English Chess Forum

I remember I once read the art of sacrificing but it was so long ago I don't really remember much about it.

All advice welcome.

Mark

David LeMoir has written a few entertaining books on the subject.

Is the work you refer to the ancient "classic" by Vukovic?

Matt Mackenzie wrote: ↑

Wed Feb 05, 2025 6:21 pm

Is the work you refer to the ancient "classic" by Vukovic?

There's also the 1964 book by Keres & Kotov "The Art of the Middle Game".

Matt Mackenzie wrote: ↑

Wed Feb 05, 2025 6:21 pm

David LeMoir has written a few entertaining books on the subject.

Is the work you refer to the ancient "classic" by Vukovic?

So long since I read it I can't be sure. But it's works that deal with the nature of sacrificial chess that I am looking for.

I admit to being biased, because LeMoir is a friend.
But How to Become a Deadly Chess Tactician, Essential Chess Sacrifices and How to be Lucky at Chess will take you an awfully long way.
LeMoir covers much of the ground Vukovic seeks to cover in The Chess Sacrifice and The Art of Attack, but for my money he does it better and far more readably.
“Lucky” in particular is a brilliant examination of the speculative sacrifice

I'd add "The Modern Chess Sacrifice" by Shamkovich to the list, and would imagine that he (Shamkovich) might be more readable on the subject than Vokovic. I haven't read anything by Le Moir.

If one is into classifying things, there are probably many ways to classify speculative sacrifices. It has long seemed to me that Spassky was the original master of one type, that being simply radically to change the nature of a game which is strategically going against you.

I now play them as much as I can but have noticed I aim for long term advantages rather than tactical shots. I don't think that's quite right. Sacrifices usually bring games to a close pretty quickly I thought?

Well, it depends on the type of sacrifice. Sacrifices as part of a combination or a speculative attack will usually resolve the position pretty quickly one way or the other, but positional sacrifices are another matter.

I seem to remember David Levy produced a book c1970 called Sacrifices In The Sicilian, which examined various thematic sacs in that opening - such as Black's RxNc3, White's minor-piece captures of a Pe6, etc. Not much heard of since. I never saw a copy, so can't say whether it was truly thematic in nature, or just a rehash of then-current opening theory.

It was truly thematic in nature, yes.

Sacrifices in the Sicilian is another one you can checkout on archive.org:
https://archive.org/details/sacrificesinsici0000levy

John Clarke wrote: ↑

Mon Feb 10, 2025 9:07 pm

I seem to remember David Levy produced a book c1970 called Sacrifices In The Sicilian, which examined various thematic sacs in that opening - such as Black's RxNc3, White's minor-piece captures of a Pe6, etc. Not much heard of since. I never saw a copy, so can't say whether it was truly thematic in nature, or just a rehash of then-current opening theory.

Curiously enough I took my mint copy of this superb book to the post-funeral celebrations of Mike Basman in 2022 and discussed it with David Levy himself. I had brought along all of my DNLL Batsfords books and asked him which was his favourite. We both agreed that "Sacrifices" was jolly good and he kindly signed it and all of his others for me. David confided that "SitS" was indeed his favourite and that it was an important title and well received at the time. Good on Bob for commissioning it.

I do play the Sicilian but as Philip Larkin once said 'Books are crap'. Thanks for the suggestions. I'll stick to rereading Rowson and leave it there.

Larkin was wrong about quite a few things, that included.

Poetry is an art. There are many aspects to it. Epistemological claims about the world don't really feature, they are just the expression of an emotion, sentiment, or attitude usually. He was only offering interpretations of what he saw around him, mostly when he worked as a Librarian in Hull. The poem in question is a study of reading habits, in which Larkin expresses his loss of interest in reading. It expresses an attitude most club payers would benefit from adopting given that its generally better to read literature written by writers and gifted enough to become established rather than read something written not by a writter by trade but a chess player. It's true there are some who can write well but they are few and far between. Anyway, had better stop there...