If my opponent and I are of about equal ability, and I have the opportunity to
permanently preventing my him from castling by sacrificing a Knight, is it
probably worth the loss? Or not? What about the sacrafice of a Bishop?
I know that the value of a pawn or piece is really only determined by context,
within an individual game, but I'm just looking for a general understanding of
the power of the castle (not the Rook, but the move).
you have answered your own question???? that is question its value!!
the value can only be assessed on each individual game and your
assessment of your opponents abilities! probaly not worth the sacrifice
for that purpose alone unless it would lead to a checkmate within a
couple of moves.unless its part of your opening castling is generally a
reserve move. that is a move that can be made.for it to be affective it
must be part of a plan. knowing this i like to leave castling till mid
game letting my opponent develop an attack against the king. then
suddenly castle. thus destroying the attack. against strong players this
doesnt work.i castle early to place the king in a safe position.but a
strong player knows this and attacks early. so there you have it. not
much help im afraid ! question,how strong is your opponent? if your
opponents castles what does this do for your plan of attack????in the
end you have to decide! isnt chess great!! :-)
I have to disagree with your second assertion Stevens, that of "your
assessment of your opponents abillities" being a factor in your
decision whether or not to go in for a material sacrifice. I like your
explanation otherwise though. The words "plan" and "calculate" are
perhaps among the most important in chess vernacular.
Obviously, you have to assess the position you're in to determine
whether you should play the sacrifice. However, I disagree that you
shouldn't play it unless you have forced mate. Mate is mate, whether
it comes in two moves, ten moves or ninety moves, so if you can
derive an advantage from the sac, play it.
Development is crucial in such positions where chance of attack is in
the air. If you have a significant lead in development, (i.e., you can
prepare your pieces to attack the enemy king faster than your
opponent can prepare his to defend), then you have a good chance of
either winning the material back (in which case you would have the
advantage if queens are still on the board, with his king still in the
center) or mating him. Of course, the words "winning," "drawn,"
and "losing" are all relative to your own ability; a one pawn advantage
at the start of the game is winning for two GMs of equal strength, but
chances to win are probably equal if you have a pawn advantage
against a player 200 points ahead of you. So, if you sac material to
get into a position that you know could be won, but you don't know
how to continue the attack, you may have ruined your position.
Anyway, development is important and don't play into a position you
don't think you can win.
The sacrifice of a piece to keep a king in the center of the board is
determined by the resultant position, that is, whether you are
sufficiently compensated by a position that will lead to later gains,
either in material or an attack that leads to mating your opponent by
forced moves. You, as a chess player, must make your best
evaluation of such subsequent positions before the move is made, of
course. To sacrifice simply to sacrifice rarely adds to one's win total.
Calculate and then calculate some more, making the best possible
moves for your opponent - moves you would play if you had his/her
position.