 ...
The Prins variation. More popular, but also much better known, is 5. Nc3. After White's text move, the most common reply for Black is 5. ... e5 in order to avoid the Maroczy Bind (6. c4)... but I decided to just allow the Maroczy instead, since I'm not afraid of it, and I actually enjoy playing Scheveningen-type formations as Black, with Pawns on d6 and e6.
5. ... e6 6. c4 ...
White decides to try the Maroczy Bind. It's a tactically safe but positionally double-edged formation. White gets a large advantage in controlled space and an easy development but suffers from weak dark squares and his minor pieces are of very unequal value... his dark-squared Bishop is now his most important minor piece, while his light-squared Bishop is badly confined by his own Pawns.
If Black can arrange to play either ... d5 or ... b5 then he will get an excellent game, but if White succeeds in keeping Black confined inside his own Pawns, Black's prospects are dim.
6. ... Nc6 7. Nc3 a6 8. Be3 Be7 9. Qd2 Bd7 10. Be2 O-O 11. g4 ...
This looked premature to me. Of course White should play for King's-side pressure... but not this abruptly. The Maroczy is a slow opening system, and White should first complete his development by Castling and bringing at least one Rook to the center before he embarks on any flank adventures. Retreating his centralized Knight to c2 would also be wise, to prevent Black from exchanging it off (and thus clearing c6 for the Bishop on d7).
I decided to meet this King's-side sally by playing for ... d5 in order to open the center against White's weak dark squares. If the center comes open, that will automatically paralyze any hostile flank attack. If necessary, I intended to play ... d5 as a Pawn sacrifice.
11. ... Nxd4 12. Bxd4 Bc6 13. g5 Ne8 14. h4 d5
Here it comes... as a (probably unsound) Pawn sacrifice, since 15. cxd5 exd5 16. exd5 Bxd5? is met by 17. Bxg7! discovering an attack on my Bishop. I wasn't too concerned about giving away my Queen's Pawn, though... White's attack is instantly halted, after which his advanced King-side Pawns are left looking rather silly; I gain access to the weak dark squares in his position and he has no really safe place to put his King. Also, for a long time to come, Black's moves are going to be much easier to find than White's replies are. In theory, Black might not be getting full compensation for his sacrificed Pawn, but in practice his position is much easier to play than White's.
15. cxd5 exd5 16. exd5 Bb5 17. Nxb5 ...
After 17. Bxb5 axb5 it will be very difficult for White to stop ... b4. He cannot protect the square with 18. a3 because of the pin on the a-file.
17. ... axb5 18. Bf2 Ra4
I felt when I made this move that I might be over-pressing, and that perhaps just 18. ... Nd6 was stronger, but I was curious as to what White intended to do with his King. Also, I hoped to tempt White into eventually playing b3 (after dealing with my immediate threat of ... Bb4, of course) which would further weaken his dark squares.
19. Kf1 Nd6 20. Kg2 f6
When I made this move, I was under the impression that White could not afford to allow the exchange of my f-Pawn, since that would increase my dark-squared pressure to a critical level. I was expecting him to return the sacrificed Pawn instead by playing 21. g6 hxg6 22. h5 in order to keep my f-file and d8-h4 diagonal closed, while simultaneously trying to breathe some new life back into his King's-side attack.
21. b3 Ra8 22. gxf6 ...
This move startled me... I had the fixed idea that it was completely unplayable.
22. ... Bxf6 23. Rac1 Nf5 24. h5 ...
Again, White might have been better off just letting me take this Pawn, in order to develop counter-pressure along the open file against my h7 square. I had the definite impression that he had either overlooked or badly underestimated my 26th move (26. ... Be7).
24. ... Nh4+ 25. Bxh4 Bxh4 26. f4 Be7!
Switching diagonals! Now White is in serious trouble, despite his two-Pawn advantage.
27. Bxb5 Bd6 28. Rhf1 Bxf4
I had also considered 28. ... Qh4, but the text move seemed clearer. I felt that the coming Queen-for-bits ending should be won for Black.
29. Rxf4 Qg5+ 30. Kf3 Rxf4+ 31. Qxf4 Rf8 32. Qxf8 Kxf8 33. Rc8+ ...
The only other reasonable drawing attempt was 33. Rf1, conceding the d-Pawn immediately.
33. ... Ke7 34. Rc7+ Kd8 35. Rxb7 ...
Ooops. Naturally, 35. Rd7+ instead was forced, after which 35. ... Kc8 36. a4 Qxh5+ 37. Ke4 and then possibly ... g6 would follow. In that position, White can't move anything except his King, since moving the Bishop loses the Rook, moving the Rook loses it to a check-check-fork sequence, and playing 38. d6 just enters a lost King-and-Pawn ending after 38. ... Qf5+ followed by returning the Queen with 39. ... Qxd7. White's Queen-side Pawns can waste a few moves, but cannot advance as a unit without cutting communication between the Bishop and Rook (a5, b4, Ba4, b5 allows ... Qg4+ and ... Qxd7). White seems to have no way to resist the advance of Black's King-side Pawns, escorted by the Queen.
EDIT: Whups... I omitted the obvious final moves...
35. ... Qxd5+ 36. White Resigns
... he loses his Rook.