The best part were the annotations, covering every single move. A great game also.

i think there's lot of better moves than R x g2 in move 36!

what about this?

5 bg5 

Yes, we shouldn't play as "wood pushers," but play every move based on our opponent's last move-- that is, 3 ply.  My move, their move, my move after that.  Mark

For all that are asking why not Kh7 instead of resignation, please read the last comment in the game (there for follows and black is down pieces in the endgame).

 --------------------------

A great move to end the game! Now 42...Kxh7 is forced and white has 43. Nxg5+! and then next capturing the Queen and white will have an easily won endgame. Therefore black resigns here. White wins, 1-0

Oh...I see...Thanks!

Nxg5+ and white take back queen and have an easy end game

I don't understand... Ok, may be I'm not so highly skilled in chess.

But anyway, it would be great if someone explain me the following.

Take a look at the latest picture of the game. Why not 42... Kxh7?

In this situation black will have a great situation. Black queen, bishop, khight against white rook and khight. No evident checkmate to black king. No white pawns near the upper horizontal (a8-h8).

Please, someone explain! 

Wow, that was incredible!!!

ADK

if black's king took whites queen, he would have an advantage.nothing could attack the white king, and if the white knight threatened the king,it could be taken by the black knight, then black would take whites remaining rook, and then trap the king on the lower-left rankget another queen with the pawns on the left side, and then checkmate.

wow

nothing is impossible,all gm have a weekness so find out why black was lost.

Very good game

Thanks for the explanation, and I appreciate the annotated game postings.

-Dan 

I used the Rybka chess program to find some improvements on some of the moves.

Your comments on 9. Nd1

- Are you claiming to be better than Nakamura, or is this Fritz talking?  I am not clear on where the judgement call "better would have been" comes from, and I want to know if it really would have been better.

 Thanks.

Reminds me of a game I once saw between Dzindzichashvili and a class A player. Roman was playing black against white's Queen's gambit, Lev Alburt was doing annotations. White offered a poison pawn. The line was the pawn couldn't be taken as it would lead to the loss of material. Lev mentioned this to those garhered and demonstrated the line of moves.

Roman just looked at the players move sheet and saw his rating. He then boldly took the pawn. White lost the game on the 17th move due to time.

GM's seem to do that things like that to us mere mortals 

I thought there was a bit of bias in the annotations though....white seems to get all these "this is genuis" remarks, I thought Black played rather well, but I guess you need to be a GM to recive any praise!

Great game, perhaps if Santalla had been playing against a weaker opponent he wouldn't have been psychologically beaten by a slower game

Nice work Patzer.  I enjoyed the game and the annotations.  Well done!!!