The first sucessful double bishop sac that people know of was applied by Lasker even though a guy tried it before and failed. Every since then it is a tactical motif that players know of and from time to time try to use it to spring a surprise attack on the unwary. Normally you sac a bishop on the h-file check with the queen and then sac the other bishop on the g-file.
On this game I tried to pull this sac not knowing for sure if it was sound but I think that later on I tottally misplayed and ended up resigning. Please comment if I indeed had a positional justification for the double sac and how I could have bettered my play after it. And if you know of examples of games played on this site of this or any other pedagogical example on it please post a link.
For those of you who aren't familiar with this here is a nice link: http://www.chessgames.com/perl/chesscollection?cid=1000591
[Event "Online Chess"]
[Site "Chess.com"]
[Date "2008.02.26"]
[Round "1"]
[White "the other guy"]
[Black "this would be me"]
[Result "1-0"]
[WhiteElo "1504"]
[BlackElo "1410"]
[TimeControl "1 in 5 days"]
1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bb5 f5 4. Bxc6 dxc6 5. Nxe5 Nf6 6. exf5 Bxf5 7. O-O Bd6 8. Qf3 Be4 9. Qc3 O-O 10. d3 Bd5 11. Bg5 Re8 12. Nc4 Bxh2+ 13. Kh1 Bxg2+ 14. Kxg2 Qd5+ 15. Kxh2 Ng4+ 16. Kh3 Qxg5 17. Qd2 Qf5 18. Kg2 b5 19. Nba3 bxc4 20. Nxc4 Qd5+ 21. Kg3 Ne5 22. Nxe5 Rxe5 23. Qf4 Rg5+ 24. Kh4 Rf5 25. Qc4 Qxc4+ 26. dxc4 Rf4+ 27. Kg3 Rxc4 28. c3 Rf8 29. Rae1 Rcf4 30. f3 h5 31. Re6 h4+ 32. Kh3 Rxf3+ 33. Rxf3 Rxf3+ 34. Kxh4 Rf6 35. Re7 Rf7 36. Re8+ Rf8 37. Re2 c5 38. b3 Rf5 39. Kg4 g6 40. Re6 Kf7 41. Rc6 1-0
Originally posted by nmdavidbOk. Thanks a lot!
Nice game!
I have actually never done the double bishop sac but have pulled off the double rook sac...will look around and see if i can find it
Dave
I think this was the critical point of the game. Looking at this I feel that I should have a rook on the f-file and the other one on the e-file, but still I don't know if that would cut it. I really feel like a win was possible here but I don't know were I missed it.
Originally posted by schakuhrVery nice! 🙂
Game 3936177
So what do you say are the key things in the position for one to try the double sac? Was I right on trying it on my game?
Edit: just found this out http://www.queensac.com/archive/sacs/2bsac.htm
Originally posted by adam warlockAfter just a brief look from this position I think that ANOTHER sac wins...but don't quote me on this..it was just a brief look. 🙂
Ok. Thanks a lot!
[fen]r3r1k1/ppp3pp/2p5/6q1/2N3n1/3P3K/PPPQ1P2/RN3R2 b - - 0 17[/fen]
I think this was the critical point of the game. Looking at this I feel that I should have a rook on the f-file and the other one on the e-file, but still I don't know if that would cut it. I really feel like a win was possible here but I don't know were I missed it.
Originally posted by Fat LadyIf you were saying that a link to his game would be nice then you can keep on sayin' that, because that chessgames link is not a link to his game its a link to games with the double bishop sac.
(Didn't notice original post included the chessgames.com link)
Originally posted by adam warlockthe general theme seems to be about having enough time to lift the rook(s) to the g and h files. an engine would be a better advisor about your sac being sound or not.
Very nice! 🙂
So what do you say are the key things in the position for one to try the double sac? Was I right on trying it on my game?
Edit: just found this out http://www.queensac.com/archive/sacs/2bsac.htm
Originally posted by diskamylI noticed that the rook lift really is relevant in this theme after my game was through. I think that I did the classic case of moveing the wrong rook. If I had a rook on the f-file and another on the e-file I think I would have it.
the general theme seems to be about having enough time to lift the rook(s) to the g and h files. an engine would be a better advisor about your sac being sound or not.
Normally I don't like to analyse games with engines because they just tell you that something works or doesn't work. They don't tell you why it works or doesn't. Only human feedback can do that.
Originally posted by tomtom232Are you talking about Ne3? I looked at that possibility during the game and that's why tried to chase off his knight from c4 but he prefered give back the material. I don't know if he realised what I was planning and the importance of the e3 square or if he just wanted to simplify and try to take some initiative of me.
After just a brief look from this position I think that ANOTHER sac wins...but don't quote me on this..it was just a brief look. 🙂
Originally posted by tomtom232Crazy dude the game posted is a game of mine. 😛
If you were saying that a link to his game would be nice then you can keep on sayin' that, because that chessgames link is not a link to his game its a link to games with the double bishop sac.
FatLady was saying that he didn't notice that I already had posted a link to chessgames so that I could study what is needed for that sac to be sound.
😛
Originally posted by adam warlockYes, but the LINK isn't to your game...crazy dude 😛
Crazy dude the game posted is a game of mine. 😛
FatLady was saying that he didn't notice that I already had posted a link to chessgames so that I could study what is needed for that sac to be sound.
😛
Originally posted by adam warlockNo...there is a way to force the king to the center of the board...but the sac does include the knight. 😛
Are you talking about Ne3? I looked at that possibility during the game and that's why tried to chase off his knight from c4 but he prefered give back the material. I don't know if he realised what I was planning and the importance of the e3 square or if he just wanted to simplify and try to take some initiative of me.