MyRatingis1523 wrote:
halloween gambit is strong
That's a good point, though I doubt any GMs use the Halloween Gambit it is a legitimate option!
Piece Sacrifice for the Center Control?
Sort:
It's better to have a piece, but it's closer than you might think, especially if you can get both of your pawns abreast in the center. Also having all 8 of your pawns to your opponent's 6 makes a difference. With no open lines it can be hard to make use of the extra piece.
In the posted game black didn't get both in the center (black had d5 and e6) and was a little behind in development, so that doesn't look good... but the concept itself isn't so bad.
Lasker1900 wrote:
Wouldn't 8...Nxd4 have been a simpler way to attack White's center and get equality? In your game, while it's true that you have eliminated White's two center pawns, you are somewhat behind in development and White's pieces are active. For what it's worth, 3...Bg4 doesn't look like a good move at all. 3...Bf5 looks safer and better
You're right all the way here. I only realized I could take d4 after the game and as soon as I moved Bg4 I realized I missed the perfectly good diagonal on f5...We both make a lot of knight moves out of the opening but even after I take the central pawns, he's still one move ahead of me. But it was unrated and they were pretty low rated so I was playing fairly lazily.
alexm2310 wrote:
Sometimes it'll be worth it, but I suspect the vast majority of the time it's ah unsound sacrifice. The example you posted is unsound, white is better. However, bear in mind people aren't infallible, and the engine evaluation doesn't take into account psychological pressure on your opponent. What I'm saying is, in blitz or bullet it's a fun idea that will surely work sometimes. Just be cautious and don't get your hopes up too much
true, and this may be an assumption but I think he played cautiously expecting some sort of trick after I took the pawns, by castling. In blitz or unrated games I may try this more often, especially if they lock down the pos with their center pawns.
No one has mentioned it, but notice a much better way to exploit White's chosen development formation after 3.d4 is the move 3...c5. The main idea is to gain for Black a 2 vs. 1 central pawn majority. These are all well known opening variations.
The point is that 3...c5 eliminates White's chances to use his pawns to suffocate your movements.
In your last comment you write that you will try your piece sacrifice in blitz and unrated games, especially if they lock down the position with their center pawns. This is a wise decision because you will find that as the level of your opposition gets stronger your unsound piece sacrifice will be refuted.
Whip_Kitten wrote:
12. f4 looks nasty.
At first glance, a line something like this below would be unpleasant for black.
That may not be the best way to continue as after f5 we get variations like this:
Keep in mind though that my post wasn't about this game, which was admittedly poorly played by me, but about the idea of a piece gambit for center pawns in general.
alexm2310 wrote:
Fieldsofforce no one mentioned it cause it's irrelevant to this thread. Anything before the knight sac is tangential
Point taken. The idea of a piece gambit for center pawns in general depends on the position and of course the strength of your opposition. The engine if he has one can show him what is wrong with his piece gambit in the position he posted.
Here is a recent game where I made a similar sacrifice which went well for me. I thought about it for a long time and eventually succumbed to temptation. Probably not sound but it was difficult to face so it was a gamble. I wouldn't have played it against a stronger player in fairness.
As one can always say, it depends on the position. But that would probably not help anyone, so I'll try to give my insight. My chess trainer learnt me that a minor piece (bishop, knight) usually starts around 3.5-4 pawns in the middlegame + depending on the circumstanes, and then the more you get in the late game, it decreases in value, until it reaches about 3. And then opposite for the rook, it starts around 4-4.5 pawn and then increases up to 5, again also depending on certain circumstances. That's why I don't believe in the middlegame it is worth to sac a minor piece, to remove your opponents center.
Earlier I was playing an unrated game and had an idea that I found amusing. Before I say that though, I'll quickly preface by mentioning that chess players are instructed that center control is extremely important to winning chess games. Its also taught as one of several golden achievements in development and play.
If this is the case, the question I'm posing is; Does sacrificing a knight or even a bishop in exchange for the opponents two central pawns advantage or disadvantage the one making the sacrifice? Furthermore, to what extent: slight or significant? Perhaps its equal or depends only on the context of the situation? Here's the opening of the game I tested this out on: