Just Curious

I played a 3/2 blitz game... not the most suitable type of amateur game for analysis but I'm just curious about 1 move I made on impulse.  

In the position above, I felt romantic and sacked my Knight (for two pawns) after a few seconds of cursory analysis.  The ensuing computer analysis called it a blunder (which is ok, as it probably was - but who cares about such things in blitz?)

I'm curious if this is a type of move others might feel compelled to make in this same postion or if it's too risky, too goofy or too uncalled for.

White's huge development lead probably makes up for the material loss in practical terms. As you say, the engine despises it but your opponent couldn't refute it and that's what matters.

Hi! I like it. Why not?

What does a computer know about adventure, imagination, or joy? Nothing; nothing at all.

It's absolutely understandable, your opponents King is in the center and being a hopeless romantic you open up the position with Nxg5!! Saying that though, is there any real way to take advantage of the King in the center, is it not so that black has enough resources to place before the hapless monarch? Still should he not be made to dance the dance of death?  You opponent is pushing pawns and asking for it! justice itself cried out ! and demands that he or she be made to pay for such wanton abandonment of the principles of sound chess! 

Holy smokes. I looked at the position and then thought "Yes! I would do it too!"... but then realized later you were talking about on g5... when I would have sac'd on b5! Turns out, both are bad because they don't have strong immediate followups or open lines. But I would definitely have looked at both. Crazy that Ne5 is so strong here. Interesting enough, both h4 and a4 are shown as top moves. a4 I would have considered... but not h4!

Ne5 was my intended move when I quickly opted on Nxg5. My only hesitation was that it opened the h file.  There's no follow up.. in fact Black has Rxh2  followed by ...Ng4+,. ...Qh8 (of vice-versa)in his pocket if the opportunity knocks, but even speculative sacrifices can have merit in blitz - more so than in standard.  

Thanks y'all.

Very easy to solve the pin by simply playing Qb6!

If Qf4 then Nbd7. If Ne4 then  Nxe4. Afte that black can develop, Bb7 ,O-O-O.

Basically white simply lose a piece for 2 pawns ( that is why engines call blunders).

Whether will you play in blitz? No, I wont , such things usually doesnt work against my opponent level.

Thanks bossy.

Just for fun, take a look at the blitz game between two chess prodigies!

more more more! Brava!!! more batgirl chess analyses, please, very elucidating.

Sarah Beth - Black is un-castled and most of his pieces still sit on the back row . so White should definitely be looking for ways to crack the position open . I like your instincts here but this sac just doesn't bring enough heat . Blitz players develop a 'sixth sense' about when to sac and when to slow play a position.  The only way to learn is trial and error .

I'd have blindly sacrificed on b5 yes.  But on g5 not even in my dreams. Nothing is too risky, too goofy or too uncalled for when two amateur play each other. "me" blunders, "not me" didn't capitalise on it,  blunders big and gift a sweet victory to "me".  Happened many a times with "me" and this ongoing game is just an example of it. When I was tired of defending and thought of giving up he blundered big and now I am back in game.  

There’s a lot of comments about opening the position because you are castled. All I see is that you have opened two files in front of your own king. Now, Erik’s sacrifice on the queenside opens the position is a way that beneficial.

You came out okay because your opponent gave back the material with interest and then helped your attack.

As many pointed out above [edit] one element in calling that a 'blunder' seems to me that you opened up the position both for yourself AND for your opponent - interesting as if you had paid a ride for both yourself and your enemy - with the 3 pts of that Knight. 

I would't have done that knowingly until today.  I will consider doing it in the future sounds fun thanks 

I have made a sac like that many times in bullet or blitz games but even if the pin is not resolved easy , engine calls it a blunder 

Officially, this sac is almost always considered to be "unsound", but in a 3|2 amateur blitz game these assessments don't really apply. As it has been pointed out, you already had an advantage because of the inferior way your opponent handled the opening (you don't retreat the queen to d8 in the Scandinavian in the first place and then play a kingside fianchetto falling even further behind in development), so I think it was worth to take the risk for three reasons:

1) Bad stage of opponent's development

2) obvious inferiority of the opponent

3) psychological effects

4) possible gain of time because your opponent might spend some time pondering whether to accept the fact (I remember that recently won more than a minute on the clock with that sac in an OTB blitz game)

5) sheer audacity, thrill & fun (what else do you play blitz for?)

One could have thought of more enterprising continuations, e.g. 14. Bf5. I think once you chose that road, you have to make use of aggressive, frightening tactics. In most cases, the opponent knows that the sac is unsound in general, but sound in certain positions, and will start wondering whether the game at hand might be one of the rare cases where it is sound.

To illustrate, here is a wonderful back-and-forth-game with reversed colours, but some similarities, of none fewer than Magnus Carlsen, who got the advantage against Naiditsch even though the comps didn't like the sac, and still managed to give the game away in the endgame (!). Note that Carlsen even saced the bishop.

And what is wrong with Ne5 immediately? Follow up would be something like f4 Ne4. Black is now indirectly prevented from castling.....on O-O, you have h4! with a strong attack