Is a gambit still a gambit if it's calculated through to the end?












1














I recently gambitted a knight (I call it a gambit as I gave away a knight without being able to take back).

However I had calculated through all the possibilities and five moves or so later I have an extra pawn and a better position. Does this still count as a gambit or doesn't it as I know I can get the material back?

Essentially, what is the actual definition of a gambit?










share|improve this question





























    1














    I recently gambitted a knight (I call it a gambit as I gave away a knight without being able to take back).

    However I had calculated through all the possibilities and five moves or so later I have an extra pawn and a better position. Does this still count as a gambit or doesn't it as I know I can get the material back?

    Essentially, what is the actual definition of a gambit?










    share|improve this question



























      1












      1








      1







      I recently gambitted a knight (I call it a gambit as I gave away a knight without being able to take back).

      However I had calculated through all the possibilities and five moves or so later I have an extra pawn and a better position. Does this still count as a gambit or doesn't it as I know I can get the material back?

      Essentially, what is the actual definition of a gambit?










      share|improve this question















      I recently gambitted a knight (I call it a gambit as I gave away a knight without being able to take back).

      However I had calculated through all the possibilities and five moves or so later I have an extra pawn and a better position. Does this still count as a gambit or doesn't it as I know I can get the material back?

      Essentially, what is the actual definition of a gambit?







      gambits terminology






      share|improve this question















      share|improve this question













      share|improve this question




      share|improve this question








      edited 1 hour ago









      Glorfindel

      12.7k43559




      12.7k43559










      asked 2 hours ago









      Arkleseisure

      1606




      1606






















          1 Answer
          1






          active

          oldest

          votes


















          2














          No, it's not a gambit; a gambit is 'just' a sacrifice which is part of (well-known) opening theory, nothing more, nothing less.



          But, technically, what you describe is not even a real sacrifice, but a 'sham sacrifice'.



          Wikipedia gives the following definitions:




          Real versus sham



          Rudolf Spielmann proposed a division between sham and real sacrifices:




          • In a 'real sacrifice', the sacrificing player will often have to play on with less material than his opponent for quite some time.

          • In a 'sham sacrifice', the player offering the sacrifice will soon regain material of the same or greater value, or else force mate. A sham sacrifice of this latter type is sometimes known as a pseudo sacrifice. (Rudolf Spielman, "The Art of Sacrifice in Chess", 1995, Dover, ISBN 0-486-28449-2)


          In compensation for a real sacrifice, the player receives dynamic, positional, or other non-material advantages which he must capitalize on, or risk losing the game due to the material deficit. Because of the risk involved, real sacrifices are also called 'speculative sacrifices'.




          If the name 'sham sacrifice' sounds too negative to you, just call it a 'tactical combination'.






          share|improve this answer





















            Your Answer








            StackExchange.ready(function() {
            var channelOptions = {
            tags: "".split(" "),
            id: "435"
            };
            initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

            StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
            // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
            if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
            StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
            createEditor();
            });
            }
            else {
            createEditor();
            }
            });

            function createEditor() {
            StackExchange.prepareEditor({
            heartbeatType: 'answer',
            autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
            convertImagesToLinks: false,
            noModals: true,
            showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
            reputationToPostImages: null,
            bindNavPrevention: true,
            postfix: "",
            imageUploader: {
            brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
            contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
            allowUrls: true
            },
            noCode: true, onDemand: true,
            discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
            ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
            });


            }
            });














            draft saved

            draft discarded


















            StackExchange.ready(
            function () {
            StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fchess.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f23320%2fis-a-gambit-still-a-gambit-if-its-calculated-through-to-the-end%23new-answer', 'question_page');
            }
            );

            Post as a guest















            Required, but never shown

























            1 Answer
            1






            active

            oldest

            votes








            1 Answer
            1






            active

            oldest

            votes









            active

            oldest

            votes






            active

            oldest

            votes









            2














            No, it's not a gambit; a gambit is 'just' a sacrifice which is part of (well-known) opening theory, nothing more, nothing less.



            But, technically, what you describe is not even a real sacrifice, but a 'sham sacrifice'.



            Wikipedia gives the following definitions:




            Real versus sham



            Rudolf Spielmann proposed a division between sham and real sacrifices:




            • In a 'real sacrifice', the sacrificing player will often have to play on with less material than his opponent for quite some time.

            • In a 'sham sacrifice', the player offering the sacrifice will soon regain material of the same or greater value, or else force mate. A sham sacrifice of this latter type is sometimes known as a pseudo sacrifice. (Rudolf Spielman, "The Art of Sacrifice in Chess", 1995, Dover, ISBN 0-486-28449-2)


            In compensation for a real sacrifice, the player receives dynamic, positional, or other non-material advantages which he must capitalize on, or risk losing the game due to the material deficit. Because of the risk involved, real sacrifices are also called 'speculative sacrifices'.




            If the name 'sham sacrifice' sounds too negative to you, just call it a 'tactical combination'.






            share|improve this answer


























              2














              No, it's not a gambit; a gambit is 'just' a sacrifice which is part of (well-known) opening theory, nothing more, nothing less.



              But, technically, what you describe is not even a real sacrifice, but a 'sham sacrifice'.



              Wikipedia gives the following definitions:




              Real versus sham



              Rudolf Spielmann proposed a division between sham and real sacrifices:




              • In a 'real sacrifice', the sacrificing player will often have to play on with less material than his opponent for quite some time.

              • In a 'sham sacrifice', the player offering the sacrifice will soon regain material of the same or greater value, or else force mate. A sham sacrifice of this latter type is sometimes known as a pseudo sacrifice. (Rudolf Spielman, "The Art of Sacrifice in Chess", 1995, Dover, ISBN 0-486-28449-2)


              In compensation for a real sacrifice, the player receives dynamic, positional, or other non-material advantages which he must capitalize on, or risk losing the game due to the material deficit. Because of the risk involved, real sacrifices are also called 'speculative sacrifices'.




              If the name 'sham sacrifice' sounds too negative to you, just call it a 'tactical combination'.






              share|improve this answer
























                2












                2








                2






                No, it's not a gambit; a gambit is 'just' a sacrifice which is part of (well-known) opening theory, nothing more, nothing less.



                But, technically, what you describe is not even a real sacrifice, but a 'sham sacrifice'.



                Wikipedia gives the following definitions:




                Real versus sham



                Rudolf Spielmann proposed a division between sham and real sacrifices:




                • In a 'real sacrifice', the sacrificing player will often have to play on with less material than his opponent for quite some time.

                • In a 'sham sacrifice', the player offering the sacrifice will soon regain material of the same or greater value, or else force mate. A sham sacrifice of this latter type is sometimes known as a pseudo sacrifice. (Rudolf Spielman, "The Art of Sacrifice in Chess", 1995, Dover, ISBN 0-486-28449-2)


                In compensation for a real sacrifice, the player receives dynamic, positional, or other non-material advantages which he must capitalize on, or risk losing the game due to the material deficit. Because of the risk involved, real sacrifices are also called 'speculative sacrifices'.




                If the name 'sham sacrifice' sounds too negative to you, just call it a 'tactical combination'.






                share|improve this answer












                No, it's not a gambit; a gambit is 'just' a sacrifice which is part of (well-known) opening theory, nothing more, nothing less.



                But, technically, what you describe is not even a real sacrifice, but a 'sham sacrifice'.



                Wikipedia gives the following definitions:




                Real versus sham



                Rudolf Spielmann proposed a division between sham and real sacrifices:




                • In a 'real sacrifice', the sacrificing player will often have to play on with less material than his opponent for quite some time.

                • In a 'sham sacrifice', the player offering the sacrifice will soon regain material of the same or greater value, or else force mate. A sham sacrifice of this latter type is sometimes known as a pseudo sacrifice. (Rudolf Spielman, "The Art of Sacrifice in Chess", 1995, Dover, ISBN 0-486-28449-2)


                In compensation for a real sacrifice, the player receives dynamic, positional, or other non-material advantages which he must capitalize on, or risk losing the game due to the material deficit. Because of the risk involved, real sacrifices are also called 'speculative sacrifices'.




                If the name 'sham sacrifice' sounds too negative to you, just call it a 'tactical combination'.







                share|improve this answer












                share|improve this answer



                share|improve this answer










                answered 1 hour ago









                Glorfindel

                12.7k43559




                12.7k43559






























                    draft saved

                    draft discarded




















































                    Thanks for contributing an answer to Chess Stack Exchange!


                    • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

                    But avoid



                    • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

                    • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


                    To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.





                    Some of your past answers have not been well-received, and you're in danger of being blocked from answering.


                    Please pay close attention to the following guidance:


                    • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

                    But avoid



                    • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

                    • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


                    To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




                    draft saved


                    draft discarded














                    StackExchange.ready(
                    function () {
                    StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fchess.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f23320%2fis-a-gambit-still-a-gambit-if-its-calculated-through-to-the-end%23new-answer', 'question_page');
                    }
                    );

                    Post as a guest















                    Required, but never shown





















































                    Required, but never shown














                    Required, but never shown












                    Required, but never shown







                    Required, but never shown

































                    Required, but never shown














                    Required, but never shown












                    Required, but never shown







                    Required, but never shown







                    Popular posts from this blog

                    Plaza Victoria

                    Brian Clough

                    Cáceres