Double Exchange Sacrifice

The exploration of the positional and tactical elements of the exchange sacrifice (rook for
bishop or knight) requires advanced skills and competitive experience, as the chessplayer
is requested to overcome dogmatic principles regarding the quantitative evaluation of
material. It is an even more difficult subject to master when it comes to a double exchange
sacrifice.

In the opening and middlegame the pieces should shape our plans by cooperating
harmoniously. The plan is then executed by means of moves, in which each unit is an
integral part of our position, and we can determine our advantage or inferiority only by
taking into account every unit.

A Chess Odyssey Naturally, it is not easy to identify which of our pieces (or even the opponents) performs
the most significant function. We have to take several strategic elements into
consideration, such as the center, open lines, initiative, attack, etc.
Efstratios Grivas
When carrying out such an evaluation, the value of our rooks barely differs from that of
our minor pieces, since an advantage is conferred by their fruitful cooperation and not
their individual, predetermined value.

If we accept that, as a rule, the superiority of the rook is realized in the endgame, we can
conclude that an exchange sacrifice (or two!) in the opening or middlegame may be
acceptable for many reasons:

To exploit our better development.

To destroy the opponents pawn structure.
To open lines in order to attack.
To assume the initiative.
To control important squares.

More on this subject (and many others!) can be found in my book Chess College 1
(Gambit 2006).

Below are two examples that illustrate how this mysterious double exchange sacrifice can
be implemented. I present the entire game, with annotations, as it is extremely important to
understand whether the idea ws born of necessity or simply through imagination and how
it was realized.

Trindade,Sandro Heleno Grivas,Efstratios

Belfort Wch-jr (6) 1983 [C80]

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 a6 4.Ba4 Nf6 5.00 Nxe4 6.d4 b5 7.Bb3 d5

8.c4?
 A bad move, yet surprisingly effective
nonetheless; it not only confused me, but I felt
obliged to win at any cost, in order to punish
my Brazilian opponent for his error.

8...dxc4?!

Although the text-move cannot be severely

criticised, 8...Bg4! seems much stronger: 9.cxd5
(9.dxe5 dxc4 10.Qe2 Nc5 /+ [10...Qd3? 11.
Qxd3 cxd3 12.Bd5 Nb4 13.Bxa8 Nc5 14.Na3
Be7 15.Bd2 a5 16.Bxb4 axb4 10, Caruso,A-Ruzzier,D/Padova 1998]) 9...Nxd4 10.Re1 f5
(10...Bxf3 11.gxf3 Nxb3 12.axb3 Nd6 13.Rxe5+ Be7 14.Qe2 [14.Nc3?! 00 15.Bf4 Bf6
16.Re2 Nf5 =+ Kavalek,L-Ratolistka,J/Kosice 1961] 14...Kf8 15.Nc3 is unclear, as
Whites activity and better piece cooperation compensates for his bad pawn structure) 11.
Nc3 Qf6! /+. A common mistake that Black should avoid is 8...Be6? 9.cxd5 Bxd5 10.
Nxe5 Nxe5 11.dxe5 c6 (11...Bxb3 12.Qxb3 += Blazkova,P-Slajs,V/Ceske Budejovice
1999) 12.Bc2 Bc5 13.Qe1 Qh4 14.Be3 = Vitolinsh,A-Sideif Sade,F/Beltsy 1979.

9.Qe2!

9.Bc2?! is no help: 9...f5 10.dxe5 Qxd1 11.Bxd1 (11.Rxd1 Bc5 12.Be3 Bxe3 13.fxe3 Nb4
/+) 11...Bb4 /+.

9...Nf6!?

Blacks main alternative is 9...Nd6, but this only gives a draw: 10.dxe5 Nf5 11.Qe4 (11.
Rd1? Nfd4 12.Nxd4 Nxd4 13.Qe4 Bf5 14.Qxd4 Qxd4 15.Rxd4 cxb3 /+ Kristjansson,B-
Amado,C/Vrnjacka Banja 1963) 11...Bd7 12.Bc2 Nb4 13.Rd1 Nxc2 14.Rxd7 Qxd7 15.
Qxa8+ Qd8 (15...Ke7? 16.Nc3 c6 17.Bg5+ +/) 16.Qc6+ Qd7 17.Qa8+ =.

10.dxe5 Nd5 11.Bc2

As compensation for the sacrificed pawn, White

has gained time for development, a space
advantage and a safer king. Still, Black has the
pawn!

11...Bc5 12.Rd1 Nce7?

Black should strongly consider returning the

pawn by 12...Ncb4! 13.Be4 (13.Nc3 c6 14.Ne4
Nxc2 15.Bg5 Qc7 16.Qxc2 [16.Nd6+ Kf8 17.
Qxc2 Bxd6 18.exd6 Qxd6 /+] 16...Bf5 /+) 13...
c6 14.a3 Nd3 15.Bxd3 cxd3 16.Qxd3 Qb6 17.
Qc2, where he can obtain a perfectly acceptable
position.

13.Nc3 Be6 14.a4?

14.Ne4 Bb6 15.Neg5 Qd7 (15...h6? 16.Nxe6 fxe6 17.Nd4 Bxd4 18.Qh5+ Kd7 19.Rxd4
+/ Jakirlic,N-Wilkins,M/Penrith 2003) 16.Nxe6 fxe6 17.Ng5 Rf8 is not very clear, but
White could gain a significant advantage by 14.Ng5! Qd7 15.Nxe6 fxe6 (15...Qxe6 16.Qf3
Rd8 17.Ne4 +/) 16.Qh5+ g6 17.Qh3 00 18.Ne4 Qc6 19.Bg5.
14...Qc8! 15.Nxd5

After 15.axb5 Nxc3 16.bxc3 axb5 17.Rxa8 Qxa8 18.Ng5 Qc8 19.Be3 Bxe3 20.Qxe3 h6 21.
Nxe6 Qxe6 22.Qe4 Qc6 23.Qh4 Qe6, Black equalizes.

15...Bxd5

15...Nxd5 16.axb5 axb5 17.Rxa8 Qxa8 18.Ng5 Qc8 19.Qf3 c6 20.Qg3 seems unpleasant
for Black.

16.Ng5 Bb6?

Black misses his chance. He should have played

16...h6 17.Ne4 Bb4 18.Bd2 Bxd2 19.Qxd2 Bxe4
20.Bxe4 Rb8 21.axb5 axb5, when he could then
breathe freely. White still has compensation for
the pawn in that he can utilize the initiative
thanks to his better placed pieces.

17.Rxd5!

Although 17.Nxh7 is also strong, this is an

excellent positional sacrifice. Blacks light
squares become weak, and White gains some
important tempi to continue his attack on the
black king.

17...Nxd5 18.Qf3 Qd7 19.Bf5! Qc6

Perhaps Black should have preferred 19...Qe7 20.Qxd5 Rd8 (20...00 21.Bxh7+ Kh8 22.
Bc2 +) 21.Qc6+ Kf8 22.Bf4, but this is a slow and certain death.

20.axb5 Qxb5

20...axb5 21.Rxa8+ Qxa8 22.Be4 + is not an

option either.

21.Nxf7!

The material gain of the f7-pawn is of minor

importance. The decisive factors are the further
weakening of the light squares around the black
king and its presence in the center.

21...Rf8

Unfortunately, the black king cannot find a safe

haven: 21...00 (21...Kxf7 22.Bd7+) 22.Be6 Rae8 23.Bxd5 c6 24.Bxc6 Qb4 25.Qe4! Rxf7
26.Bxe8 Rxf2 27.Be3 Bxe3 28.Qxe3 eliminates Blacks chances of survival.

22.e6 g6
22...h6 23.Ne5 Kd8 24.e7+! Kxe7 25.b3! (25.Ng6+ Kd6 26.Bf4+ Kc6 27.Be4 is fine) is
also lost for Black.

23.Bc2?!

23.Be4! c6 24.Nd6+ Ke7 25.Nxb5 Rxf3 26.Bxf3 is the simplest win.

23...Qc5

Black had to consider the threat of 24.Ba4.

24.Bg5 c6 25.Rd1 Ra7

Or 25...Rb8 26.Ba4 and Black must resign;

equally good is 26.Rxd5 Qxf2+ 27.Qxf2 Bxf2+
28.Kxf2 cxd5 29.Ba4+ Rb5 30.Ke3 Rxf7 31.Bxb5
+ axb5 32.exf7+ Kxf7 33.Kd4 Ke6 34.Bd2 +.

26.Rxd5!

A second exchange sacrifice on the same square!

However, this time it is the beginning of a
winning combination and not a positional
sacrifice.

26...Qxf2+

26...Raxf7 27.exf7+ Rxf7 28.Rxc5 Rxf3 29.Re5+; 26...cxd5 27.Ba4+.

27.Qxf2 Bxf2+ 28.Kh1! Bb6 29.Nd6# 10

I was so lightheaded and in such heavy time-trouble that I felt this was impossible. Back
then, if I had a quarrel with my girlfriend she could upset me by simply shouting:
Trindade!

Conquest,Stuart Grivas,Efstratios
Afitos (4) 1991 [A01]

1.b3 g6 2.Bb2 Nf6 3.g3 Bg7 4.Bg2 d5 5.c4 d4 6.Nf3 c5 7.b4 00 8.bxc5 Nc6 9.00 Nd7
10.d3 Nxc5 11.Nbd2 Re8!?

Alternatives are:

a) 11...h6 12.Ba3 Qa5 13.Bxc5 Qxc5 14.Qa4 Bd7

15.Rab1 Qa5 16.Qxa5 Nxa5 17.Nb3 Nxb3 18.
Rxb3 b6 = Dizdar,G-Lalic,B/Sarajevo 1988.

b) 11...a5 12.Rb1 Re8 13.Ba3 Na6 14.Ne1 Nab4

unclear, Miles,A-Sokolov,I/Belgrade 1988.

12.Ba3
 a) 12.a4 e5 13.Nb3 Ne6 14.Ba3 Rb8 (14...Bd7 15.
Nfd2 Na5? 16.Nxa5 Qxa5 17.Bxb7 Rab8 18.Bd5
Nc5 19.Bxc5 Qxc5 20.Ne4 Qc7 21.Qc2 Be6 22.Bxe6 Rxe6 23.Rfb1 +/ Giertz,N-
Konopka,M/Marbach 1994) 15.Nfd2 Bf8 16.Bxf8 Kxf8 unclear, Keene,R-Reichenbach,W/
Mannheim 1975.

b) 12.Ng5 Bg4 13.Nde4 Na6 14.h3 Bd7 15.Ba3 h6 16.Nf3 Qc8 17.Kh2 Nd8 18.Rb1 Bc6 =
Heimsoth,H-Becker,M/Essen 2004.

12...Qa5 13.Qc1

13.Bxc5!? Qxc5 is an interesting alternative:

a) 14.Qa4 Qb4 15.Qxb4 Nxb4 16.a3 Nc6 17.Rfb1 Rb8 18.Ne1 Bd7 = Schebler,G-Ahn,M/
Leuven 1998.

b) 14.Rb1 Qa5 15.Qb3 Rd8 16.Qb5 Qc7 17.Nb3 Bf8 18.Nc5 e6 19.Ne4 Be7 = Dizdar,G-
Popovic,P/Caorle 1982.

c) 14.Nb3?! Qh5 15.Rb1 Rd8 16.Qc1 Bg4 =+ Abel,D-Siebarth,R/Willingen 2003.

13...Na4 14.Nb3 Qc7

14...Qh5 15.Qg5! Qxg5 16.Nxg5 Nc3 17.Rfe1 Bg4 18.Nf3 e5 unclear, looks like a decent
alternative.

15.Qc2 Bd7 16.Rae1

White is getting ready to break up the center by the e3-advance. This seems to be his only
dangerous option at the moment.

16...Rad8!

Black is now ready to continue with ...h6 and ...e5, developing a strong initiative.
Therefore, White feels obliged to seek complications.

17.e3 dxe3 18.fxe3 Bf5! 19.Nfd4

This was a must, as 19.e4?! Bg4 would ensure Black a permanent positional advantage
because of the weak light square complex in Whites center.

19...Nxd4 20.Nxd4

20.exd4 Rxd4! is no different.

20...Rxd4!

A very interesting (and almost forced) exchange

sacrifice for purely positional compensation: the
occupation of important central squares and the
better pawn structure. Instead, 20...Bd7?! 21.Rb1
b6 22.Nb5 Bxb5 23.Rxb5 can only be preferable
 for White.

21.exd4

After 21.Qxa4 Qd7! 22.Qxa7 (22.Qxd7? Rxd7 23.d4 Bd3 24.Rf2 e5 25.dxe5 Bxc4 /+)
22...Rxd3 23.Bb4 Rc8 24.a3 Rxc4 25.Qxb7 Qxb7 26.Bxb7 Rc7, Blacks stands slightly
better because of Whites shattered pawn structure.

21...Bxd4+ 22.Kh1 Nc5 23.Rd1

White should have further complicated matters by 23.Bxc5! Bxc5 24.Be4 Bh3 25.Rf3 (25.
Bg2 Bf5 =) 25...b6 26.Qb2 Rd8 27.Qd2 Be6 28.Qf4.

23...Rd8 24.Qe2 b6 25.Bd5

25...Rxd5!

The second exchange sacrifice follows soon after

the first. This is justified by the increased activity
of Blacks minor pieces, in sharp contrast to the
clumsy white rooks.

26.cxd5 Qd7 27.Rf4?

White overestimates his chances. After 27.Qf3!

e5! (upon 27...f6!? 28.Bxc5! bxc5 29.Rb1 Bh3 30.
Rfe1 Bg4 31.Qe4 Bf5, Black could agree to a
draw by repetition) 28.Bxc5 Bxc5 29.Rc1 Bd4,
an unclear position arises, despite the fact that Black is two exchanges down. This proves
the validity of his earlier moves.

27...Qxd5+ 28.Qg2 Be6! 29.Rxd4?

White feels compelled to return some of the extra material, as he could find no useful
course of action, while Blacks threats in the direction of the white king were becoming
annoying. 29.h4 Qd6 30.Kh2 Be5 31.Rb4 Bd5 is unattractive, but it is the only try. Given
that this was the third exchange sacrifice in the game, it can be said that neither player
really liked his rooks!

29...Qxd4 30.Bb2 Qd8! 31.Kg1

 31...Bd5?!

The simplest is 31...Bxa2! and ...Bd5, with an

extra pawn compared to the game.

32.Qe2 Qd7 33.a3

Blacks position seems to be quite nice, but he

still has to find an acceptable plan attacking the
white king cannot be bad!

33...Ne6!

Threatening...Ng5-h3+.

34.Qe3 f6 35.h4 Ng7! 36.Kh2 Nf5

Which would you prefer: the black f5-knight or

the white d1rook?

37.Qf4 Qe6!

Threatening 38...Qe2+.

38.Qd2 Bc6 39.Re1 Qd6! 40.Qf2 Qxd3

Another winning line is 40...Nxh4 41.Be5 fxe5 42.gxh4 e4+.

41.h5

41...Nh6?

Black could win easily by 41...Qd5, intending

42...Ne3!!. With his last move he believed that
the win was very near; however, he overlooked
Whites next, which forces the exchange of
queens and results in an endgame where White
draws easily.

42.Qe2! Qxe2+

The exchange of queens causes Black to lose his

most valuable weapon: the attack against the
white king.
43.Rxe2 Kf7 44.Rc2 Be4 45.hxg6+ hxg6 46.Rc7 a6 47.Bd4 b5 48.Bc5 Ng8 49.Ra7

White wins back one pawn and achieves equality, as the black kingside pawns lack
activity.

49...Bd3 50.Bb4 Bc4 51.Rxa6 e5 52.Rc6 Bd3 53.Rd6 Bc4 54.Rc6 Bd3 55.Kg1 Nh6 56.
Kf2 Ng4+ 57.Ke1 e4

There is no way for either side to make progress. A sad end to an interesting game, with
two exchange sacrifices on d4 and d5!.

I would also like to point out the famous game Topalov-Aronian, Wijk aan Zee 2006. It
was analyzed in many publications and voted the best game of Informant 96. In this game,
White sacrificed both rooks on the e4-square!

Topalov,Veselin Aronian,Levon
Wijk aan Zee (10) 2006 [E15]

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 00 12.00 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 10

Copyright 2007 Efstratios Grivas. All rights reserved.

 [ChessCafe Home Page] [Book Review] [Columnists]
[Endgame Study] [Skittles Room] [Archives]
[Links] [Online Bookstore] [About ChessCafe] [Contact Us]

Copyright 2007 CyberCafes, LLC. All Rights Reserved.

"ChessCafe.com" is a registered trademark of Russell Enterprises, Inc.