Pawn Sacrifice JustificationHow can I tell when to sacrifice?How to judge a sacrifice?Was this sacrifice a good one?Why sacrifice the rook?Who is better after this queen sacrifice line?Spectacular queen sacrifice gameExchange sacrifice to dominate black squares in NajdorfIs this knight sacrifice a good idea?Why should I sacrifice Bishop?Why does white sacrifice their queen in this exercise?

Is there a way to detect if the current member function is operating on an lvalue or rvalue?

How to determine the actual or "true" resolution of a digital photograph?

Does jamais mean always or never in this context?

What does YCWCYODFTRFDTY mean?

Why didn't this hurt this character as badly?

How to figure out whether the data is sample data or population data apart from the client's information?

Smart diagram in Mathematica

Lock in SQL Server and Oracle

Can someone publish a story that happened to you?

Why is the origin of “threshold” uncertain?

Can fracking help reduce CO2?

What word means to make something obsolete?

Upright [...] in italics quotation

In gnome-terminal only 2 out of 3 zoom keys work

Can not tell colimits from limits

Modify locally tikzset

Is GOCE a satellite or aircraft?

Has any spacecraft ever had the ability to directly communicate with civilian air traffic control?

What is the point of Germany's 299 "party seats" in the Bundestag?

Can solid acids and bases have pH values? If not, how are they classified as acids or bases?

Why does nature favour the Laplacian?

Illegal assignment from SObject to Contact

Options leqno, reqno for documentclass or exist another option?

What's the metal clinking sound at the end of credits in Avengers: Endgame?



Pawn Sacrifice Justification


How can I tell when to sacrifice?How to judge a sacrifice?Was this sacrifice a good one?Why sacrifice the rook?Who is better after this queen sacrifice line?Spectacular queen sacrifice gameExchange sacrifice to dominate black squares in NajdorfIs this knight sacrifice a good idea?Why should I sacrifice Bishop?Why does white sacrifice their queen in this exercise?













2















A few weeks ago, Magnus Carlsen (White) played against Anish Giri (Black), and this position was reached on the board on move 17 after black had played exf4:



Here is the full game:



[White "Magnus Carlsen"]
[Black "Anish Giri"]
[FEN ""]

1. c4 e5 2. Nc3 Nf6 3. Nf3 Nc6 4. g3 d5 5. cxd5 Nxd5 6. Bg2 Bc5 7. O-O O-O 8. d3 h6 9. Nxd5 Qxd5 10. a3 a5 11. Bd2 Qe612. Rc1 Qe7 13. Bc3 Nd4 14. e3 Nxf3+ 15. Qxf3 Bd6 16. Qh5 c617. f4 exf4 18. gxf4 Qxe3+ 19. Kh1 Rd8 20. Rce1 Qc5 21. f5 Bf822. Be4 Rd5 23. Rf3 b5 24. Rg1 Ra7 25. Bf6 g6 26. Qh3 Rd6 27. Qh4 Rxf6 28. Qxf6 Be7 29. Qxc6 Qxc6 30. Bxc6 Kg7 31. fxg6 fxg6 32. d4 a4 33. d5 b4 34. Be8 Bg5 35. h4 Bxh4 36. Rxg6+ Kh7 37. Rc6 Bg4 38. Rf4 Rg7 1-0


Now, with white to play, it would be natural would be to play exf4. However, gxf4 was played, hanging a pawn and letting black capture it with a check.



Can someone explain what is the logic behind such apparently wrong move?










share|improve this question
























  • Could you perhaps give us a link to the full game, along with who played which side?

    – Rewan Demontay
    7 hours ago












  • A link of the full game is: m.youtube.com/watch?v=fFRVFHP4GLE&t=284s. Note the moves list is given in the video description. I have also updated the answer.

    – Maths64
    6 hours ago
















2















A few weeks ago, Magnus Carlsen (White) played against Anish Giri (Black), and this position was reached on the board on move 17 after black had played exf4:



Here is the full game:



[White "Magnus Carlsen"]
[Black "Anish Giri"]
[FEN ""]

1. c4 e5 2. Nc3 Nf6 3. Nf3 Nc6 4. g3 d5 5. cxd5 Nxd5 6. Bg2 Bc5 7. O-O O-O 8. d3 h6 9. Nxd5 Qxd5 10. a3 a5 11. Bd2 Qe612. Rc1 Qe7 13. Bc3 Nd4 14. e3 Nxf3+ 15. Qxf3 Bd6 16. Qh5 c617. f4 exf4 18. gxf4 Qxe3+ 19. Kh1 Rd8 20. Rce1 Qc5 21. f5 Bf822. Be4 Rd5 23. Rf3 b5 24. Rg1 Ra7 25. Bf6 g6 26. Qh3 Rd6 27. Qh4 Rxf6 28. Qxf6 Be7 29. Qxc6 Qxc6 30. Bxc6 Kg7 31. fxg6 fxg6 32. d4 a4 33. d5 b4 34. Be8 Bg5 35. h4 Bxh4 36. Rxg6+ Kh7 37. Rc6 Bg4 38. Rf4 Rg7 1-0


Now, with white to play, it would be natural would be to play exf4. However, gxf4 was played, hanging a pawn and letting black capture it with a check.



Can someone explain what is the logic behind such apparently wrong move?










share|improve this question
























  • Could you perhaps give us a link to the full game, along with who played which side?

    – Rewan Demontay
    7 hours ago












  • A link of the full game is: m.youtube.com/watch?v=fFRVFHP4GLE&t=284s. Note the moves list is given in the video description. I have also updated the answer.

    – Maths64
    6 hours ago














2












2








2








A few weeks ago, Magnus Carlsen (White) played against Anish Giri (Black), and this position was reached on the board on move 17 after black had played exf4:



Here is the full game:



[White "Magnus Carlsen"]
[Black "Anish Giri"]
[FEN ""]

1. c4 e5 2. Nc3 Nf6 3. Nf3 Nc6 4. g3 d5 5. cxd5 Nxd5 6. Bg2 Bc5 7. O-O O-O 8. d3 h6 9. Nxd5 Qxd5 10. a3 a5 11. Bd2 Qe612. Rc1 Qe7 13. Bc3 Nd4 14. e3 Nxf3+ 15. Qxf3 Bd6 16. Qh5 c617. f4 exf4 18. gxf4 Qxe3+ 19. Kh1 Rd8 20. Rce1 Qc5 21. f5 Bf822. Be4 Rd5 23. Rf3 b5 24. Rg1 Ra7 25. Bf6 g6 26. Qh3 Rd6 27. Qh4 Rxf6 28. Qxf6 Be7 29. Qxc6 Qxc6 30. Bxc6 Kg7 31. fxg6 fxg6 32. d4 a4 33. d5 b4 34. Be8 Bg5 35. h4 Bxh4 36. Rxg6+ Kh7 37. Rc6 Bg4 38. Rf4 Rg7 1-0


Now, with white to play, it would be natural would be to play exf4. However, gxf4 was played, hanging a pawn and letting black capture it with a check.



Can someone explain what is the logic behind such apparently wrong move?










share|improve this question
















A few weeks ago, Magnus Carlsen (White) played against Anish Giri (Black), and this position was reached on the board on move 17 after black had played exf4:



Here is the full game:



[White "Magnus Carlsen"]
[Black "Anish Giri"]
[FEN ""]

1. c4 e5 2. Nc3 Nf6 3. Nf3 Nc6 4. g3 d5 5. cxd5 Nxd5 6. Bg2 Bc5 7. O-O O-O 8. d3 h6 9. Nxd5 Qxd5 10. a3 a5 11. Bd2 Qe612. Rc1 Qe7 13. Bc3 Nd4 14. e3 Nxf3+ 15. Qxf3 Bd6 16. Qh5 c617. f4 exf4 18. gxf4 Qxe3+ 19. Kh1 Rd8 20. Rce1 Qc5 21. f5 Bf822. Be4 Rd5 23. Rf3 b5 24. Rg1 Ra7 25. Bf6 g6 26. Qh3 Rd6 27. Qh4 Rxf6 28. Qxf6 Be7 29. Qxc6 Qxc6 30. Bxc6 Kg7 31. fxg6 fxg6 32. d4 a4 33. d5 b4 34. Be8 Bg5 35. h4 Bxh4 36. Rxg6+ Kh7 37. Rc6 Bg4 38. Rf4 Rg7 1-0


Now, with white to play, it would be natural would be to play exf4. However, gxf4 was played, hanging a pawn and letting black capture it with a check.



Can someone explain what is the logic behind such apparently wrong move?







tactics middlegame sacrifice carlsen master-games






share|improve this question















share|improve this question













share|improve this question




share|improve this question








edited 5 hours ago









Glorfindel

13.2k43664




13.2k43664










asked 7 hours ago









Maths64Maths64

436112




436112












  • Could you perhaps give us a link to the full game, along with who played which side?

    – Rewan Demontay
    7 hours ago












  • A link of the full game is: m.youtube.com/watch?v=fFRVFHP4GLE&t=284s. Note the moves list is given in the video description. I have also updated the answer.

    – Maths64
    6 hours ago


















  • Could you perhaps give us a link to the full game, along with who played which side?

    – Rewan Demontay
    7 hours ago












  • A link of the full game is: m.youtube.com/watch?v=fFRVFHP4GLE&t=284s. Note the moves list is given in the video description. I have also updated the answer.

    – Maths64
    6 hours ago

















Could you perhaps give us a link to the full game, along with who played which side?

– Rewan Demontay
7 hours ago






Could you perhaps give us a link to the full game, along with who played which side?

– Rewan Demontay
7 hours ago














A link of the full game is: m.youtube.com/watch?v=fFRVFHP4GLE&t=284s. Note the moves list is given in the video description. I have also updated the answer.

– Maths64
6 hours ago






A link of the full game is: m.youtube.com/watch?v=fFRVFHP4GLE&t=284s. Note the moves list is given in the video description. I have also updated the answer.

– Maths64
6 hours ago











2 Answers
2






active

oldest

votes


















2














As was stated in the answer to this post made by D M, one idea of capturing in this manner is to open up the g-file for white's rooks to attack black's king. In the game this proved to be a very potent idea, and in general it's a good idea to open up lines for one's rooks against the enemy king if one intends to attack it.



But there is another point to letting the e-pawn hang and that is to gain some tempi for the attack. When black's queen spends one tempo on capturing on e3 with check, white responds by playing Kh1 (a move that white wants to make in order to clear the g-file for the rooks), so while black used a tempo to make a move that does nothing to bolster their defenses, white made a move that is crucial for the coming attack (gaining 1 tempo, relatively speaking). Next white improves the position of the rook on c1 by going to e1. Once again, this is done with a gain of tempo, since black's queen is exposed on e3 and needs to spend one tempo moving away. This way white manages to get two "free" tempi to make his position more ready for going on the attack while black had to strut around with their queen, arguably doing nothing to bolster their defenses.



So the pawn sacrifice had a two-fold purpose here, I would say. First, by capturing with the g-pawn white opens up an important line of attack against black's king. Secondly, by investing the e-pawn white gains some free tempi to use in order to make their position more ready to go on the offensive against black's king.



In general, material count is only one of many factors in evaluating a position, and while it may be the most obvious it is not always the most important one. In this example, Carlsen judged that his superior piece coordination and black's kingside weaknesses were more important positional factors than the material count, and seeing how the game went it is difficult to argue that his judgement was off.






share|improve this answer






























    1














    It appears the reason was to clear the pawn from the g-file to get an attack on the opponent's king. Kh1 and Rg1 were later played, which supports this theory.






    share|improve this answer























      Your Answer








      StackExchange.ready(function()
      var channelOptions =
      tags: "".split(" "),
      id: "435"
      ;
      initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

      StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
      // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
      if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
      StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
      createEditor();
      );

      else
      createEditor();

      );

      function createEditor()
      StackExchange.prepareEditor(
      heartbeatType: 'answer',
      autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
      convertImagesToLinks: false,
      noModals: true,
      showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
      reputationToPostImages: null,
      bindNavPrevention: true,
      postfix: "",
      imageUploader:
      brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
      contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
      allowUrls: true
      ,
      noCode: true, onDemand: true,
      discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
      ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
      );



      );













      draft saved

      draft discarded


















      StackExchange.ready(
      function ()
      StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fchess.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f24331%2fpawn-sacrifice-justification%23new-answer', 'question_page');

      );

      Post as a guest















      Required, but never shown

























      2 Answers
      2






      active

      oldest

      votes








      2 Answers
      2






      active

      oldest

      votes









      active

      oldest

      votes






      active

      oldest

      votes









      2














      As was stated in the answer to this post made by D M, one idea of capturing in this manner is to open up the g-file for white's rooks to attack black's king. In the game this proved to be a very potent idea, and in general it's a good idea to open up lines for one's rooks against the enemy king if one intends to attack it.



      But there is another point to letting the e-pawn hang and that is to gain some tempi for the attack. When black's queen spends one tempo on capturing on e3 with check, white responds by playing Kh1 (a move that white wants to make in order to clear the g-file for the rooks), so while black used a tempo to make a move that does nothing to bolster their defenses, white made a move that is crucial for the coming attack (gaining 1 tempo, relatively speaking). Next white improves the position of the rook on c1 by going to e1. Once again, this is done with a gain of tempo, since black's queen is exposed on e3 and needs to spend one tempo moving away. This way white manages to get two "free" tempi to make his position more ready for going on the attack while black had to strut around with their queen, arguably doing nothing to bolster their defenses.



      So the pawn sacrifice had a two-fold purpose here, I would say. First, by capturing with the g-pawn white opens up an important line of attack against black's king. Secondly, by investing the e-pawn white gains some free tempi to use in order to make their position more ready to go on the offensive against black's king.



      In general, material count is only one of many factors in evaluating a position, and while it may be the most obvious it is not always the most important one. In this example, Carlsen judged that his superior piece coordination and black's kingside weaknesses were more important positional factors than the material count, and seeing how the game went it is difficult to argue that his judgement was off.






      share|improve this answer



























        2














        As was stated in the answer to this post made by D M, one idea of capturing in this manner is to open up the g-file for white's rooks to attack black's king. In the game this proved to be a very potent idea, and in general it's a good idea to open up lines for one's rooks against the enemy king if one intends to attack it.



        But there is another point to letting the e-pawn hang and that is to gain some tempi for the attack. When black's queen spends one tempo on capturing on e3 with check, white responds by playing Kh1 (a move that white wants to make in order to clear the g-file for the rooks), so while black used a tempo to make a move that does nothing to bolster their defenses, white made a move that is crucial for the coming attack (gaining 1 tempo, relatively speaking). Next white improves the position of the rook on c1 by going to e1. Once again, this is done with a gain of tempo, since black's queen is exposed on e3 and needs to spend one tempo moving away. This way white manages to get two "free" tempi to make his position more ready for going on the attack while black had to strut around with their queen, arguably doing nothing to bolster their defenses.



        So the pawn sacrifice had a two-fold purpose here, I would say. First, by capturing with the g-pawn white opens up an important line of attack against black's king. Secondly, by investing the e-pawn white gains some free tempi to use in order to make their position more ready to go on the offensive against black's king.



        In general, material count is only one of many factors in evaluating a position, and while it may be the most obvious it is not always the most important one. In this example, Carlsen judged that his superior piece coordination and black's kingside weaknesses were more important positional factors than the material count, and seeing how the game went it is difficult to argue that his judgement was off.






        share|improve this answer

























          2












          2








          2







          As was stated in the answer to this post made by D M, one idea of capturing in this manner is to open up the g-file for white's rooks to attack black's king. In the game this proved to be a very potent idea, and in general it's a good idea to open up lines for one's rooks against the enemy king if one intends to attack it.



          But there is another point to letting the e-pawn hang and that is to gain some tempi for the attack. When black's queen spends one tempo on capturing on e3 with check, white responds by playing Kh1 (a move that white wants to make in order to clear the g-file for the rooks), so while black used a tempo to make a move that does nothing to bolster their defenses, white made a move that is crucial for the coming attack (gaining 1 tempo, relatively speaking). Next white improves the position of the rook on c1 by going to e1. Once again, this is done with a gain of tempo, since black's queen is exposed on e3 and needs to spend one tempo moving away. This way white manages to get two "free" tempi to make his position more ready for going on the attack while black had to strut around with their queen, arguably doing nothing to bolster their defenses.



          So the pawn sacrifice had a two-fold purpose here, I would say. First, by capturing with the g-pawn white opens up an important line of attack against black's king. Secondly, by investing the e-pawn white gains some free tempi to use in order to make their position more ready to go on the offensive against black's king.



          In general, material count is only one of many factors in evaluating a position, and while it may be the most obvious it is not always the most important one. In this example, Carlsen judged that his superior piece coordination and black's kingside weaknesses were more important positional factors than the material count, and seeing how the game went it is difficult to argue that his judgement was off.






          share|improve this answer













          As was stated in the answer to this post made by D M, one idea of capturing in this manner is to open up the g-file for white's rooks to attack black's king. In the game this proved to be a very potent idea, and in general it's a good idea to open up lines for one's rooks against the enemy king if one intends to attack it.



          But there is another point to letting the e-pawn hang and that is to gain some tempi for the attack. When black's queen spends one tempo on capturing on e3 with check, white responds by playing Kh1 (a move that white wants to make in order to clear the g-file for the rooks), so while black used a tempo to make a move that does nothing to bolster their defenses, white made a move that is crucial for the coming attack (gaining 1 tempo, relatively speaking). Next white improves the position of the rook on c1 by going to e1. Once again, this is done with a gain of tempo, since black's queen is exposed on e3 and needs to spend one tempo moving away. This way white manages to get two "free" tempi to make his position more ready for going on the attack while black had to strut around with their queen, arguably doing nothing to bolster their defenses.



          So the pawn sacrifice had a two-fold purpose here, I would say. First, by capturing with the g-pawn white opens up an important line of attack against black's king. Secondly, by investing the e-pawn white gains some free tempi to use in order to make their position more ready to go on the offensive against black's king.



          In general, material count is only one of many factors in evaluating a position, and while it may be the most obvious it is not always the most important one. In this example, Carlsen judged that his superior piece coordination and black's kingside weaknesses were more important positional factors than the material count, and seeing how the game went it is difficult to argue that his judgement was off.







          share|improve this answer












          share|improve this answer



          share|improve this answer










          answered 49 mins ago









          ScoungedScounged

          3,6151320




          3,6151320





















              1














              It appears the reason was to clear the pawn from the g-file to get an attack on the opponent's king. Kh1 and Rg1 were later played, which supports this theory.






              share|improve this answer



























                1














                It appears the reason was to clear the pawn from the g-file to get an attack on the opponent's king. Kh1 and Rg1 were later played, which supports this theory.






                share|improve this answer

























                  1












                  1








                  1







                  It appears the reason was to clear the pawn from the g-file to get an attack on the opponent's king. Kh1 and Rg1 were later played, which supports this theory.






                  share|improve this answer













                  It appears the reason was to clear the pawn from the g-file to get an attack on the opponent's king. Kh1 and Rg1 were later played, which supports this theory.







                  share|improve this answer












                  share|improve this answer



                  share|improve this answer










                  answered 3 hours ago









                  D MD M

                  4,8201131




                  4,8201131



























                      draft saved

                      draft discarded
















































                      Thanks for contributing an answer to Chess Stack Exchange!


                      • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

                      But avoid


                      • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

                      • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.

                      To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




                      draft saved


                      draft discarded














                      StackExchange.ready(
                      function ()
                      StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fchess.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f24331%2fpawn-sacrifice-justification%23new-answer', 'question_page');

                      );

                      Post as a guest















                      Required, but never shown





















































                      Required, but never shown














                      Required, but never shown












                      Required, but never shown







                      Required, but never shown

































                      Required, but never shown














                      Required, but never shown












                      Required, but never shown







                      Required, but never shown







                      Popular posts from this blog

                      Jet Time Laivasto | Lähteet | Aiheesta muualla | NavigointivalikkoJet Time - The CompanyThe CompanyManagementJet Time aloittaa lauantaina Suomi-rekisterissä olevalla Boeing 737 -koneellaJettime Finland Fleet Details and HistoryJettime Fleet Details and HistoryRegional Jet OÜ takes over ATR production for SASJet Time Returns To Its Core BusinessYhtiön kotisivutlaajentamalla

                      Olympian arkeologinen museo Sisällysluettelo Historia ja rakennus | Kokoelmat | Lähteet | Aiheesta muualla | Navigointivalikko37°38′36″N, 21°37′46″EInfobox OKArchaeological Museum of Olympia: HistoryArchaeological Museum of Olympia: DescriptionΜουσείο Ιστορίας των Ολυμπιακών Αγώνων της Αρχαιότητας: ΙστορικόArchaeological Museum of Olympia

                      Äpy Sisällysluettelo Äpyt kautta historian | Esimerkkejä Äpy-huumorista | Katso myös | Kirjallisuutta | Aiheesta muualla | Navigointivalikkowww.äpy.fi