I was wondering if trading 2 minor pieces for a rook and 2 pawns in this particular position was a sound strategy. It seemed to me I was exposing the king pretty good and getting even material for it. Also, I was wondering if my sacrifice was even legit. I'm a noob when it comes to this stuff so any help from pro-analyzers would be appreciated.
Had a look at this and it would be a nice sac with more than enough compensation. Problem is I don't think White woulsd respond to c5 with Nc2. Why wouldn't he just play NxB?
Yes. You are absolutely right. Thats a very logical move. The only reason I'd see not playing it would be that its really his only developed piece, with his bishop and rook penned in. That would probably be the only reason not to. But then again retreating cedes to an attack and blocks the queen so I guess he'd probably take. Another possibility is Ne2, which guards g3, if he played defensively. I hate pesky knights!
Thanks for your help. I guess I have a lot of noobish tendencies to work off, not calculating lines thoroughly...
Originally posted by Fat Lady In the game you missed a chance of getting the sacrificed piece back - instead of 32...h5, better is 32....Rxf2+ 33.Kxf2 Rd2+
Holy moly. And I kept staring at that fork over and over... I guess I wasn't thinking after blowing my plan. I'm too monomanical sometimes. Damn you Fat Lady for pointing that out, argh! I could have easily recoverd.
Originally posted by Dies Irae Holy moly. And I kept staring at that fork over and over... I guess I wasn't thinking after blowing my plan. I'm too monomanical sometimes. Damn you Fat Lady for pointing that out, argh! I could have easily recoverd.
Also, your opponent had a slightly stronger 42nd move. Can you see what it was?
You sacrifice does not look sound to me because you didn't have enough pieces readied for the attack. Your opponents king had lots of space around it and he had a couple of pieces nearby in a good position to defend, so you were unlikely to cause much damage with just your queen and knight.
You allowed the exchange of queens a few moves later. If you are losing in material then as a general rule you should try to avoid all piece exchanges, especially queens! However swapping pawns off when you are losing is generally a good idea because you may get to an ending where you can swap off one of your last remaining pieces for his last pawn and get a draw.
Originally posted by Fat Lady You sacrifice does not look sound to me because you didn't have enough pieces readied for the attack. Your opponents king had lots of space around it and he had a couple of pieces nearby in a good position to defend, so you were unlikely to cause much damage with just your queen and knight.
You allowed the exchange of queens a few moves later. If you are ...[text shortened]... ding where you can swap off one of your last remaining pieces for his last pawn and get a draw.
Yes you are totally right on all counts. I guess really I was just rook hunting. And I knew the maxim that its better for the material advantage to exchange, which sharpens the power difference, but I did not know that its better to exchange pawns when down in material to try to get a draw, but I guess that makes a lot of sense.
Thanks for the pro-tip and the analysis, Fat Lady. Learning these basic concepts in chess is like hearing about gravity for the first time- its pretty obvious once you know it, and you easily intuit it, but its not really clear until its all stated so blatantly.
Originally posted by Fat Lady Don't forget to switch back to the Dies Irae account before posting in this thread.
Lmao. I actually have a legit reason for the switch, but its gonna sound like total BS so let the chips fall where they may... I'll suscribe to RHP to atone for this sin because I really like it here.
Was this sacrifice sound?
08 Dec '06 09:34
Back to Top