Quality sacrifice
A quality sacrifice in chess is the sacrifice of a rook for a bishop or a knight . Quality describes the added value of the tower compared to the figure exchanged.
Quality sacrifices - like the other victims in chess - can be tactically or strategically motivated. While a tactical quality sacrifice can serve the purpose of gaining material or direct attack on the opposing king, a strategic (or positional) quality sacrifice is aimed at longer-term, strategic goals. It serves, for example, to weaken the opposing pawn structure or field complexes; one sacrifices for a long-lasting initiative or strategic characteristics like the possession of the bishop couple .
The former world chess champion Tigran Petrosjan was famous in the 1950s and 1960s for his positional, often defensively motivated sacrifices. More recently, the 2005 FIDE world champion, Wesselin Topalow , caused a sensation with relatively frequent sacrifices.
Examples
The following examples are intended to illustrate the various characteristic features of positional sacrifice:
Struggle for the center and figure activity
| a | b | c | d | e | f | G | H | ||
| 8th |  |
|
 |
|
|
 |
 |
|
8th |
| 7th |  |
|
 |
|
|
 |
|
|
7th |
| 6th | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6th |
| 5 | |
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
5 |
| 4th | |
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
4th |
| 3 | |
|
 |
|
|
|
 |
|
3 |
| 2 | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2 |
| 1 | |
 |
|
 |
|
|
|
|
1 |
| a | b | c | d | e | f | G | H |
Diagram 1: Position after 17. a2 – a3
| a | b | c | d | e | f | G | H | ||
| 8th | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
8th |
| 7th | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7th |
| 6th | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6th |
| 5 | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5 |
| 4th | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4th |
| 3 | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3 |
| 2 | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2 |
| 1 | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1 |
| a | b | c | d | e | f | G | H |
Diagram 2: Position after 19.… d7 – d5
The position of the game from Diagram 1 is typical of a relatively seldom played variant of the Sicilian Defense . Black's game idea is based on the fight against the white pawn on e5, which so far has decisively prevented the coordination of the black pieces. Black's previous rook maneuver Ta8 – b8 – b4 is mainly used to get an important defender of White's central position out of the way: the bishop on f4. The Dutch grandmaster Gennadi Sosonko sacrificed quality with 17.… Rb4xf4 and conquered the important central pawn after 18. Qg3xf4 Bg7xe5 . Two moves later ( Diagram 2 ) the position picture had fundamentally changed: the black king's bishop dominates the black squares, the previously passive Nf7 strives over d6 to e4 and the pawn overweight in the center takes important squares away from white pieces. Black is already better. Sosonko won the game after 39 moves.
| a | b | c | d | e | f | G | H | ||
| 8th | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
8th |
| 7th | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7th |
| 6th | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6th |
| 5 | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5 |
| 4th | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4th |
| 3 | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3 |
| 2 | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2 |
| 1 | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1 |
| a | b | c | d | e | f | G | H |
Diagram 3: Position after 14. Ng3 – h5
| a | b | c | d | e | f | G | H | ||
| 8th | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
8th |
| 7th | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7th |
| 6th | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6th |
| 5 | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5 |
| 4th | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4th |
| 3 | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3 |
| 2 | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2 |
| 1 | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1 |
| a | b | c | d | e | f | G | H |
Diagram 4: Position after 15.… Nf6xe4
The game example from the third diagram shows the typical Sicilian quality sacrifice rook against knight on the c3-square, here in the Sosin variant , in which White tries, among other things, to weaken the d5-square with an early f2 – f4 – f5. With his last move 14. Ng3 – h5 Alexander Bangiev wants to exchange the knight on f6, a defender of the key field d5. However, instead of 14. Ng3 – h5, he would have better ordered his queen to d3 in order to consolidate his central position; it was followed by the sacrifice 14.… Rc8xc3 , after which the e4-pawn fell: 15. b2xc3 Nf6xe4 . Black threatens to open the position further with d6 – d5 if necessary, and dominates the position with his pawn center and the bishop pair ( Diagram 4 ). Bangiev continued with 16. Qd1 – g4 and lost in 42 moves (on 16. Ng5xg7 + Ke8 – f8 17. Ng7 – h5 follows Qd8 – b6 with Black's superior position).
Field weaknesses
| a | b | c | d | e | f | G | H | ||
| 8th | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
8th |
| 7th | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7th |
| 6th | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6th |
| 5 | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5 |
| 4th | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4th |
| 3 | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3 |
| 2 | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2 |
| 1 | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1 |
| a | b | c | d | e | f | G | H |
Diagram 1: Position after 13. c4 – c5
| a | b | c | d | e | f | G | H | ||
| 8th | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
8th |
| 7th | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7th |
| 6th | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6th |
| 5 | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5 |
| 4th | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4th |
| 3 | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3 |
| 2 | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2 |
| 1 | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1 |
| a | b | c | d | e | f | G | H |
Diagram 2: Position after 22.… Bg7 – d4
In the world championship match between Karpov and Kasparov in 1990, Karpov's move 13. c4 – c5 resulted in the critical position ( Diagram 1 ). As a result of the King's Indian defense , White has a well-centralized position and the pawn majority on the queenside, and Black Isolani on d5 is reliably blocked. With his next move, Kasparov initiated his counterplay with a sacrifice : 13.… Re8xe3 !? Due to the loosened pawn structure, White has black-squared weaknesses that were reliably covered by the important queen bishop on e3. After the game sequence 14. Qd2xe3 Qd8 – f8 Black threatens the pawn on c5 and is ready to move the bishop from g7 to the diagonal h6 – c1 if necessary. In contrast to the previous examples, the victim has not captured an additional pawn; only the initiative on the weakened fields brings the position into a dynamic equilibrium. After another eight moves ( Diagram 2 ), Kasparov wound up a draw with sacrifices to pieces and rooks : 23. Qf2xd4 Rh4xh2 + followed by continuous chess using Qe7 – h4 +.
initiative
| a | b | c | d | e | f | G | H | ||
| 8th | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
8th |
| 7th | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7th |
| 6th | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6th |
| 5 | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5 |
| 4th | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4th |
| 3 | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3 |
| 2 | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2 |
| 1 | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1 |
| a | b | c | d | e | f | G | H |
Diagram 1: Position after 17.… Nf6 – e4
| a | b | c | d | e | f | G | H | ||
| 8th | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
8th |
| 7th | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7th |
| 6th | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6th |
| 5 | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5 |
| 4th | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4th |
| 3 | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3 |
| 2 | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2 |
| 1 | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1 |
| a | b | c | d | e | f | G | H |
Diagram 2: Position after 24. Bc3 – b2
In 2006, the FIDE world champion Wesselin Topalow demonstrated in the traditional tournament in Wijk aan Zee a quality sacrifice that had been prepared at home, which offered him a long-lasting initiative and good practical opportunities. Against the Armenian Levon Aronian an apparently balanced position was formed with symmetrical Bauer distribution (after 17 trains Diagram 1 ). With the sacrifice 18. Re1xe4 the resulting position changed completely: after 18.… d5xe4 19. Nf3 – e5 Qd8 – d5 20. Qd1 – e1 Bc8 – f5 21. g3 – g4 Bf5 – g6 22. f2 – f3 b5 – b4 23. f3xe4 Qd5 – e6 24. Bc3 – b2 ( Diagram 2 ) Topalow had conquered the e4 pawn and was given a flexible pawn center. In addition, there were chances to attack the weak c6 pawn, supported by the white pair of bishops who supported the pawns from the background. Aronjan was unable to cope with the pressure of White and after a further 20 moves lost clearly when the pawn pair c5 and d4 after another sacrifice on move 36, also on e4, inexorably set in motion to convert .
Blockade and jumper dominance
| a | b | c | d | e | f | G | H | ||
| 8th | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
8th |
| 7th | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7th |
| 6th | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6th |
| 5 | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5 |
| 4th | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4th |
| 3 | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3 |
| 2 | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2 |
| 1 | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1 |
| a | b | c | d | e | f | G | H |
Diagram 1: Position after 25.… Re7 – e6
| a | b | c | d | e | f | G | H | ||
| 8th | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
8th |
| 7th | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7th |
| 6th | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6th |
| 5 | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5 |
| 4th | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4th |
| 3 | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3 |
| 2 | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2 |
| 1 | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1 |
| a | b | c | d | e | f | G | H |
Diagram 2: Position after 28.… Ne7 – d5
The "classic" of the positional sacrifice of quality dates from 1953, played at the Zurich Candidates ' tournament . Ten years before his first world championship title, Tigran Petrosjan is facing a mobile pair of pawns with a space advantage in the center against the American Samuel Reshevsky , the pawn on d4 is also a covered passed pawn . Should White be able to push through the advance d4 – d5 unhindered, Black will be pushed further on the defensive and will soon be hopeless. With his unexpected, "passive" sacrifice of quality 25 ... Re7 – e6, Petrosjan is pursuing two main goals: He clears the e7 square from his knight, from which he should approach his ideal d5 square. In addition, by exchanging the bishop on g4 for the rook on e6, he would like to take the only white piece off the board that could threaten or exchange the central knight on d5. Only three moves later, Petrosyan had reached his goal ( diagram 2 ): The knight has reached his ideal field, from which he cannot be driven away, and he also supports the counterplay of the pawn majority on the queenside. In contrast to this, the white rooks stand uncoordinated on the now rigid e-line, the bishop on b2 is a "bad" one because it is blocked by its own pawns. Reshevsky found himself forced to sacrifice a rook against the black bishop who dominated the white fields and the game ended in the final with the division of the point.
Improvement of the pawn position and creation of passed pawns
| a | b | c | d | e | f | G | H | ||
| 8th | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
8th |
| 7th | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7th |
| 6th | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6th |
| 5 | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5 |
| 4th | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4th |
| 3 | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3 |
| 2 | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2 |
| 1 | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1 |
| a | b | c | d | e | f | G | H |
Position after 25. Qd3 – c2
In this position, Black has double pawns on the c-file, which would prove to be a crucial weakness in the endgame . Michail Botvinnik therefore played 25.… Rd8 – d4. If White does not want to lose control of the d-file, he has to accept the sacrifice, whereupon Black significantly improves his pawn structure and receives a covered passed pawn on d4. This was followed by 26. Nc3 – e2 Ba6 – c8 27. Ne2xd4 White takes with the knight because he does not want to give up his black-squared bishop. However, this was a wrong decision; 27. Be3xd4 c5xd4 28. Ne2 – c1 would have been better. The knight then comes to d3 on the next move and blocks the passed pawn there. The game was followed by 27.… c5xd4 28. Be3 – f2 c6 – c5 29. Rd1 – f1 f7 – f5 with good compensation for Black, who won the game after 53 moves.
Such positionally justified victims later appeared in similar positions in practice and were seen as typical of the Soviet chess school . Jan Timman called them "Russian quality victims".
Combination of two sacrifices
| a | b | c | d | e | f | G | H | ||
| 8th | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
8th |
| 7th | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7th |
| 6th | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6th |
| 5 | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5 |
| 4th | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4th |
| 3 | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3 |
| 2 | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2 |
| 1 | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1 |
| a | b | c | d | e | f | G | H |
Position after 17. Qd2 – e3
| a | b | c | d | e | f | G | H | ||
| 8th | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
8th |
| 7th | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7th |
| 6th | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6th |
| 5 | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5 |
| 4th | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4th |
| 3 | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3 |
| 2 | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2 |
| 1 | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1 |
| a | b | c | d | e | f | G | H |
Position after 31.… Bc6 – d5
In the game Kasparow against Piket , Tilburg 1989, there were two thematic sacrifices:
For Black to move it is important to eliminate the white knight on c3. However, this cannot be done using 17.… Ne4xc3, because this knight is still needed on f6 to defend one's own king. So Black sacrificed quality with 17.… Rc4xc3. Since he had previously won a pawn on e4, his material disadvantage is not very great, and he also has counterplay against White's castling position, which was opened after 18. b2xc3. This motif is typical of the dragon variant . The sacrifice does not lead to profit, but to a dynamic position with opportunities for both sides.
14 moves later, White for his part sacrificed quality in order to remove an important defensive piece, tear up Black's king position and initiate a mating attack via the h-file. It was followed by 32.Rh2xh5 !! g6xh5 33. Qf2 – h4 Qc5 – c4 34. Qh4xh5 Qc4 – f1 + 35. Kc1 – b2 e7 – e5 36. Qh5 – h6 (threatens f5 – f6 and mate on g7) 36.… Kg8 – h8 37. g5 – g6 f7xg6 38. f5xg6 Re8 – e7 (mate threatened on h7) 39. Re3 – f3 Qf1 – c4 (39.… Bd5xf3 followed by 40. Qh6 – f8 mate) 40. Rf3 – f8 + and Black gave up. The forced 40 ... Bd5 – g8 is simply followed by 41. Qf8xe7.
Even after 33.… e5 34. Qxh5 Da3 + 35. Kd2 Da4! 36. g6! fxg6 37. fxg6 Qd7 38.Nf5 Be6 (38.… Rf8 39. gxh7 +! Kh8 40.Nh4) 39.Nh6 + Kg7 40.Rg3! White would have had a decisive advantage.
See also
Individual evidence
- ↑ Jan Timman: The positional exchange sacrifice. In: New In Chess 2007, 3, p. 90.
literature
- Sergey Kasparov: The Exchange Sacrifice. A Practical Guide . Milford 2016. ISBN 978-1941270226 .
- Imre Pál: The sacrifice of quality . 2nd Edition. Kecskemét 2001. ISBN 963-640-005-9 .