Originally posted by huckleberryhound for us termanology retards (i mean me)
what is a rook sac?
A rook sacrifice, meaning to give up the piece (in this case a rook) for some other form of compensation. In this case it is not a sacrifice since the rook could not be captured without the queen being gained. In short, how can it be a sacrifice when you will gain material?
A genuine sacrifice will not lead to a forced gain in material but some other form of compensation, such as: development; gaining an outpost; space; open lines and/or diagonals; exposing a king etc. Often you will gain more than one of these forms of compensarion with a sacrifice.
Thanks for bursting my bubble. =( , haha jk. Really though, i was just wanting another perspective on that move. I thought it was the best available move, but who am i.
Originally posted by Menso Thanks for bursting my bubble. =( , haha jk. Really though, i was just wanting another perspective on that move. I thought it was the best available move, but who am i.
It was the best available move (probably) but it still isn't a sacrifice, it's a "discovered check" that allows you to gain material.
Originally posted by cmsMaster It was the best available move (probably) but it still isn't a sacrifice, it's a "discovered check" that allows you to gain material.
I 've seen a term "fake sacrifice" often used - if the opponent takes the offered piece he is going to lose at least the same amount of material in all variations. (I find that many times I've tried to pull a fake sacrifice it turns into a real one when my opponent declines it in a way I had not thought of...)
Originally posted by bahus [b]I 've seen a term "fake sacrifice" often used - if the opponent takes the offered piece he is going to lose at least the same amount of material in all variations.
In the English versions of his books, Euve used the term 'sham sacrifice' for this type of move. Personally I like the term investment; you know you are going to get back more than you put in.
Originally posted by Essex 3 In the English versions of his books, Euve used the term 'sham sacrifice' for this type of move. Personally I like the term investment; you know you are going to get back more than you put in.
It's a temporary sacrifice, which is still a sacrifice. Btw, why does everyone care so much about exact usage of this particular term? This 'debate' seems to come up again and again in the forum, and imo is a waste of time that distracts from more interesting chessy things in the threads.
Originally posted by TommyC Btw, why does everyone care so much about exact usage of this particular term? This 'debate' seems to come up again and again in the forum, and imo is a waste of time that distracts from more interesting chessy things in the threads.
chess players being anally retentive nitpicks? that can't really come as a surprise. 🙂
Originally posted by bahus I 've seen a term "fake sacrifice" often used - if the opponent takes the offered piece he is going to lose at least the same amount of material in all variations. (I find that many times I've tried to pull a fake sacrifice it turns into a real one when my opponent declines it in a way I had not thought of...)
- bahus
The term "fake sacrifice" is for scrubs. Don't use it.
30 Jun '06 23:36
My first completed game
Back to Top