J. Watson-Rule Independence

Chess player John Watson wrote a book that featured a section or chapter on Rule Independence a long time ago. I mean like how many times have you hear the phrase "If center pawns are locked up, then attack with a pawn storm on flanks or wings" OR open the game up with line opening pawn moves if you possess the bishop pair"  His book showed counterexamples to many of the pedantic overstated rules that have been passed down over the generations mentally handicapping some beginning players.

The following game played at ICC reminded me of something else the IM quoted in his book. A guy named Suba stated that Bad Bishops protect good pawns. One can see in the diagram that Black's Bishop at e6 is enveloped by the pawns on the g6,f5,d5,c6,b7 squares. 

However, imagine that same entombed prelate on f5 threatening mate in one!! The move f4 , clearing the f5 square for the aforementioned threat, appears to  be refuted  by Bd3 where g6 is attacked by the Bishop and and g1 Rook. In the game Black played Rh1 desiring to exchange Rooks with Belgium player Azrael1978. This  is close to a horrible positional/tactical blunder. Rh2 is a better move, but Black must see how to respond to f3 attacking the Black Lady. 

So Black has the initiative after Rook h2 even though his Bishop is manifestly bad patiently awaiting diagonal opening pawn moves. On a side note IM Watson endorsed the interesting view of Sarah Hurst which espouses the assertion that chess intelligence does necessarily positively correlate to IQ, practical intelligence or other forms of mental acumen. I knew of academically retarded guys in Houston who were expert chess players.  Her remarks on the matter sound almost angry to the point I would bet she has very LOUD multiple orgasms.