"positional exchange sacrifice" examples

[kgburcham]

First would someone smarter than me define "positional exchange sacrifice".
So I assume a program decides to give up material for a better position.
So should I assume that when this happens, the score will increase with the loss of material but reflects the gain in position?

If this definition is correct, does anyone have any of these positions?
Richard Vida had mentioned this in another post.

I would think these are very difficult to find because of the points for material loss in the main line.
For example: if we had a position that a program gave a piece to gain position that also shows an increase in score but the main line does not show any material gain. Have these examples been posted in the past?
thanks
kgburcham

[Vinvin]

Your definition is correct but it's often linked to long terme activity and engines are not very good for long term ...

Here are 3 famous examples (I'm not sure they are completely correct) :

Rxe4 !
[d]1rbq1rk1/p3bppp/2p5/1pPp4/3Pn3/1PB2NP1/P4PBP/R2QR1K1 w - - 0 18
d5!
[d]r2q1rk1/pp2ppbp/4b1p1/n7/3PP3/3BBP2/P3N1PP/R2Q1RK1 w - - 0 14
R1xd4!
[d]1q3r2/1r2Npkp/pp1R2p1/2p5/3bQP1P/P5P1/1P3P2/3R2K1 w - - 0 27
[Event "Corus Wijk aan Zee"]
[Site "Wijk aan Zee NED"]
[Date "2006.01.25"]
[EventDate "?"]
[Round "10"]
[Result "1-0"]
[White "Veselin Topalov"]
[Black "Levon Aronian"]
[ECO "E15"]
[WhiteElo "?"]
[BlackElo "?"]
[PlyCount "87"]

1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e6 3.Nf3 b6 4.g3 Ba6 5.b3 Bb4+ 6.Bd2 Be7 7.Bg2
c6 8.Bc3 d5 9.Ne5 Nfd7 10.Nxd7 Nxd7 11.Nd2 O-O 12.O-O Nf6
13.e4 b5 14.exd5 exd5 15.Re1 Rb8 16.c5 Bc8 17.Nf3 Ne4 18.Rxe4
dxe4 19.Ne5 Qd5 20.Qe1 Bf5 21.g4 Bg6 22.f3 b4 23.fxe4 Qe6
24.Bb2 Bf6 25.Nxc6 Qxc6 26.e5 Qa6 27.exf6 Rfe8 28.Qf1 Qe2
29.Qf2 Qxg4 30.h3 Qg5 31.Bc1 Qh5 32.Bf4 Rbd8 33.c6 Be4 34.c7
Rc8 35.Re1 Qg6 36.Rxe4 Rxe4 37.d5 Rce8 38.d6 Re1+ 39.Kh2 Qf5
40.Qg3 g6 41.Qg5 Qxg5 42.Bxg5 Rd1 43.Bc6 Re2+ 44.Kg3 1-0


[Event "Corus"]
[Site "Wijk aan Zee NED"]
[Date "2007.01.16"]
[EventDate "2007.01.13"]
[Round "4"]
[Result "1-0"]
[White "Veselin Topalov"]
[Black "Alexey Shirov"]
[ECO "D86"]
[WhiteElo "2783"]
[BlackElo "2715"]
[PlyCount "81"]

1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 g6 3. Nc3 d5 4. cxd5 Nxd5 5. e4 Nxc3 6. bxc3
Bg7 7. Bc4 c5 8. Ne2 Nc6 9. Be3 O-O 10. O-O Bg4 11. f3 Na5
12. Bd3 cxd4 13. cxd4 Be6 14. d5 Bxa1 15. Qxa1 f6 16. Qd4 Bf7
17. Bh6 Re8 18. Bb5 e5 19. Qf2 Re7 20. f4 exf4 21. Qxf4 Qb6+
22. Kh1 Bxd5 23. exd5 Qxb5 24. Qxf6 Qe8 25. Qd4 Rd8 26. h3 Rf7
27. Rxf7 Qxf7 28. Qc3 b6 29. Ng3 Nb7 30. Ne4 Qe7 31. Nf6+ Kf7
32. Nxh7 Kg8 33. Nf6+ Kf7 34. Ng4 Kg8 35. Qd2 Re8 36. Qf4 Qd6
37. Qf2 Qc5 38. Qg3 Qd4 39. Kh2 Nd8 40. Qd6 Ne6 41. Be3 1-0

[Event "6th Kings Tournament"]
[Site "Bucharest"]
[Date "2012.11.12"]
[Round "5"]
[White "Topalov, Veselin"]
[Black "Nisipeanu, Liviu-Dieter"]
[Result "1-0"]
[ECO "E15"]
[WhiteElo "2769"]
[BlackElo "2668"]
[PlyCount "80"]
[EventDate "2012.??.??"]

1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 e6 3. Nf3 b6 4. g3 Ba6 5. Qc2 Bb7 6. Bg2 c5 7. d5 exd5 8. cxd5
Nxd5 9. O-O Be7 10. Rd1 Nc7 11. Nc3 a6 12. Bf4 O-O 13. e3 Ra7 14. Rd2 Ne6 15.
Rad1 Nxf4 16. exf4 Qc8 17. h4 d6 18. a3 Nc6 19. Nd5 Bd8 20. Ne3 Bf6 21. Rxd6
Nd4 22. Nxd4 Bxd4 23. Bxb7 Rxb7 24. Nf5 Qb8 25. Qe4 g6 26. Ne7+ Kg7 27. R1xd4
cxd4 28. Qxd4+ f6 29. Nc6 Qc8 30. Kh2 Rc7 31. Qd5 Re8 32. Nd4 Rce7 33. f5 Qc1
34. Ne6+ Kh8 35. Qd4 Qc2 36. Qxf6+ Kg8 37. fxg6 Qxg6 38. Qxg6+ hxg6 39. Nf4 Rg7
40. Rxb6 a5 1-0

[jdart]

The classic example is sacing a Rook for a Knight. This is a standard motif in some openings, notably the Sicilian Dragon. Another common example is sacing a piece for pawns: a couple examples are Tal-Larsen, Bled 1965, and Rauzer-Makogonov, Leningrad 1934 (these are mentioned in Polugavesky's book The Sicilian Labyrinth, vol. 2, in the chapter Strategic Sacrifices).

--Jon

[Vinvin]

There are some more here : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_exchan ... _sacrifice

And lot more here : http://www.chessgames.com/perl/chesscol ... id=1003049

[jdart]

Another one is from Short-Kasparov, PCA World Ch. 1993:

[D] 2q1k2r/1b2b3/p2p1p2/1p2pRp1/2r1P3/P1NQ2BP/1PP1R1P1/1K6 b k - 0 25

Rxc3

[Don]

Your definition is correct but it's often linked to long terme activity and engines are not very good for long term ...

Here are 3 famous examples (I'm not sure they are completely correct) :

Rxe4 !
[d]1rbq1rk1/p3bppp/2p5/1pPp4/3Pn3/1PB2NP1/P4PBP/R2QR1K1 w - - 0 18

I have some doubts that Rxe4 is clearly the best move. Even when I step into the position Komodo fails to see that white does any better than by playing Bb2 and pressuring the knight to move. After doing this white gets a great position in all the lines I looked at - but after the exchange sac white is ok but not great.

How to other programs evaluation this one?

d5!
[d]r2q1rk1/pp2ppbp/4b1p1/n7/3PP3/3BBP2/P3N1PP/R2Q1RK1 w - - 0 14
R1xd4!
[d]1q3r2/1r2Npkp/pp1R2p1/2p5/3bQP1P/P5P1/1P3P2/3R2K1 w - - 0 27
[Event "Corus Wijk aan Zee"]
[Site "Wijk aan Zee NED"]
[Date "2006.01.25"]
[EventDate "?"]
[Round "10"]
[Result "1-0"]
[White "Veselin Topalov"]
[Black "Levon Aronian"]
[ECO "E15"]
[WhiteElo "?"]
[BlackElo "?"]
[PlyCount "87"]

1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e6 3.Nf3 b6 4.g3 Ba6 5.b3 Bb4+ 6.Bd2 Be7 7.Bg2
c6 8.Bc3 d5 9.Ne5 Nfd7 10.Nxd7 Nxd7 11.Nd2 O-O 12.O-O Nf6
13.e4 b5 14.exd5 exd5 15.Re1 Rb8 16.c5 Bc8 17.Nf3 Ne4 18.Rxe4
dxe4 19.Ne5 Qd5 20.Qe1 Bf5 21.g4 Bg6 22.f3 b4 23.fxe4 Qe6
24.Bb2 Bf6 25.Nxc6 Qxc6 26.e5 Qa6 27.exf6 Rfe8 28.Qf1 Qe2
29.Qf2 Qxg4 30.h3 Qg5 31.Bc1 Qh5 32.Bf4 Rbd8 33.c6 Be4 34.c7
Rc8 35.Re1 Qg6 36.Rxe4 Rxe4 37.d5 Rce8 38.d6 Re1+ 39.Kh2 Qf5
40.Qg3 g6 41.Qg5 Qxg5 42.Bxg5 Rd1 43.Bc6 Re2+ 44.Kg3 1-0


[Event "Corus"]
[Site "Wijk aan Zee NED"]
[Date "2007.01.16"]
[EventDate "2007.01.13"]
[Round "4"]
[Result "1-0"]
[White "Veselin Topalov"]
[Black "Alexey Shirov"]
[ECO "D86"]
[WhiteElo "2783"]
[BlackElo "2715"]
[PlyCount "81"]

1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 g6 3. Nc3 d5 4. cxd5 Nxd5 5. e4 Nxc3 6. bxc3
Bg7 7. Bc4 c5 8. Ne2 Nc6 9. Be3 O-O 10. O-O Bg4 11. f3 Na5
12. Bd3 cxd4 13. cxd4 Be6 14. d5 Bxa1 15. Qxa1 f6 16. Qd4 Bf7
17. Bh6 Re8 18. Bb5 e5 19. Qf2 Re7 20. f4 exf4 21. Qxf4 Qb6+
22. Kh1 Bxd5 23. exd5 Qxb5 24. Qxf6 Qe8 25. Qd4 Rd8 26. h3 Rf7
27. Rxf7 Qxf7 28. Qc3 b6 29. Ng3 Nb7 30. Ne4 Qe7 31. Nf6+ Kf7
32. Nxh7 Kg8 33. Nf6+ Kf7 34. Ng4 Kg8 35. Qd2 Re8 36. Qf4 Qd6
37. Qf2 Qc5 38. Qg3 Qd4 39. Kh2 Nd8 40. Qd6 Ne6 41. Be3 1-0

[Event "6th Kings Tournament"]
[Site "Bucharest"]
[Date "2012.11.12"]
[Round "5"]
[White "Topalov, Veselin"]
[Black "Nisipeanu, Liviu-Dieter"]
[Result "1-0"]
[ECO "E15"]
[WhiteElo "2769"]
[BlackElo "2668"]
[PlyCount "80"]
[EventDate "2012.??.??"]

1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 e6 3. Nf3 b6 4. g3 Ba6 5. Qc2 Bb7 6. Bg2 c5 7. d5 exd5 8. cxd5
Nxd5 9. O-O Be7 10. Rd1 Nc7 11. Nc3 a6 12. Bf4 O-O 13. e3 Ra7 14. Rd2 Ne6 15.
Rad1 Nxf4 16. exf4 Qc8 17. h4 d6 18. a3 Nc6 19. Nd5 Bd8 20. Ne3 Bf6 21. Rxd6
Nd4 22. Nxd4 Bxd4 23. Bxb7 Rxb7 24. Nf5 Qb8 25. Qe4 g6 26. Ne7+ Kg7 27. R1xd4
cxd4 28. Qxd4+ f6 29. Nc6 Qc8 30. Kh2 Rc7 31. Qd5 Re8 32. Nd4 Rce7 33. f5 Qc1
34. Ne6+ Kh8 35. Qd4 Qc2 36. Qxf6+ Kg8 37. fxg6 Qxg6 38. Qxg6+ hxg6 39. Nf4 Rg7
40. Rxb6 a5 1-0

[jdart]

Topalov has made a specialty of exchange sacs. My favorite is actually this one:

[D] r6r/pp1kpp1p/4bnp1/2p5/2P5/2P3P1/P3PPBP/1RB1K2R b K - 0 12

b6! With *very* long-term compensation. Topalov won the game:

[Event "Sarajevo Bosnia"]
[Site "Sarajevo"]
[Date "2000.05.17"]
[EventDate "?"]
[Round "7"]
[Result "0-1"]
[White "Etienne Bacrot"]
[Black "Veselin Topalov"]
[ECO "A41"]
[WhiteElo "?"]
[BlackElo "?"]
[PlyCount "66"]

1.d4 d6 2.Nf3 g6 3.c4 Bg7 4.Nc3 c5 5.dxc5 Bxc3+ 6.bxc3 dxc5
7.Qxd8+ Kxd8 8.Ne5 Be6 9.g3 Nd7 10.Nxd7 Kxd7 11.Bg2 Nf6 12.Rb1
b6 13.Bxa8 Rxa8 14.f3 Ne8 15.Bf4 Bxc4 16.Rb2 Kc6 17.Rd2 Nd6
18.Bxd6 exd6 19.Kf2 d5 20.e4 dxe4 21.fxe4 Re8 22.Re1 Be6
23.Kf3 Kb5 24.Kf4 Kc4 25.Re3 a5 26.Kg5 b5 27.Kh6 b4 28.cxb4
axb4 29.Kxh7 Ra8 30.Kg7 Kb5 31.h4 c4 32.g4 c3 33.Rg2 Rxa2 0-1

[Thomas Lagershausen]

Your definition is correct but it's often linked to long terme activity and engines are not very good for long term ...

Here are 3 famous examples (I'm not sure they are completely correct) :

Rxe4 !
[d]1rbq1rk1/p3bppp/2p5/1pPp4/3Pn3/1PB2NP1/P4PBP/R2QR1K1 w - - 0 18

I have some doubts that Rxe4 is clearly the best move. Even when I step into the position Komodo fails to see that white does any better than by playing Bb2 and pressuring the knight to move. After doing this white gets a great position in all the lines I looked at - but after the exchange sac white is ok but not great.

How to other programs evaluation this one?

Sorry Don, i have big doubts that a computerchessprogramer can evaluate a positional decision of a super-GM.

And the evaluation of todays best chessprograms are not sophisticated enough to evaluate long-term exchange-sacrifices.

If they could, they would play games like Topalov.

But they didn´t.

[Vinvin]

Your definition is correct but it's often linked to long terme activity and engines are not very good for long term ...

Here are 3 famous examples (I'm not sure they are completely correct) :

Rxe4 !
[d]1rbq1rk1/p3bppp/2p5/1pPp4/3Pn3/1PB2NP1/P4PBP/R2QR1K1 w - - 0 18

I have some doubts that Rxe4 is clearly the best move. Even when I step into the position Komodo fails to see that white does any better than by playing Bb2 and pressuring the knight to move. After doing this white gets a great position in all the lines I looked at - but after the exchange sac white is ok but not great.

How to other programs evaluation this one?

Strange, Houdini 1.5 like this one (but preferred move changes over depth).

Intel dual core 3.1 Ghz, 2 threads , 3 best moves :
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
23/57 04:07 765.446.495 3.088.000 +0,14 Fd2 Cxd2 Dxd2 Ff6 Te3 Ff5 Ce5 Dc7 Tae1 g6 T3e2 Fg7 Cf3 Fd7 Cg5 Ff6 b4 Ff5 a3 a6 Cf3 Fe4 Ce5
23/57 04:07 765.446.495 3.088.000 +0,16 Fb2 Ff6 Ce5 Fxe5 dxe5 Cg5 Dd4 De7 f4 Ch3+ Rh1 Fg4 b4 a5 bxa5 b4 Tf1 Ff5 a6 Ta8 Dxb4 Txa6 a4 Taa8 a5 Tfb8 Dd4 Ta6 Fc3
23/57 04:07 765.446.495 3.088.000 +0,24 Txe4 dxe4 Ce5 Dd5 De1 Ff5 f3 e3 Dxe3 f6 Cxc6 Dxc6 Dxe7 Tbe8 Dd6 Dxd6 cxd6 Fd7 Ff1 Tc8 Fb4 Tfe8 a4 bxa4 Fc4+ Rh8 Fc5 axb3 Fxb3 Te3 Fd5 Tce8 Fxa7
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

[Dr.Wael Deeb]

Your definition is correct but it's often linked to long terme activity and engines are not very good for long term ...

Here are 3 famous examples (I'm not sure they are completely correct) :

Rxe4 !
[d]1rbq1rk1/p3bppp/2p5/1pPp4/3Pn3/1PB2NP1/P4PBP/R2QR1K1 w - - 0 18

I have some doubts that Rxe4 is clearly the best move. Even when I step into the position Komodo fails to see that white does any better than by playing Bb2 and pressuring the knight to move. After doing this white gets a great position in all the lines I looked at - but after the exchange sac white is ok but not great.

How to other programs evaluation this one?

Strange, Houdini 1.5 like this one (but preferred move changes over depth).

Intel dual core 3.1 Ghz, 2 threads , 3 best moves :
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
23/57 04:07 765.446.495 3.088.000 +0,14 Fd2 Cxd2 Dxd2 Ff6 Te3 Ff5 Ce5 Dc7 Tae1 g6 T3e2 Fg7 Cf3 Fd7 Cg5 Ff6 b4 Ff5 a3 a6 Cf3 Fe4 Ce5
23/57 04:07 765.446.495 3.088.000 +0,16 Fb2 Ff6 Ce5 Fxe5 dxe5 Cg5 Dd4 De7 f4 Ch3+ Rh1 Fg4 b4 a5 bxa5 b4 Tf1 Ff5 a6 Ta8 Dxb4 Txa6 a4 Taa8 a5 Tfb8 Dd4 Ta6 Fc3
23/57 04:07 765.446.495 3.088.000 +0,24 Txe4 dxe4 Ce5 Dd5 De1 Ff5 f3 e3 Dxe3 f6 Cxc6 Dxc6 Dxe7 Tbe8 Dd6 Dxd6 cxd6 Fd7 Ff1 Tc8 Fb4 Tfe8 a4 bxa4 Fc4+ Rh8 Fc5 axb3 Fxb3 Te3 Fd5 Tce8 Fxa7
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

I have a deep respect toward this free version of Houdini.......

Somehow it keeps coming back over and over despite the release of it's commercial brothers.....
Dr.D