Originally posted by diskamylIt would seem that the "weaker game of chess" aspect may be due to the fact that he did exactly what GP said not to.
Again, with all due respect, I really dislike the tradition of trying to prove ideas with sample games, where one side obviously has played a weaker game of chess than the other, aside from the essence of that idea trying to be proven.
Take the rook. Seems its fruit from the poisonous tree.
Originally posted by diskamylI agree with the sickly pawn, I often sac a rook for the fianchettoed bishop placing the queen on the long diagonal and tearing the weakened dark square complex apart thereafter - actually, I am getting aroused just thinking about it - excuse me for a moment.
With all due respect, I think that is a careless advice. I would advise taking the rook in almost all of such situations.
Originally posted by diskamylNot trying to score any points here.
Again, with all due respect, I really dislike the tradition of trying to prove ideas with sample games, where one side obviously has played a weaker game of chess than the other, aside from the essence of that idea trying to be proven.
Just trying to give the lad an idea what to avoid if he
is going to start playing a Black kingside finachetto.
If I had not the chances are he would have grabbed the
first a1 Rook he saw and lost horribly.
I selected games where the players appear to be over 2000 so
these are not beginners games.
1 edit
Originally posted by diskamylI see GP's point here...
Again, with all due respect, I really dislike the tradition of trying to prove ideas with sample games, where one side obviously has played a weaker game of chess than the other, aside from the essence of that idea trying to be proven.
But again, in the games that were provided, in the first game Black's 16. ..e6 was clearly a bad move. The third game was clearly evident that Black played badly soon after capturing the Rook.
It all boils down to one point: The most vital and important piece on the board is ONLY ONE - The King. You need to protect your King, no matter what you lose or gain.
Ram,
Any bishop that is not blocked by its own pawn is a good bishop.
"When your opponent has a bishop, you should place your
pawns on the same color squares as the bishop. However, if
you have a bishop yourself, then you should try to keep the
pawns on different colored squares than your bishop, no
matter if your opponent has a bishop or not.
- Capablanca." from Chess Strategy for the Tournament Player by GM Lev Alburt.
As long as you are not blocking your fianchetto bishop with your own pawns, it is good. With the fianchetto, you control the long diagonal, which is also crucial.
+Udaya
1 edit
Originally posted by ram1977The third game is the most instructive when discussing this type of sac.
The third game was clearly evident that Black played badly soon
after capturing the Rook.
J.Sanz (2345) - J.Fraguela (2380) These are OTB grades.
Both players knew what they were doing. Black knew his King's position
was in danger but judged he could handle it.
White thought otherwise.
Black did his best to keep away the White Queen away from a
square where it could go to h6. He missed c4-c5!
There is a difference between bad play and getting outplayed.
OK bad judgement - but he knew what he doing. He took a chance.
On another day he may have turned the exchange into a win.
Bad play would be snatching the Rook and then allowing Qh6
without making any attempt to stop it.
Go back and play it over again - Black did not win the exchange.
White gave it to him. Things to be learnt here boys - don't skip past it.
Originally posted by greenpawn34No, no, I know you're not trying to score any points, and I'm very happy with your contritbution to this forum. Actually, I'm just happy I've just had a discussion with you 🙂
Not trying to score any points here.
Just trying to give the lad an idea what to avoid if he
is going to start playing a Black kingside finachetto.
If I had not the chances are he would have grabbed the
first a1 Rook he saw and lost horribly.
I selected games where the players appear to be over 2000 so
these are not beginners games.
Keep this up, you're probably right, but I just cannot help thinking otherwise.