I can see why you were tempted to play the R sac, open lines with 2 Bishops and a Rook bearing down on an exposed enemy King after the sacrifice. That's what all the books teach to look for in an attack. But Black had enough defensive pieces and especially control of the e6 square to blunt your attack.
Don't get discouraged about this game. Next time look closer at the tactical situation before you sac. Do you have at least a chance for the attack to crash through? Are critical squares available? Can you find that extra piece or tempo that will make it work? Good luck.
There is a germ of a rook sac in that position but only when your own f-pawn is not vulnerable to check; when you have chased the knight from c5; and when you check on e6 first and the king moves to h8. In that position the sac seems fine to me and is not actually a "sac" in the true sense.
For instance:
say you tried,
20. b4 and your opponent made an asinine retreat (Rxf2+ seems spoils everything) N anywhere
21. Be6 + Kh8
22. Rxh7+ Kxh7
23. Rxh1+ Bh6
24. Bxh6 seems fatal. Of course this is based on cursory analysis and no help from my friend, Fritz.
Originally posted by greenpawn34Whoops! Didn't know you'd already covered this dodgy idea, it doesn't work in this position because of Rxf2+, and the subsequent Rxg2 swapping a Bishop for the black knight, I think, so I agree with you that the whole plan needs a ?
Yes Rxh7 is a daft move.
Did you have the wrong position on your board?
Where you looking at an idea after b4 - Be6+ and then Rxh7?