Sometimes Less Is More

    In his book The Art of Sacrifice in Chess, the old master of attack, Rudolf Spielmann, game some instructions on the sacrifice of the exchange. 

    Spielmann wrote that the absolute value of the pieces is what form the basis on which most exchanges are made, i.e. Q=9, R=5, B and N and B=3 and P=1. However, it is the relative value that is the decisive factor for positional play and especially for sacrifices. To wit: 

1) The simpler the position, the more the absolute value carries weight. 

2) The more complicated the position, the more the relative value of the pieces gain in importance. 

 

    When it comes to the sacrifice of the exchange it is never an exactly even transaction so you either win the exchange or you lose it. Exchange sacrifices are dependent on specific positional and tactical factors. Spielmann offers the following helpful definitions: 

 

1) Any voluntary loss in material counts as a sacrifice. 

2) The sacrifice of the exchange is when a Rook is given up for a minor piece and a Pawn. 

3) The term sacrificing the exchange when applied to situations where a Rook is given up for a minor piece and two Pawns is incorrect; it should be wins two Pawns for the exchange. 

4) The sacrifice of the exchange can serve any purpose. It can be a sacrifice for: 

    a) Development 

    b) An obstructive sacrifice, a sacrifice intended to blockade a square, file, rank or diagonal. 

    c) A sacrifice designed to expose the opponent's King. 

 

    In all cases, the sacrifice of the exchange is designed to improve the position of the minor pieces. Here is a case in point taken from the game Spielmann vs. Tarrasch that was played in Carlsbad 1923. 

    Spielmann gave this game in his classic The Art of Sacrifice in Chess. A great attacker and sacrificial player, in this book he classified various tactical motifs, but as with almost all of those old books from pre-engine days, analytical errors abound in the examples. Still, there is a lot to be learned from the book. 

 

    Even if his evaluations and play in the following game are not always correct, they worked against the great Tarrasch which says something...we can learn ideas from them and maybe use theme in our own games.

  

[Event "Carlsbad"] [Site "Karlsbad CSR"] [Date "1923.05.06"] [Round "?"] [White "Rudolf Spielmann"] [Black "Siegbert Tarrasch"] [Result "1-0"] [ECO "C30"] [Annotator "Stockfish 18"] [PlyCount "61"] [EventDate "1923.04.28"] {C30: King's Gambit Declined} 1. e4 e5 2. f4 Bc5 {Statistically, at least in my database, this move produces much poorer results for black than accepting the game. White has a lot of ways to counter this move and many times black will end up with a much worse position than if he had accepted it. If black wants to decline the gambit then the Falkbeer (2...d5) is a better choice. The idea is that the B prevents white from castling.} 3. Nf3 (3. fxe5 {This is a trap that loses for white.} Qh4+ 4. g3 Qxe4+) 3... d6 4. c3 {Other options are 4.Nc3 and 4.Bc4, but the text is considered slightly better.} Bg4 {This pin is somewhat annoying and the method white uses here to counteract it originated with Frank Marshall.} 5. fxe5 dxe5 6. Qa4+ {Equally good is 6.Bc4} Bd7 7. Qc2 Nc6 8. b4 {Black's next move is forced. 8...Bd6 is necessary to prevent white from winning the e-Pawn.} Bd6 9. Bc4 {Now 9.b5 isn't so effective.} (9. b5 Na5 10. d4 {1-0 (41)} c6 {Black has full equality.}) 9... Nf6 10. d3 Ne7 11. O-O Ng6 12. Be3 {This permits black to obtain counterplay so 12.a4 would have been more precise.} b5 13. Bb3 a5 14. a3 axb4 15. cxb4 {Black's Q-side advance has succeeded in forcing white to play this which has resulted in black achieving full equality.} O-O 16. Nc3 c6 17. h3 Qe7 18. Ne2 Bb8 {The purpose of this move is to exchange Bs after ... Ba7 in the hope of establishing a N on f5, but the maneuver is somewhat labored.} 19. Kh2 Ba7 20. Bg5 h6 21. Bxf6 Qxf6 22. Nfd4 Qd6 23. Nf5 Bxf5 $1 24. Rxf5 Nf4 25. Rf1 {Up to this point black has defended himself ably and picked up a positional advantage in the better P-formation because white's Ps on a3 and d3 are backward and may become weak. For his part white has built up strong pressure on the f-file which Tarrasch seems to underestimate. (Spielmann) Actually, white's last move gives black a slight advantage, but he must play accurately because the slightest slip will give white tactical chances. It doesn't matter how great a positional advantage you have, miss a tactical shot and the positional advantage means nothing!} (25. Nxf4 {This is the correct move.} exf4 26. e5 Qd7 27. Rxf7 Rxf7 28. e6 Qd6 29. exf7+ Kf8 {and the chances are equal.}) 25... g6 {Here Spielmann makes the incorrect claim that it would be better to decline white's offer of the exchange implied by his last move and that black had little choice but to play 25...Ne6. The text move "wins" the exchange at the cost of enabling white's attack, hitherto directed only against f7, to spread over the whole K-side. (Spielmann)} (25... Ne6 {This move does result in an equal position so Spielmann is correct in that claim.} 26. Qa2 Rae8 {with equal chances.}) 26. R1xf4 {This is white's best move, but it is black who has a slight advantage.} exf4 27. e5 {Black can claim a slight advantage here... provided he finds the best moves...it is this difficult task that makes the games of great attackers like Spielmann, Nezhmetdinov, Tal and others so entertaining...in the complications their opponents often went astray.} Qe7 ( 27... Qc7 {was a little more accurate.} 28. Rf6 Kh8 29. Qc3 Be3 30. Rxc6 Qd8 31. Rf6 (31. e6+ Kh7 32. exf7 {would be a bad mistake.} f3 33. Ng3 Qg5 34. Qf6 Rxa3 {with a winning attack.}) 31... Qe7 32. Nxf4 Rxa3 {Black is slightly better.}) 28. Rf6 {Spielmann has completely misjudged the position, not only did he do so during the game, he did so when he wrote the book! He wrote - "The powerful establishment of the R on this square is the point of the sacrifice. There are now many threats, above all 29. d4 and only then capture at g6 by either the R or Q. True, Black remains with two Rs for the Q, but his K-side is so critically weakened that successful defense is, in the long run, impossible. Yet this would be better than the defense which Black actually selects." That's all wrong as any engine will tell you. Stockfish puts black's advantage at nearly 3 Pawns.} (28. Qxc6 {This move, not mentioned by Spielmann, would have drawn which is white's best course.}) 28... Kg7 {[%mdl 8192] The critical position! Spielmann makes no comment on this move, but it is the one that costs black the game. It's not the only losing move available to black thought. However, he also has a winner.} (28... Qxe5 $2 {loses after} 29. Rxg6+ Kh7 (29... Kh8 30. Rxh6+ Kg8 31. d4) 30. d4) (28... Kh8 $3 {and black is winning.} 29. Qc3 Be3 {White is the exchange down and there is no good way he can conjure up any kind of an attack.} 30. Qxc6 Qxe5 {is winning for clack.}) 29. d4 {Now white wins quickly.} Bxd4 30. Bxf7 Bxe5 31. Qxg6+ {Black resigned, It's mate next move.} 1-0