Art of Sacrifice by Rudolf Spielmann: Introduction

Link to the Lichess study containing the whole book!

THE BEAUTY OF A GAME OF CHESS IS USUALLY APPRAISED, AND with good reason, according to the sacrifices it contains. Sacrifice-a hallowed, heroic concept! Advancing in a chivalrous mood, the individual immolates himself for a noble idea. Such sacrifice evokes our homage and admiration even where the idea as such does not meet with our full approval. In chess, which we like to view as a counterpart of life, a sacrifice arouses similar feelings in us. On principle we incline to rate a sacrificial game more highly than a positional game.

IN THE DOMAIN OF PROBLEMS THE VARIOUS SACRIFICIAL THEMES have long since been classified and given their own nomenclature. In practical chess such a classification has never, to my knowledge, been attempted.
It is otherwise in practical chess. Here well-defined combinations and sacrifices turn up more or less at hazard. Hardly ever are they "pure" and "economical" as in problems, and consequently they are harder to recognize and classify. This is doubtless one of the reasons why such classification has not yet been attempted.
Sacrifices represent in chess an exceptionally important phase of the struggle. Beauty is not the sole object. They have the common aim of increasing the effectiveness of other pieces outside of the normal routine, if possible suddenly. In equalized positions their purpose is to gain time. But mostly they serve to increase already existing advantages and they are consequently particularly adapted to the exploitation of mistakes by the other side. It may be that an advantage in development is turned into a grand assault, or that a weak point in the enemy lines is ripped open in the same way.
The advantage to be exploited need not be of a general nature; it can be merely local. Particularly in such cases does the sacrifice provide an indispensable weapon; for placid play is apt to dissipate the advantage, with resultant drifting into a drawn position.
A sacrifice at the right moment takes opportunity by the forelock. The opponent may gain material, but he is tempted or forced to make some temporarily useless moves, his troops become disordered and the disconnected forces are beaten before they can put up a united front to the enemy.
To get the unwieldy mass of possible sacrifices into some sort of order, we must first classify them under three heads:
Form, Size and Object.
Under the heading "form," there are two types: active and passive.
In distinguishing between these two types, the deciding factor, from a scientific point of view, would be whether the sacrifice arises from a move made for the purpose of sacrificing, or from a raid by the enemy. In other words, through moving and offering a piece-or through disregarding the enemy's
threat to capture.
Thus after a passive sacrifice as it can be declined with no worsening of Black's position. In the nature of things the active sacrifice is by far the more powerful of the two. The Active sacrifice because it has to be accepted.

The size of the sacrifice appears to be perfectly easy to determine. But, as we shall see later on, this aspect also presents problems, as the value of each unit varies qualitatively according to the nature of a given position.
There are sacrifices of Pawns and of pieces. The latter can be subdivided into full- and part-sacrifices, depending on whether a whole piece is given up or whether there is partial compensation.
When considering part-sacrifices, we must distinguish between the major and minor pieces. When minor pieces are sacrificed, any material compensation can consist only in Pawns. In the case of a major piece, the compensation may be minor pieces or Pawns or both. The possible resulting situations are quite dissimilar, for after full sacrifices the number of your own units diminishes, while after a part-sacrifice it frequently actually increases.
The most important classification of sacrifices is according to their object. In this respect we must first distinguish between two groups, namely sham and real sacrifices. The difference is this: sham sacrifices involve losses of material only for a definable amount of time; in the case of real sacrifices, the amount of time required for recovering the material is not clear.
Therefore a sham ( temporary ) sacrifice involves no risk. After a series of forced moves, the player either recovers the invested material with advantage, or else even mates his opponent. The consequences of the sacrifice were foreseen from the first. Properly speaking, there is no sacrifice, only an advantageous business deal.
Yet such sacrifices must not be disparaged; often fine per­ception and a great deal of imagination are required, as well as the gift of intricate calculation, in order to discern possibilities in a position and exploit them.
We shall divide sham sacrifices into three groups:
1. positional sacrifices
2. sacrifices for gain
3. mating sacrifices
Positional sacrifices lead to forced recovery of the material lost with an improvement in position.

The mating sacrifice leads to checkmate or, alternatively, to immediately decisive gain of material. The actual mate can frequently be delayed by the heaviest counter-sacrifices (loss of the Queen, for example), which are, in effect, tantamount to mate.
In real sacrifices the player gives up material, but is unable to calculate the consequences with accuracy; he has to rely on his judgment. He obtains dynamic advantages, which he can realize gradually. Should he not succeed in this, he will most probably lose the game through deficiency in material. Therein lies the risk, and risk is the hallmark of the real sacrifice. This group will occupy most of our attention from now on.
Compared with sham sacrifices, the real sacrifices are much more difficult to treat scientifically. Their secrets reveal themselves only to the gifted and courageous player, who has strong if controlled self-confidence. The timid player will take to real sacrifices only with difficulty, principally because the risk involved makes him uneasy.
The theory of real sacrifices cannot go beyond general rules, advice, warnings and illustrations. But let no one be discouraged: the moderately gifted player can obtain a considerable playing strength by applying himself diligently; while, on the other hand, weak play does not necessarily indicate lack of talent!
Unlike the sham sacrifice, in which the aims are clear as day, the real sacrifice has vaguely defined goals; the result lies in the lap of the gods and at most can be formulated only intuitively.
It follows that it must be a matter of some difficulty to differentiate between the various types of real sacrifices. I have had to adopt a subjective point of view again and to proceed at times by instinct.

I have arrived at the following subdivisions:

1. sacrifices for development
2. obstructive sacrifices
3. preventive ( or anti-castling ) sacrifices
4. line-clearance sacrifices
5. vacating sacrifices
6. deflecting or decoy sacrifices
7. ( castled ) King's Field sacrifices
8. King-Hunt sacrifices

1. The sacrifice for development aims at an unusual acceleration of one's development. To this type belong more or less all gambits. The rapid formation of a center which is said by many to be the object of most gambits, is, strictly speaking, only a means to the attainment of that object ( accelerated development ). In the nature of things the developing sacrifice occurs in the opening stages-when the development on either side is as yet uncompleted.
Besides the developing sacrifices known to theory, new ones are constantly evolved in practical play. For the most part they are Pawn sacrifices, but pieces are sometimes sacrificed as well.

2. The obstructive sacrifice also occurs before the respective developments are completed, and the object is likewise a net plus in development. But here we achieve our objective not by speeding up our own, but by slowing down the opponent's, development. The material staked will have to be of a modest
nature.

3. The preventive (anti-castling) sacrifice is intended to prevent the opponent's castling. To this end even a whole piece can be given up in certain circumstances, namely when it is possible to hold the hostile King in the middle and to open up the center files.

4. The line-clearance sacrifice aims at the early employment of the Rooks on open lines. In certain cases this type of sacrifice justifies a very large stake.

5. The vacating sacrifice procures access for a particular unit to a more favorable square. For so limited an object, only a small investment should be risked.

6. The deflecting or decoy sacrifice has the definite object of luring or diverting one or more enemy pieces from the main field of battle. The attacker, for instance, allows his opponent to graze on one wing in order to be able to pursue his attack undisturbed on the other side. Such sacrifices ordinarily occur only after development is far advanced.

7. Sacrifices in the King's Field have the object of breaking up the hostile King's castled position. They are the most frequent combinations in the middle game and occur in countless variations. They are seldom encountered in the opening stage, requiring as they do an advanced stage of development.

8. King-Hunt sacrifices I call those which drive the King into the open, where he is automatically exposed to a great many dangers.

In comparing the two broad groups of sacrifices, we now perceive the train of thought on which this division is based. In the sham sacrifice the ultimate object is paramount. In the real sacrifice, only the provisional aim is considered. The common ground in both types is that only the object visible at the time of the sacrifice is taken as the characteristic feature.
In practical play, combinations frequently occur which are composed of several sacrifices. These usually belong to only one of the two main groups. But it is quite possible for a sham sacrifice to precede a real one. The converse can happen in the course of a game, but hardly as part of one combination.