Knight and Rook sac, was it appropiate?

  • #1

    I sacced a knight and rook in this game for far superior positioning down the road, would a better player have ripped me for this?



  • #2
    mashanator wrote:

    Yes, you would of gotten very severly owned if you had played that against a stronger player.

    Can you just elaborate a bit more? For instance, someone pointed out that the move 15: b4 would have nullified my rook sac in this other game.

     

    http://www.chess.com/forum/view/game-analysis/was-this-early-rook-sac-proper

  • #3

    Yes, a better player would have owned you.  As I told someone before, what has black done to deserve to get rocked by your knight sac?  He has made  reasonable moves.  Your sac isn't based on mistakes by black or some opening theory line.  You have just one piece involved in the attack initially which is clearly not enough and black has few weaknesses.  He has doubled g-pawns but has compensation in the open h-file.  You are simply missing too many requirements for a sacrifice like this.  You got nada but kudos for winning anways. 

  • #4

    I wish i could get someone to play like this against me. It would be so fun to see how White would continue after 7. g4?! Nxg4 8. hxg4 Bxg4 and White can start the car and get ready to go home before seeing how the rest of the game played out.

  • #5

    2.e3 (?) is passive. c4, or Nf3, are the interesting moves (c3 is passive too, even if less because it does not trap a bishop)

    3.Bd3 (?) commits to never play c4 because it would lose a tempo after ...dxc4, and choses the place of the bishop (d3 against e2) when it could have been wise to keep the choice for later.

    4.b3 is the only way to get out of the move 2 problem, but only if you intend to exchange the bishop on a3, not to place it on a fianchetto your pawn closes on b2.

    5.Nf3 (?) : 5.Ne2, with the idea f3 and e4, was a way to get something done.

    7.g4 (?) weakens the kingside for no advantadge.

    8.Bb2 ? : see comment on 4.b3

    9.Bxg6 (?) : the doubled pawn here are not a liabality, but an asset : they are harder to attack and above all they open the h file for Black.

    11.Nxf7 ?? throws awyay a piece.

    15 "the queens attacks many squares from there" : this is true, but it attacks no useful square. What good is it to attack the d5 pawn if it is solidly defended and no tactical opportunities arise from sacrificing a piece on it ? What good is it to control e4 if pushing the pawn on it only leads to massive trade of material which favors Black who has one more piece ?

    15...Ne8 ? is passive and achieves nothing. Black crushes White's head after ...a5, ...a4, etc.

    16...Bh4 ?? runs into a trap for nothing.

    The exchange sacrifice (you get one minor piece for your rook, so that's not a rook sacrifice) is justified, because White can't take the trapped bishop otherwise.

    24...Rxh4 (?) : this wins much time for Black's attack, but it was simpler to play ...Kf7, as anyways White has nothing.

    25...c5 ? loses time compared to ...a4 ! where all white moves lead to the opening of a file and a dolourous death.

    I agree 26...Nxc5 is better than the text (retaking with the queen)

    30...Nb8 ????? achieves nothing. Simply ...Kf7 and White is lost (no counterplay).

    31...Qxe3 + ?? loses badly.

     

    So no, the piece sacrifice wasn't appropriate. The exchange sacrifice was.

  • #6
    vengence69 wrote:

    I wish i could get someone to play like this against me. It would be so fun to see how White would continue after 7. g4?! Nxg4 8. hxg4 Bxg4 and White can start the car and get ready to go home before seeing how the rest of the game played out.

    Oh yes ? And what is your brilliant answer to 9.Be2 in that line ?

Top
or Join

Online Now