I played Isaac, who has been keeping up his rating over the last tournament, and can be quite the calculator in tactical positions.
I played this game positionally, and basically just let him go for too much, such as with his Ng5 move, which I suggested after the game was premature (should develop first). Then with ..Rd1-f1, okay he has an attack, but his development has been very haphazard.
He played BxNc6, and I should have recaptured with the Bd7 – yes, he can play Re1+..Kf8, but I would have two pawns for it.
I did not play attack or defense the best, but I did balance the two better than with what he was doing. I sort of slipped him a bogus attack, which was my preferred idea all along, along with simple positional play. Even Isaac could have played Black’s final attack much better than I, but the difference was that I had accumulated all of those tiny positional plusses, the kind that meant I could play the finish sort of lousy and still stagger over the finish-line first.
I didn’t want to accept the gambit at first (and play ..e6 instead and try to win positional/endgame, but then I knew he would get an attack still. Actually, I realized that he could then turn it into a French Advanced with f3-f4, but that seemed more boring at the moment, so I took the pawn instead), and spent a long time debating over whether I should, but then I got the idea that perhaps he will get a little over-optimistic, which is exactly what happened.
This was a little bit on the “gift-win” side, as he could have hung tough with better positional play, and not figuring on my being a sucker so much.