Tactical Analysis of a Complex Rook Sacrifice

My friend Pyre recently played in a rapid tournament, and when we went over his games, we came across a very interesting and incredibly complex rook sacrifice.
The variation did not actually occur in the game, but it allowed for some fascinating tactical analysis.

In the position below the question is should Black sacrifice the rook on e3?

The key position. Should Black sacrifice the rook on e3?

This is a very interesting position because even though the sacrifice on e3 looks very strong, and makes intuitive sense, the variations are very long and too complex to calculate all the way through at this point.

In a previous blog I had already written about this kind of sacrifice: somewhere in the middle between a very "concrete" and straightforward sacrifice (like the classic bishop sacrifice on h7, where there are typically only very few variations to calculate with lots of "only" moves), and a purely long-term sacrifice like for example the various positional exchange sacrifices in the French and Sicilian openings.

Pyre and I discussed this position on Skype, using a screen share of my Chessbase window. We did not have enough time to discuss this game with the detail it deserves, so some of our conclusions were wrong or at least inaccurate. However, that in itself allowed for some interesting observations.

This position would have likely occurred shortly after the rook sacrifice. 

The links to a more comprehensive (and accurate...) analysis can be found at the end of this article.

After we were done with our analysis, I looked at the position again, and only after that second analysis I finally turned to my engine to verify the analysis that we had done up to this point. The screenshot shows DEEP FRITZ 13's analysis after 20. Kg1:

In the position shown above after 20. Kg1, DEEP FRITZ recommends these moves for Black after about 30 seconds 

There are basically 3-4 variations worth looking into:

a) 20. ... Nxb4 

b) 20. ... Qg4+

c) 20. ... Qg3+

d) 20. ... d4

It is interesting to note that there are a great number of transpositions between these variations. It's also worth noting that due to the large number of checks Black has in all these variations on h3/g3/g4/, the number of variations and positions to consider is enormous, and too much for an amateur player to handle with certainty.

For a full analysis please refer to the link at the bottom of this article, but the main ideas are these:

Nxb4: to pin the Nc3, and potentially swing the Rc8 over to the kingside via the now available c6-square

d4: to undermine White's already wobbly center even further, open the g1-a7 diagonal for the Bb8, and prepare Nd4 to exchange the White Nf3, the key defender of h2

Qg4+/Qg3+: to shuffle White's King around to the right square (g1 or h1, depending on the variation), and then follow up with Nxb4 or d4

Of course, the ramifications of these moves are impossible to evaluate with great certainty when deciding whether to sacrifice the rook.

Even when looking at the game together, Pyre and I missed or underestimated the following opportunities:

a) Ba7+: We completely missed the idea that Black in certain variations can play Ba7+. With the Black queen on h3 it's a pretty common mating pattern. What may have contributed to us overlooking this move initially is that we were so fixated on the long diagonal b8-h2 that it would not even occur to us to place the bishop elsewhere. On the other hand though, when a bishop is fianchettoed on b7, moves like Ba6 to switch diagonals always occur naturally to me.

b) Ng4: We spent too much time analyzing this idea, at the expense of other more effective moves. Considering that so many kingside attacks involve moves like Ng4, and that it's a very natural and "human" move to make, it's not surprising that we gave the move too much credit. 

c) Nxb4: A "computer" move that pins White's Nc3, and activates the Rc8

Conclusions:

1. Some - in fact a large number of - combinations and sacrifices are too complex to be evaluated with certainty. In such situations, following John Nunn's advice in his "Secrets of Practical Chess", a chess player should follow his instincts. If experience and gut feeling tell you the sacrifice is sound, you should proceed with it even if there is not enough time to work out every detail.

I know, however, from own experience that this is VERY difficult. In my own tournament games I frequently did not follow this advice, and usually regretted it later.

2.  When analyzing a very tactical position (let alone a strategic/positional one), it is very important to do it without the help of a chess engine first. Even if this leads to some wrong conclusions initially, it is vital that you exercise your ability to calculate accurately. This not only builds your tactical skill set, but also gives you the confidence to handle difficult tactical positions. I will expand on how to use chess engines effectively in another article soon.

Link to the game analyzed here:

NN - Pyre, Rapid 2015

Link to the same analysis in PDF format:

NN - Pyre, Rapid 2015

A Position to Pawnder - Pyre's Reflections on his Journey into the World of Chess

The following is an article written by Pyre, one of my chess students, reflecting upon his transition from competitive SC2 to chess. My thoughts on Pyre's progress will be published here soon.
This article can also be found on TeamLiquid:
http://www.teamliquid.net/blogs/viewblog.php?topic_id=429882

========================================================================

When playing Starcraft, I was very often asked by friends and family, “What is Starcraft?” and “How do you play Starcraft?”. My response was always, “Well, it’s sort of like chess, but faster and more difficult”. On the one hand, who can argue that Starcraft isn’t a faster-paced game? Starcraft is in real time and chess is turn-based. Some Starcraft games end in 5 minutes, while some chess games last for 7 hours! However, I could never have been more wrong when assuming that Starcraft was a harder game than chess. Learning how chess pieces move is one thing, but mastering the art, beauty, and complexity that encompasses it is as different as night and day. 

Pyre used to be one North America's most promising SC2 talents and was consistently ranked among TOP 16 on the GM ladder before he turned his attention to chess

Optional Backstory:

      If you don’t know who I am, it's because I haven’t logged onto battle.net for about 8 months. Back in September, I joined my high school’s chess club thinking that my strategic brain would easily be able to convert my grandmaster Starcraft abilities into grandmaster chess play. I was terrible at first, and the mere thought of eventually becoming good at chess was slowly slipping away. I lost to every single person in the chess club every week and wondered why I was good at Starcraft and not good at chess. But eventually, the constant defeats and humiliation got to me and I decided to seriously train to become better. The same competitive drive I applied to Starcraft in my humble beginnings was being applied to chess. What began as a side-project to Starcraft shortly took over as I regained the desire to become better at something--the same something that attracted me so much to Starcraft in the first place.

      With this ambition, I was lucky enough to fall under RevTiberius's wing and become a chess student of his. Soon enough, I started to see results. It was not long before my first competition happened, which was the culmination of all the high schools nearby and I got third place. Good right? Well, not as good as I had hoped. All this did was tell me that I still had a really long road ahead of me. But after several hours a day of studying and playing from January to now, I can confidently say that my chess is at a decent level (approximately 1800 ELO from 1000 ELO) and I hope to continue at the same rate during my stay at UCSD. 

 "I could never have been more wrong when assuming that Starcraft was a harder game than chess". SC2 GM and chess enthusiast Pyre reflecting upon chess and SC2

      “We ain’t so different you and I”. It’s true. Both Starcraft and chess are similar games where both players start evenly and through smart decision making, the better player should win. There are starting imbalances very similar to that of terran, protoss, and zerg, although I doubt “white” is going to get patched anytime soon. There is a large amount of theory, strategy, and overall knowledge required in both games to be successful. Taking expansions in Starcraft is the same as developing your pieces and castling (bringing your king to safety, while bringing your rook into the game) in chess. Going for a baneling bust, or a 6 pool, is very similar to the infamous “Scholar’s mate” (trying to checkmate your opponent in 4 moves) in chess or even just moving your queen out too early and trying to do damage with it. 

      The strategy in both games is really no different. In both games, you build an army and often there is a main fight that decides the game. For all you positional, quiet players who like to “turtle” in Starcraft, guess what? You can do that in chess, too--just close up the position with pawns and its equivalent to a widow mine and siege tank line! And for all you attacking players who like blink stalker openings, roach baneling busts, and 1/1/1s, there’s aggressive type play in chess as well with what are known as gambits (sacrificing material for hyperaggression). 

      Both games have gone through changing times and changing ideas throughout their existence. In the beginning of Starcraft 2 in 2010, everyone (including zergs) opened on 1 base and it remained that way until even the 7 minute mark. Struggling, zergs eventually realized that they needed the extra larvae and they needed the extra base, so they started going hatch first. As a response, terrans started making reactor hellions to start putting pressure on the expansion. These are examples of trends. From the 1500s-1800s, chess players strived to control the center immediately and valued fast development. However, at the dawn of the 20th century, ideas changed and certain people (called “hypermodernists”) decided that as a response, chess players could let their opponent control the center at first, but then flank attack it later! This idea had never been seen before, but it changed the way people thought chess was played and it led to even more innovation further down the road. 

      Tournaments are seen in both chess and Starcraft 2 at the professional level and the amateur level. One of the most intriguing things I had found out about when I first started getting into chess was the fact that most local chess tournaments have sections. This was a new thing to me, as no Starcraft tournament I ever went to had a “diamond-only” section or a “platinum-only” section with cash prizes for them too. This seemed genius to me. Everyone who participated in these chess tournaments had something to play for. They weren’t just going to get “beat by a gm, then watch”.

      There are also chess pros, just like there are Starcraft pros. The “Flash” of chess would be either Garry Kasparov or Bobby Fischer. Both of these chess players are legends of their time and have been internationally recognized outside of the chess world. The “Taeja” or “Mvp” of chess would be Magnus Carlsen. Magnus Carlsen is currently the world #1 at only 22 years old! He is a superstar in his own world just as Starcraft players are in theirs.

      If you’re a fan of just one of these games, then I highly encourage you to try the other. As a non-Starcraft player, if you feel intimidated by the speed at which Starcraft is played, let me assure you that you don’t need 450 APM to be good. Plenty of successful Starcraft players, like Polt, are able to out-think and outplay their opponents purely out of strategy, tactics, and immense game knowledge. If you play Starcraft and have never gotten into chess, then just imagine you’re playing Starcraft except without the APM and constant movements--just the strategic portion. Nothing can match the pleasure of beating someone in a game of raw intellectual strength.

Episode VII - How to Make Money at Chess and Starcraft 2 (If you are not Kasparov or MarineKingPrime)

This article is not necessarily a comprehensive treatment of the topic. It is merely a collection of thoughts and opinions of mine on the economic realities behind coaching. I spoke to a lot of people in the SC2 and chess communities for this article, but all errors and omissions are my own.

This article is a continuation of a piece I wrote about prize money at the top level in chess and SC2. If you missed it, you can find it here:
http://revtiberius.blogspot.ca/2013/03/episode-v-how-much-money-does-chess.html

The main point of the article was that unlike in other sports like soccer, basketball or golf, in Chess and Starcraft only a few players at the very top make good money. In this article I'm arguing that for SC2 and chess players who aren't quite at that level, coaching is probably the only way to make a steady income.

Synopsis of this article:
1. It is very hard to make money at SC2 or chess if you are not part of the global elite
2. Coaching is a much better way for talented players to make a stable income
3. Good players don't necessarily make good coaches.

Before I discuss the coaching business, I first want to talk about the kind of money that I've seen semi-professional SC2 players make.

The Texas Holdem Massacre: In recent years several second-rate grandmasters have given up chess in order to pursue a career in professional poker, where with the skill set of a chess grandmaster it is much easier to make good money compared to being a "mediocre" grandmaster on the chess circuit. And yes, the 1974 original "Texas Chainsaw Massacre" is my favorite horror movie ("Who will survive? And what will be left of them?")

In 2011 and early 2012 I was part of the management of Team Revoki, which in its prime was one of the best semi-professional teams in North America. Even though we had some very promising talents on the team, there hasn't been a single player from that time who has succeeded in become a full-time SC2 professional. The only possible exception is Chris "RevIllusion" Lee

http://wiki.teamliquid.net/starcraft2/Illusion_(American_player)

But even he doesn't seem to be good enough (yet?!) to establish himself as a top SC2 player based on the SC2 earnings I posted in the previous article. Though of course I wish him the best of luck.

My time on Team Revoki taught me a lot about the semi-professional SC2 scene, and the business side of e-Sports

But despite the undeniable skill we had on the team there was nobody who made even remotely enough money to be considered "professional". The situation of players on the teams Revoki was competing with was very similar.

For a Top 8 Master league players and GMs we had on the team, other than coaching there were the following ways to make money:
1. Sponsorships and Salaries: Revoki and rivalling teams could only offer very limited amounts to their players. Personally I was also of the opinion that whatever resources we did have should be spend on the team as a whole (e.g. pay for the website, team-internal KotH's etc.) rather than be used to pay "salaries".
2. Prize Money: From time to time our players won money at LANs similar to the prize Col.Firezerg is collecting in the picture below. Several GMs I spoke with lamented the fact that the collapse of the Playhem Daily series meant a serious blow to their potential to regularly win money and get their name out to get invited to better teams.
3. Show Matches: We occasionally hosted show matches between our leading players and somewhat more known SC2 "celebrities". For example we had one show match between RevJsung and ESC.Goody. It was a Bo7 for a $100 prize. To be totally honest I was a little surprised and disappointed that even a player like Goody had to agree to a show match like this. Considering the amount of time a B07 takes, $100 is not very much reward.
4. Streaming: Initially some of our players thought that the revenue from their twitch.tv streams could potentially amount to something substantial. However, it has since become clear that this business model does not work for the players, and some streaming platforms (e.g. Owned3d) have already gone under. On Twitch and other platforms a streamer needs at least several thousands of viewers before the incomes becomes significant. This is a lot more than the average "semi-professional" player can attract.

SC2 GM Col.Firezerg (right) wins $160 at a university LAN 

Even a player like Pyre who's clearly one or two levels above the talent we had on Team Revoki "only" managed to make about $1,000 in his SC2 career so far. I think that's a great achievement, but it also shows how difficult it is to make money even as a very strong GM if you are not part of one of the top teams like EG.

For several years, my former clan mate HyDra[VcK] was a leading player in the Fastest Map Possible (FMP) community in North America in the original Starcraft / Brood War.  

Though it has to be said that the situation in the SC2 amateur community is already a lot better compared to the old original SC / Broodwar days. To put this into perspective, I asked my old clan mate HyDra[VcK] about the money he made in his "Fastest Map Possible" (FMP) career. His earnings were about $600, exclusively prize money, consisting of individual prizes of mainly $50-$100. Fortunately (?!) not nearly enough to ever make him consider going pro.

I also spoke with Gerome[VcK], another old clan mate of mine. He was also part of the FMP community and occasionally won smaller amounts at local high school LANs (you may remember that back in the day "LAN" actually meant "local"), typically in 2v2 tournaments. Commenting on his limited success, he said "when you're in high school, it's pretty cool to win any kind of money, but my advice for people considering a professional SC2 career would be 'Don't quit your day job!'" I couldn't agree more.

Russian-German Grandmaster Arthur Jussupow (left), shown here in conversation with Garry Kasparov in Zurich 2009, is one of the world's foremost chess coaches and author of several excellent books on training for competitive chess players. On his website www.jussupow.de he offers online lessons for only 60 Euros/hour. 

So. Now that we have firmly established that there is no real money in SC2 unless you are part of the global elite. How do you actually make money off your SC2 or chess skills? In my opinion the only people who manage to do that are (good) coaches.

I also want to say that I firmly believe in the value of good coaching. In both chess and SC2 I have personally reached levels that I could have never achieved without the help of good coaches. I no longer play SC2, but I will almost certainly at some point hire a chess coach again to help me improve my game so that at some point I might actually break the 2300 ELO barrier, which is my long-term goal in chess.

Who are the people willing to pay for lessons? For this article I spoke to a number of well-known SC2 GMs and coaches, and they all confirmed that their typical clients are slightly older and economically more stable than the average SC2 player. Players who pay for lessons are typically in the late 20s/early 30s, have decent jobs, and not the time/desire to acquire skill through grinding out ladder games.

In chess, the situation is a bit different. First of all, compared to the rather APM-heavy SC2, chess is a much more knowledge based game. This means that coaching in chess makes even more sense than it does in SC2 because there are many concepts that will be very hard for a beginner to understand without external help from either a coach or a book or other resources. Many strategic and positional ideas for example, just as endgame technique or the mechanics of calculating variations a player can't simply learn by playing games.

Modern technology offers completely new ways of teaching chess in a class room setting. Whether all these new gimmicks really make sense is something I'll look at in a future article. But the short answer is "No!"

Coaching as a Business:
Even if they aren't famous grandmasters, qualified coaches make anywhere between $25 - $50 / hour. Let's assume an average rate of $30/hour and 4 hours of coaching 5 days a week. That translates into a weekly income of $600. It does take some serious effort and commitment to build a reputation strong enough to attract this many students, but talented coaches can do so without too much difficulty.

Compared to that, the number of people who make $600/week through playing chess or SC2 is very small. And really good coaches make significantly more than $600/week.

In fact a 20 hour coaching commitment per week leaves enough room for other professional activities such as college or a (not too demanding) day job.

In my case for example I could make that kind of money if I devoted enough time to coaching chess. I'm not doing it because my full time job keeps me busy enough (and is more lucrative) but if that was not an option I would seriously think about coaching full time. Not only because of the money, but arguably even more so because by coaching talented players, I as a coach go through a lot of teaching materials that benefit me as a player, too.
However, when it comes to my hobbies, financial considerations are secondary. I play chess and played SC2 primarily because it's a lot of fun.

Magnus Carlsen's very first coach said that he never learned as much about chess as he did in the year he was teaching Carlsen. 

On Gosucoaching.com, Team EG's Idra offers lessons for $300/hour. Obviously Idra is a good player, but I doubt that he is good enough a coach to be worth so much money.

However, the fact that coaching is the only way for many talented players to make some money does not mean that every player is equally qualified for coaching. Strong players don't necessarily make good coaches, and many excellent coaches have seen only very limited success as players. The problem with coaches like Idra is that the student ends up paying a lot of money for the "celebrity" status of the coach, but does not get very much coaching expertise in return.

A great example of a good SC2 coach is Zanderfever, who played an important role in my eventual promotion to diamond league. Though at the time he was "only" a top 25 Master League protoss (I was playing terran). I highly recommend you check out his website:
http://www.zanderfever.tv/

In the next article on coaching I'll be talking about how to identify a good coach.

To be continued...