http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RGwbU2Bz9bI
exploit the move as much as you mean it - and it will work good.
Material sacrifice to make castle impossible
Sort:
That would be the dumbest thing. Unless you have a mate in 10 or something (or you know a clear cut continuation where you can get back your piece) you almost never do that thing. The king in the centre doesn't necessarily mean it is weak.
In fact, if your opponent has the total control in the centre he doesn't even need to castle because the king is safe. As Anand put it recently "Castling is getting out of fashion"
So it really depends on the occasion, but try to avoid such things. After all, castling is just another move.
Here is a game I played as black and did not castle (although I was not forced to do so)
Pistallion wrote:
Is it a good move to go down a piece to make the opponent not able to castle? (make the king kill the piece so he cant castle)
of course "it depends". It is a common theme. I believe Vukovic in "Art of Attack" and Kotov and Keres in "The Art of the Middle Game" devote chapters to this. I'll dig them out later and post something.
it's powerfull if you know what you're doing and you're aware of the consequences of your moves.
But if you do it only to prevent him from castle - and let him into a material advange without knowing anything about the repercution of your move, it's useless, exept if you get lucky over your opponent's blunders.
Is it a good move to go down a piece to make the opponent not able to castle? (make the king kill the piece so he cant castle)