One of my personal chess weaknesses has been an overly materialistic assessment of situations, which means I have inappropriately valued material over positional factors. This is a common phenomenon at the Class level. For example, players may hang onto a pawn for dear life, even if defending it cramps their position and gives their opponent a winning initiative, rather than deliberately jettisoning the pawn in return for freer and more active play for their pieces.
Another situation illustrated below is ignoring candidate moves that "lose" a pawn, without taking into consideration the benefits for the player's overall game. In some cases, these can even be very temporary sacrifices, or the pawn itself is "poisoned" due to a tactical response, which means ignoring the possibility - consciously or unconsciously - is a definite blind spot in the thinking process.
Finally, I'll make the observation that none of these pawn sacrifices lead to forced wins; these are not puzzles to be solved and the game is over. Rather, they are superior to other candidate moves, even if they only end up in a level position. This fact may also contribute to a Class player not considering them, if there is no obvious win or advantage that results.
Firstly from my own play, here are some clear examples. They are followed by a few master-level ones; if you go through any collections of annotated master games, you should be able to easily find more.
Annotated Game #296: The recurring idea of c4-c5, opening diagonals and the c4 square for pieces. I eventually play it, but under less favorable circumstances than I could have earlier in the game - this is also a recurring theme.
Annotated Game #295: The f-pawn sacrifice I should have played comes early enough to be considered a gambit, but the principle is the same - in return for the pawn, the rest of my pieces gain activity that provides full compensation.
Annotated Game #293: The move 15 possibility of playing c4 opens up activity for the dark-square bishop and queen, and works due to tactics (the hanging b-pawn is poisoned) that I should have further considered.
Annotated Game #291: Here's another freeing c4-c5 pawn sac idea on move 15.
Annotated Game #272: This shows the power of the e3-e4 pawn lever in Colle / Stonewall type positions, even when it is a (temporary) sacrifice.
A few Master-level examples, including from analysis:
Tarjan-Kosteniuk (2017) - 15. b4!?
From Bologan's Caro-Kann: A Modern Repertoire for Black (New In Chess, 2018) - analysis, King's Indian Attack; the d-pawn is given up by Black for piece activity, and it is also instructive to look at what happens if White tries to seize the d-pawn earlier.
From John Nunn's Best Games 1985-1993, Batsford Chess Library, 1995; games 20 (move 19) and 22 (sequence starting with move 21)
From Journey to NM - Lightning Strikes Back blog, the round 4 game; technically this isn't master-level play, but it's close and White's sacrifice of the d-pawn for piece activity and an attack is an excellent example.
Don't Just Memorize, Understand! Two Key Moves in the London System - the full video (from Dr. Can's Chess Clinic) is worth watching for its principles, also containing a great pawn sacrifice idea in the central variation presented against the London System, which has a concrete tactical reason behind it.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Your comments and ideas on chess training and this site are welcomed.
Please note that moderation is turned on as an anti-spam measure; your comment will be published as soon as possible, if it is not spam.