Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 14:10:40 12/16/98
Go up one level in this thread
On December 15, 1998 at 22:35:46, Dann Corbit wrote: >On December 15, 1998 at 22:18:58, Robert Hyatt wrote: >>No.. wrong term. "combination" is what you are looking for. "sacrifice" >>usually means offering something where you get nothing *tangible* back. IE >>sacrifice the exchange to get pressure in the center that may or may not win >>later on. The above is not a sac, because you get more back than you invest, >>ie you give up the queen, but win the game... >All true sacrifices lose then, or they are merely illusions? If the sacrifice >somehow wins in the long run, then it is just pushed out farther, but there was >some benefit. If the sacrifice does not win anything at all and you lose the >game, then its value is questionable at best. What you are describing sounds >more like a gambit to me. I suppose my terms are all wrong, but I have always >thought that on any two plies, if you toss out a bigger piece for a smaller one, >then it is a sacrifice. Is there some "official" definition of what a sacrifice >is? I differentiate between the two types of sacrifices... one is a sacrifice that loses, one that wins. But the win is so far in the future the sacrifice is made on "speculative" grounds. If you play Qxg8 Rxg7 Nf7#, the qxg8 losing the queen is not a sacrifice at all. Because I will trade 10 dollar bills for 20 dollar bills all day long. But would you trade a 10 dollar bill for a 5 dollar bill + something else that may or may not be worth anything? That's a sacrifice IMHO...
This page took 0 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.