Do you ever sacrifice your queen?

I have two pattern of sacrificing my queen 

Patetrn 1

Pattern 2

Three games where my queen sacrificed and won me the match

Game 1

Game 2

Game 3

Well true , good observation 

@boamind

Your queen sacs were completely unsound. You only won because of the psychological factor where you confused your opponent with the sac, coupled with the fact that it was minute chess. You'd never get these kinda games with opponents of this strength in 15 min chess.

Also, your first example has some merit that at least you draw out black's king, but the second is just plain stupid and looks worse than a noob 5 yr old playing.

I would love my opponent to do either of those sacrifices in a long game. In fact after that I'd be happy for them to get up and Carlsen to sit down.

Never try yet. I like to see more chess game like this.

Its garbage. Real queen sacs should win you the game not lose them! This is a REAL queen sac I did in a game on live chess>>

That was fun to watch those "queen sacrifices" by boamind. I would call them "throwing away the queen". There is a big difference.

And, yes...Q sacrifices, contrary to what someone above said...can be a tremendous game winner. Beginners just blunder the Q away. High level players sacrifice the Q with aplomb and it leads directly to a win.

Takes skill. It's not even a gutsy move for a skilled player. He knows it will win the game...and soon, not 20 moves later.

I'm not that highly skilled. But I have done it...but only when I am certain of the outcome. Otherwise..nuh uh.

Impulsively "sacrificing the Q"...such as in a speed game where the player is doing a  Kamikaze attack and throwing in the kitchen sink, via "seat of the pants"...not my cup of tea.

Sacrifices of material should always be judged in context with the specific positions.

In my example, for instance (a positional queen sacrifice as early as move five), white does not win by force, but if black defends optimally he ends down a pawn for nothing, which is pretty close to "winning for white".

What if on move 31.dxc6 - how would you rate your position then?

Well true This queen sacrifice opening is played only for the sake of fun,not much merit in it. 1) some sound queen sacrifice 2) and 3) queen sacrifice as black.btw this games were played by m,y favorite player ontocaustic.

Well I don't want to spam this forum with any more games.My point of view is queensacrifice opening is unsound but it is fun. 

Cheers

I haven't done so on this site in a long time (no longer able to get the game because I am not premium) but just a week or so ago I gave up the lady.

My oppenent had already traded his queen for 2 rooks, and I gave it back for a rook, which allowed three connected passed pawns to dominate his remaining rook and threaten to queen.  While he rushed the king to the Qside to deal with the a/b/c pawns, I used my king to eat his Kside pawns, and get passers on both sides.  He resigned when he realized that he couldn't handle both sides, and would have to trade the rook for the Qside pawns to stop them, and not be able to handle the Kside pawns in any event.

so much trolling in that forum... it ends up being prosy.

no one laughs. seriously.

Liar, you didn't phone me.

No, fairly amusing though.

In answer to the forum's original question, No, not intentionally :=(

I'm looking for total enlightenment, not "yes" or "no"

If I can't find that I'll settle for some gratuitous sex, which will presumably involve looking for a "yes" and not a "no."

Yes, I am going to walk the Earth...along with Kwai Chang Caine (虔官昌 Qián Guānchāng)

Keep that kung fu bunny away from me or I'll kick his ass