Abdel Irada: <<•> Of infiltration and impunity <•>>One of two things has happened in this position: Either White has overcommitted his pieces on the kingside and will have to exchange/retreat them or lose them, or Black has allowed too many enemy pieces to penetrate his kingside.
Which of these eventualities is true we can test with an infiltrating move:
<<•> 11. Qf7! ... >
This threatens 12. Qxg7#, but White has several pieces en prise. What if Black takes one?
(a) 11. ...Rxf7 12. Nxf7†, Kg8 13. Nxd8, Bxh6 14. e3
. After White extricates the knight via e6 or b7, he will consolidate with an exchange to the good. This is a clear if not a winning advantage in the endgame.
(b) 11. ...Bxh6?? 12. Qxh7#.
(c) 11. ...fxg5?? 12. Qxg7#.
This leaves Black one desperate defense.
<<•> 11. ...Rg812. Qxf6! ... >
Now White threatens in deadly earnest the smothered mate that a move ago was mere mirage.
Again Black can't take anything:
(d) 12. ...e/Bxf6?? 13. Nf7#.
And of course the bishop is pinned and can't take on h6.
This means Black must find a means to defend f7, and of these I see four.
< (1,2) 12. ...Qe8/f8?
13. Nf7†
>
Black will have to give up the queen to forestall mate.
< (3) 12. ...Be6
13. Bxg7†, Rxg7
14. Qxg7†, Kxg7
15. Nxe6†
>
White emerges a rook and a bishop to the good.
< (4) 12. ...Be8
13. Bxg7†, Rxg7
14. Qxg7†, Kxg7
15. Ne6†
>
And here White has an extra rook.
All things considered, Black's best chances seem to lie in note (a), where he is "only" the exchange down. But if that is the most he can do to punish White's infiltration, then it appears we have our answer: It is not that White has overcommitted, but that Black has underdefended.
∞