I was surprised to see this yesterday in one of the local bookshops that doesn't usually stock many chess books, and even fewer good ones.
I bought it, since it is always instructive to read the views of a master (I always learn something). Anyone read it, and have an opinion?
Please don't complain about the lack of computer checking, or that the variations are out of date (first published in 1935).
It does have a bit of a vintage flavour though - lots of King's Gambit examples, but that might not be a bad thing in a book about sacrifices.
Spielmann's not a dull writer. His introduction begins:
'The beauty of a chess game is usually appraised, and with good reason, according to the sacrifices it contains. Sacrifice - a hallowed, heroic concept! Advancing in a chivalrous mood, the individual immolates himself for a noble idea'.
He then goes on to propose a taxonomy of sacrifices, albeit one that he readily admits is somewhat subjective.
He intruduces the concept of pseudo-sacrifice. Just to give a queen might not be a sac at all, because it gives you another benefit but in another currency. So what is a sac?
I found his writing a bit of a mouthful (translated by Du Mont).
(Imagine Charles Dickens writing a chess book.)
It's not a put down but sometimes you need to re-read a line or two
to figure out what he is saying.
I like his comments after Game 26 where he basically admits he
played the game by intuition and calls 'poverty-stricken' players who
do the same but try to state later that they saw it all.
(the same way some modern players try to pass of Rybka/Fritz
analysis as their own)
The games and the notes in these games are wonderful.
Everytime I push a pawn onto e6 or d6 I always think of Spielmann
and his game v Landau in the section under Obstrcutive Sacrifice.
You will get ideas from this book alright and enjoy going through it.
Originally posted by greenpawn34 (Imagine Charles Dickens writing a chess book.)
"It was the best of games, it was the worst of games; it was the age of sacrifice, it was the age of prophylaxis; it was the epoch of attack, it was the epoch of defence; it was the season of White, it was the season of Blackness; it was the spring of hope, it was the winter of despair; we had winning before us, we had losing before us; we were all going directly to Victory, we were all going the other way."
Originally posted by Blackamp I was surprised to see this yesterday in one of the local bookshops that doesn't usually stock many chess books, and even fewer good ones.
I bought it, since it is always instructive to read the views of a master (I always learn something). Anyone read it, and have an opinion?
Please don't complain about the lack of computer checking, or that the vari ...[text shortened]... ropose a taxonomy of sacrifices, albeit one that he readily admits is somewhat subjective.
Spielmann was a tremendous attacking player very similar in style to the Great Mikhail Tal or a modern day shirov. He was very much against the rigid positional style of chess that reared it's head in the early part iof the 20th century through the 20's and 30's. His opening repertoire always sought to try and refute this style of chess and not without success it has to be said.
He claimed victories over the very best players of his time including a couple of wins against Capablanca, something the great Nimzowich was never able to do.
I own a copy of this book and i think it is simply charming! you will not fail to be amazed by the vision of the man. the games are both fun to play through as well as being very instructive.
Along with the Art of The Checkmate and the games collections i have featuring Tal and Alekhine it's my most treasured possession.
Originally posted by Blackamp "It was the best of games, it was the worst of games; it was the age of sacrifice, it was the age of prophylaxis; it was the epoch of attack, it was the epoch of defence; it was the season of White, it was the season of Blackness; it was the spring of hope, it was the winter of despair; we had winning before us, we had losing before us; we were all going directly to Victory, we were all going the other way."
I like that - very good.
We could do a thread on how various authors would write a chess book.
Shakepsear: "Is this a Knight I see before me?"
or "b2 or not b2 - where to put the Bishop."
The book is great. I read it long ago and replaced my lost copy in a second-hand shop just yesterday. This is one of those books that have the right amount of analysis for me. I don't have much time to study chess, so reams of sidelines are sort of wasted.
Friends, Romans, Internet Community, lend me your eyes. I come in praise of chess games, not to bury them. The great games than men play live after them, bland games are oft interred with their bones. So let it be with most games.
Originally posted by eljefejesus Jane Austen:
It is a truth universally acknowledged that chess players in possession of a high rating must be in want of a wife.
Spielmann's 'The Art of Sacrifice in Chess'
20 Jun '09 08:16
Back to Top