Read an Excerpt
THE ART OF SACRIFICE IN CHESS
By Rudolf Spielmann, FRED REINFELD, LA. HOROWITZ, J. DU MONT Dover Publications, Inc.
Copyright © 2014 Dover Publications, Inc.
All rights reserved.
ISBN: 978-0-486-14306-4
CHAPTER 1
The Various Types of Sacrifices
IN THE DOMAIN OF PROBLEMS THE VARIOUS SACRIFICIAL THEMES have long since been classified and given their own nomenclature. In practical chess such a classification has never, to my knowledge, been attempted. A few combinations, such as "Philidor's legacy," have their own names; but apart from that, nothing has been done except an occasional loan from the problemist, such as "self-block," "vacating sacrifice" and the like. True, problem composers have a much easier task: their ideas are preconceived and can be executed without any interference by an opponent! Superfluous pieces are simply eliminated, so that the underlying idea ultimately appears in purest form permitting clear-cut diagnosis.
It is otherwise in practical chess. Here well-defined combinations and sacrifices turn up more or less at hazard. Hardly ever are they "pure" and "economical" as in problems, and consequently they are harder to recognize and classify. This is doubtless one of the reasons why such classification has not yet been attempted.
I can well imagine that some other author would classify the various types of sacrifices in an altogether different manner. That is why I again emphasize my purely subjective point of view. A definitive treatment cannot be expected from a first attempt. It will probably take a long time to establish for practical chess the kind of universally acceptable nomenclature that exists in the realm of problems.
Sacrifices represent in chess an exceptionally important phase of the struggle. Beauty is not the sole object. They have the common aim of increasing the effectiveness of other pieces outside of the normal routine, if possible suddenly. In equalized positions their purpose is to gain time. But mostly they serve to increase already existing advantages and they are consequently particularly adapted to the exploitation of mistakes by the other side. It may be that an advantage in development is turned into a grand assault, or that a weak point in the enemy lines is ripped open in the same way.
The advantage to be exploited need not be of a general nature; it can be merely local. Particularly in such cases does the sacrifice provide an indispensable weapon; for placid play is apt to dissipate the advantage, with resultant drifting into a drawn position.
A sacrifice at the right moment takes opportunity by the forelock. The opponent may gain material, but he is tempted or forced to make some temporarily useless moves, his troops become disordered and the disconnected forces are beaten before they can put up a united front to the enemy.
To get the unwieldy mass of possible sacrifices into some sort of order, we must first classify them under three heads: form, size and object.
Under the heading "form," there are two types: active and passive.
In distinguishing between these two types, the deciding factor, from a scientific point of view, would be whether the sacrifice arises from a move made for the purpose of sacrificing, or from a raid by the enemy. In other words, through moving and offering a piece—or through disregarding the enemy's threat to capture. Thus after 1 P-K4, P-K4; 2 P-KB4 is an active sacrifice. Conversely, after 1 P-K4, P-K4; 2 N-KB3, N-QB3; 3 P-Q4, PxP; 4 NxP, the raid 4 ... Q-R5 allows the passive sacrifice 5 N-N5.
From a practical point of view, however, I prefer to make a different distinction, namely, whether or not acceptance of the proffered sacrifice is compulsory. Those which must be accepted I call active, the others passive.
In the Allgaier Gambit (1 P-K4, P-K4; 2 P-KB4, PxP; 3 N-KB3, P-KN4; 4 P-KR4, PN5; 5 N-N5, P-KR3; 6 NxP) both forms occur in the first six moves. 5 N-N5 is a passive sacrifice, as it can be declined by 5 ... N-KB3 with no worsening of Black's position. Contrariwise, 6 NxP is an active sacrifice because it has to be accepted.
In the nature of things the active sacrifice is by far the more powerful of the two.
The size of the sacrifice appears to be perfectly easy to determine. But, as we shall see later on, this aspect also presents problems, as the value of each unit varies qualitatively according to the nature of a given position.
There are sacrifices of Pawns and of pieces. The latter can be subdivided into full- and part-sacrifices, depending on whether a whole piece is given up or whether there is partial compensation.
When considering part-sacrifices, we must distinguish between the major and minor pieces. When minor pieces are sacrificed, any material compensation can consist only in Pawns. In the case of a major piece, the compensation may be minor pieces or Pawns or both. The possible resulting situations are quite dissimilar, for after full sacrifices the number of your own units diminishes, while after a part-sacrifice it frequently actually increases.
A separate chapter treats of the sacrifice of the exchange and all its ramifications.
The most important classification of sacrifices is according to their object.
In this respect we must first distinguish between two groups, namely sham and real sacrifices. The difference is this: sham sacrifices involve losses of material only for a definable amount of time; in the case of real sacrifices, the amount of time required for recovering the material is not clear.
Therefore a sham (temporary) sacrifice involves no risk. After a series of forced moves, the player either recovers the invested material with advantage, or else even mates his opponent. The consequences of the sacrifice were foreseen from the first. Properly speaking, there is no sacrifice, only an advantageous business deal.
Yet such sacrifices must not be disparaged; often fine perception and a great deal of imagination are required, as well as the gift of intricate calculation, in order to discern possibilities in a position and exploit them.
We shall divide sham sacrifices into three groups:
1. positional sacrifices
2. sacrifices for gain
3. mating sacrifices
Positional sacrifices lead to forced recovery of the material lost with an improvement in position.
Thus, after 1 P-K4, P-K4; 2 N-KB3, N-QB3; 3 N-B3, B-B4 White can sacrifice advantageously with 4 NxP, for after 4 ... NxN he recovers the piece by 5 P-Q4, with improved prospects.
The sacrifice for gain leads to an advantage in material, the sacrificed material being regained by force and with interest.
An example: 1 P-K4, P-K4; 2 N-KB3, N-QB3; 3 B-N5, P-QR3; 4 B-R4, N-B3; 5 O-O, B-K2; 6 P-Q4, P-QN4; 7 B-N3, NxQP?; 8 BxPch, KxB; 9 NxPch followed by 10 QxN.
The mating sacrifice leads to checkmate or, alternatively, to immediately decisive gain of material. The actual mate can frequently be delayed by the heaviest counter-sacrifices (loss of the Queen, for example), which are, in effect, tantamount to mate.
For example: 1 P-K4, P-K4; 2 N-KB3, P-Q3; 3 B-B4, P-KR3; 4 N-B3, N-QB3; 5 P-Q4, B-N5; 6 PxP, NxP?; 7 NxN! If Black now captures the Queen, mate follows by 8 BxPch, K-K2; 9 N-Q5 mate. True, Black can avoid this mate in various ways by declining the sham sacrifice. But in that case White remains a piece to the good.
In real sacrifices the player gives up material, but is unable to calculate the consequences with accuracy; he has to rely on his judgment. He obtains dynamic advantages, which he can realize gradually. Should he not succeed in this, he will most probably lose the game through deficiency in material. Therein lies the risk, and risk is the hallmark of the real sacrifice. This group will occupy most of our attention from now on.
Compared with sham sacrifices, the real sacrifices are much more difficult to treat scientifically. Their secrets reveal themselves only to the gifted and courageous player, who has strong if controlled self-confidence. The timid player will take to real sacrifices only with difficulty, principally because the risk involved makes him uneasy.
The theory of real sacrifices cannot go beyond general rules, advice, warnings and illustrations. But let no one be discouraged: the moderately gifted player can obtain a considerable playing strength by applying himself diligently; while, on the other hand, weak play does not necessarily indicate lack of talent!
Unlike the sham sacrifice, in which the aims are clear as day, the real sacrifice has vaguely defined goals; the result lies in the lap of the gods and at most can be formulated only intuitively.
It follows that it must be a matter of some difficulty to differentiate between the various types of real sacrifices. I have had to adopt a subjective point of view again and to proceed at times by instinct. This conforms, after all, with the nature of these sacrifices, which in actual play are generally decided upon on an instinctive basis.
I have arrived at the following subdivisions:
1. sacrifices for development
2. obstructive sacrifices
3. preventive (or anti-castling) sacrifices
4. line-clearance sacrifices
5. vacating sacrifices
6. deflecting or decoy sacrifices
7. (castled) King's Field sacrifices
8. King-Hunt sacrifices
The sacrifice for development aims at an unusual acceleration of one's development. To this type belong more or less all gambits, as, for example the Muzio Gambit (1 P-K4, P-K4; 2 P-KB4, PxP; 3 N-KB3, P-KN4; 4 B-B4, P-N5; 5 O-O, PxN).
The rapid formation of a center which is said by many to be the object of most gambits, is, strictly speaking, only a means to the attainment of that object (accelerated development). In the nature of things the developing sacrifice occurs in the opening stages—when the development on either side is as yet uncompleted.
Besides the developing sacrifices known to theory, new ones are constantly evolved in practical play. For the most part they are Pawn sacrifices, but—as in the Muzio, mentioned above— pieces are sometimes sacrificed as well.
The obstructive sacrifice also occurs before the respective developments are completed, and the object is likewise a net plus in development. But here we achieve our objective not by speeding up our own, but by slowing down the opponent's, development. The material staked will have to be of a modest nature. An instance from the Caro-Kann Defense: 1 P-K4, P-QB3; 2 P-Q4, P-Q4; 3 P-K5, B-B4; 4 P-KN4, B-N3; 5 P-KR4, P-KR3; 6 P-K6. [This last move obstructs the future development of Black's King Bishop.]
The preventive (anti-castling) sacrifice is intended to prevent the opponent's castling.
To this end even a whole piece can be given up in certain circumstances, namely when it is possible to hold the hostile King in the middle and to open up the center files. In his second match with Lasker, Steinitz gave up a piece early in the game for this purpose:
1 P-K4, P-K4; 2 N-KB3, N-QB3; 3 B-B4, B-B4; 4 P-B3, N-B3; 5 P-Q4, PxP; 6 PxP, B-N5ch; 7 N-B3, NxKP; 8 O-O, BxN; 9 PxB, P-Q4; 10 B-R3.
The line-clearance sacrifice aims at the early employment of the Rooks on open lines. The Alekhine variation of the French Defense belongs to this category: 1 P-K4, P-K3; 2 P-Q4, P-Q4; 3 N-QB3, N-KB3; 4 B-N5, B-K2; 5 P-K5, KN-Q2; 6 P-KR4.
After 6 ... BxB; 7 PxB, QxP White's open King Rook file becomes very powerful.
In certain cases this type of sacrifice justifies a very large stake.
The vacating sacrifice procures access for a particular unit to a more favorable square. For so limited an object, only a small investment should be risked. A pretty case in point is the following example from the Two Knights' Defense:
1 P-K4, P-K4; 2 N-KB3, N-QB3; 3 B-B4, N-B3; 4 N-N5, P-Q4; 5 PxP, N-QR4; 6 P-Q3, P-KR3; 7 N-KB3, P-K5; 8 Q-K2, NxB; 9 PxN, B-QB4; 10 P-KR3, O-O; 11 N-R2.
Now Black has only one really promising continuation of the attack: 11 ... PK6!; 12 BxP, BxB; 13 PxB, N-K5. Thanks to this Knight's strong position, Black's attack is very powerful.
The deflecting or decoy sacrifice has the definite object of luring or diverting one or more enemy pieces from the main field of battle. The attacker, for instance, allows his opponent to graze on one wing in order to be able to pursue his attack undisturbed on the other side. Such sacrifices ordinarily occur only after development is far advanced. An example from the Ruy Lopez:
1 P-K4 P-K4
2 N-KB3 N-QB3
3 B-N5 P-QR3
4 B-R4 N-B3
5 O-O NxP
6 P-Q4 P-QN4
7 B-N3 P-Q4
8 PxP B-K3
9 P-B3 B-K2
10 B-K3 O-O
11 QN-Q2 N-R4
12 B-B2 NxN
13 QxN N-B5
14 Q-Q3 P-N3
15 B-R6 NxNP
16 Q-K3 R-K1
17 Q-B4 ....
White has a strong attack against the hostile castled position. Black's Knight is out of play and for the time being is unable to participate in the defense.
Sacrifices in the King's Field have the object of breaking up the hostile King's castled position. They are the most frequent combinations in the middle game and occur in countless variations. They are seldom encountered in the opening stage, requiring as they do an advanced stage of development.
King-Hunt sacrifices I call those which drive the King into the open, where he is automatically exposed to a great many dangers. An example from the Vienna: 1 P-K4, P-K4; 2 N-QB3, B-B4; 3 N-R4, BxPch.
White hardly has an alternative to capturing and must at least attempt to hold the extra piece. But his King will be driven from pillar to post after 4 KXB, Q-R5ch; 5 K-K3, QB5ch; 6 K-Q3, P-Q4.
In comparing the two broad groups of sacrifices, we now perceive the train of thought on which this division is based. In the sham sacrifice the ultimate object is paramount. In the real sacrifice, only the provisional aim is considered. The common ground in both types is that only the object visible at the time of the sacrifice is taken as the characteristic feature.
In practical play, combinations frequently occur which are composed of several sacrifices. These usually belong to only one of the two main groups. But it is quite possible for a sham sacrifice to precede a real one. The converse can happen in the course of a game, but hardly as part of one combination.
In the following pages, the various types of sacrifices will be treated according to their object, that is, according to their type. Only in two cases will the classification be according to the amount of material given up. These are the sacrifice of the exchange and the Queen sacrifice. The reasons for this are set forth in the respective chapters.
SHAM SACRIFICES
A surprisingly large number of sacrificial combinations must be classed as sham sacrifices, because they lack the real characteristics of the sacrifice.
The material given up is regained subsequently, frequently with interest. They are sham sacrifices in the most literal sense of the word.
With these we shall deal in the next three sections.
POSITIONAL SACRIFICES
To this class belong all sacrifices which have the object of effecting an improvement in position by temporarily giving up material. The recapture of the material given up, is an essential characteristic. It is not necessary for the compensation to be in the same currency. But the quid pro quo, in the material sense, must be adequate. In effect the positional sacrifice is a form of barter—only the return is not made immediately, but rather in the course of several moves. Again, a positional sacrifice need not necessarily lead to an advantage in position. Undertaken in a bad position, it may barely save the game or merely prolong resistance.
However, if when all is said and done the positional sacrifice is only an exchange, it is nevertheless an exceedingly valuable weapon. Of course, one must gauge accurately the consequences of such a deal. This should not be difficult as a rule.
(Continues...)
Excerpted from THE ART OF SACRIFICE IN CHESS by Rudolf Spielmann, FRED REINFELD, LA. HOROWITZ, J. DU MONT. Copyright © 2014 Dover Publications, Inc.. Excerpted by permission of Dover Publications, Inc..
All rights reserved. No part of this excerpt may be reproduced or reprinted without permission in writing from the publisher.
Excerpts are provided by Dial-A-Book Inc. solely for the personal use of visitors to this web site.
