Author: Ed Schröder
Date: 15:51:55 10/04/99
Go up one level in this thread
>Posted by Robert Hyatt on October 04, 1999 at 09:35:17: >>Then tell me the difference between a "positional sacrifice", and a >"sacrifice". > > >Here is how _I_ differentiate between the two: > >positional sacrifice: giving up material for some positional compensation >that you believe will enable you to win when the game seems to be pretty >even, or will enable you to draw if your opponent seems to be winning. IE >black frequently plays RxNc3 in the Sicilian, as it removes a dangerous piece >and prevents it from supporting the center, plus it often produces other weak- >nesses such as two isolated pawns. Or where black has pawns at a2/b2/c2 and >black finds a way to play a3 in a position where white must play bxa3. Black >believes that by giving up the pawn, the three weak white pawns (a2/a3/c2) >will >eventually fall, and because they are isolated, white has no real chances of >winning an endgame on the queenside as well. All of this is just positional >judgement that says "my position before the sac is worse than my position >after >the sac." > >real sacrifice: giving up material, not because you see immediate positional >gain that offsets the loss, but because you believe that the resulting >position >has tactical chances that are worth the gamble. IE the common Bxh7+ move that >gets played even when white can't see a forced mate, but he can see the king >getting into places where it might not be able to avoid a mate. This is more >speculative since the sacrificer doesn't actually see whether the gamble pays >off or not. I do this fairly often in blitz time controls myself. Probably >more often than I do real positional sacrifices... Thanks for pointing out your views. When a human sacs with Bxh7+ he expects a win otherwise he wouldn't play that move. Rebel played 24.gxh6 and Sherbakov took the bait (the white knight) with 24..Qxd5? (24..g6! was the only good move) and then was caught in a heavy king attack. Every annotator will call 24.gxh6 a sac. IMO. Ed PS, just read GM Scherbakov calls 24.gxh6 a sac too :)
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.