30 Jan 09
Originally posted by ArrakA real sacrifice doesn't win immediately. So, if you can calculate that a given sacrifice will win in any continuation, it isn't a sacrifice. That you are winning 50% of your games after a sacrifice seems to be therefore okay.
yeah but if you dont see ahead more then 5 moves then how do you know if your sacrifice will work out? ive lost so many games becuase i cant calculate over 5 moves ahead and ill just intuitively sacrifice, but it only will work out 50% of the time. how come GM's are so good at caluclating sacrifices if they can only see 5 moves ahead?
30 Jan 09
Originally posted by gambit05It's not OK if he could score more than 50% without the 'intuitive' sacrifice! It means that either the intuition is off a bit, or the play after the sacrifice isn't exact enough, or a bit of both.
A real sacrifice doesn't win immediately. So, if you can calculate that a given sacrifice will win in any continuation, it isn't a sacrifice. That you are winning 50% of your games after a sacrifice seems to be therefore okay.
I'd be interested to see an example of an Arrak sacrifice which didn't work out - we could discuss whether it was the right move to make at that time.
A sacrifice which leads to a forced win, as Gambit rightly points out, isn't really a sacrifice as such -i t's a temporary sacrifice, or more correctly a trading of advantages (trading in a piece or two in a good position, for an even better position (mate or simpler winnnig position).
30 Jan 09
Originally posted by gambit05I would agree with that, but he isn't referring to real sacrifices you mean, he's talking about pseudo sacrifices, which are meant to be tactical and concrete, and if they fail 50 % of the time, that means 50% blundering.
A real sacrifice doesn't win immediately. So, if you can calculate that a given sacrifice will win in any continuation, it isn't a sacrifice. That you are winning 50% of your games after a sacrifice seems to be therefore okay.
30 Jan 09
Originally posted by diskamylWhether a certain move is a blunder, a sacrifice or a temporary sacrifice (as pointed out by streetfighter) probably depends on who is making the move and who is looking to the game (in terms of playing strength. I sacrifice quite frequently, i.e. giving some material without seeing an immediate win. A weaker player might think it is a brilliant move, a stronger players might think it as a blunder.
I would agree with that, but he isn't referring to real sacrifices you mean, he's talking about pseudo sacrifices, which are meant to be tactical and concrete, and if they fail 50 % of the time, that means 50% blundering.
30 Jan 09
2 edits
Here is a recent example of mine where I temporarily sacrifice a piece on move 19. It becomes a true sacrifice when I decline to recapture (moves 23-25), but the pressure on black compels him to return the piece on move 25.
As Gambit points out, weaker players might not understand it - stronger players might not agree with it! The full article with game annotations can be seen here:-
http://www.chess.com/article/view/chess-psychology-101
[Burnett, A]
[Farrell, N]
[SNCL 2008]
[2197]
[2257]