nice games.

this game seems to bbe against more conservative players that are duped into stingy hit and run tacticcs.

I think first step is accepting the truth, that that pawnoffer is a weapon in middlegame. We often looking too much for material!-

Then sharpen your eye to realisize such things in mastergames. Surely you will later realize such opportunities in your own games! Give them from time to time try!

staggerlee: Nice article.  Knowing when tempo or position is more important than material is crucial to becoming a better player.  These examples are helpful.

 

Where should we start when looking to improve understanding of this?

davidetal has cleared exactly, what with zwischenzug is meant.

In a expected logical follow-up of  moves an unexspected one, which gives the whole valuation often a change.

But do not forget my main theme. It is the weapon of a pawnoffer for getting a compensation. We saw it also now in the second WC-game, when this time Kramnik gave a pawn to get better play for his pieces

A zwischenzug I think is a position when any move you do makes your position worse - you would prefer to skip a turn.

 

That's zugzwang.

That Pawn offer really turned the tables on White.

ADK

Nice article.  Knowing when tempo or position is more important than material is crucial to becoming a better player.  These examples are helpful.

The zwischenzug (German for "intermediate move", pronounced [ˈtsvɪʃənˌtsuːk]) is a chess tactic in which a player, instead of playing the expected move (commonly a recapture of a piece that the opponent has just captured) first interpolates another move, posing an immediate threat that the opponent must answer, then plays the expected move (Hooper & Whyld 1992:460) (Golombek 1977:354). Ideally, the zwischenzug changes the situation to the player's advantage, such as by gaining material or avoiding what would otherwise be a strong continuation for the opponent.

Such a move is also called an intermezzo,^[1]intermediate move, or in-between move.^[2] (Horowitz & Reinfeld 1954:180-97) When the intermediate move is a check, it is sometimes called a "zwischenschach" (van Perlo 2006:479).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zwischenzug

Not to be confused with zugzwang.  A player whose turn it is to move who has no move that does not worsen their position is said to be in zugzwang (Soltis 2003:78). Thus every move would make their position worse, and they would be better off if they could pass and not move.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zugzwang

A zwischenzug I think is a position when any move you do makes your position worse - you would prefer to skip a turn.

A zwischenzug? what is that?

As we have learned time and again...it's NOT always material that wins games but tactics.

Yes, after the pawn win white had adventage, but he gave counterplay. And later  he lost control over the game. His knight retreats for example were bad.-

But my aim was to show, that a pawnoffer,-intended or not - can be a useful weapon in middlegame fight

I don't believe that Lasker sacrificed a Pawn here. It would be more accurate to say that he lost it in view of Black's troubles a few moves earlier in the game.

What is certainly true here is that White's advantage, though clear, required accurate play.  In Fact, I believe White was still better until he played 9.Rd3?! Allowing 9...Qe6.  It was necessary to play 9.Nf5 answering 9...d4 with 10.Nxe3 where White is still better because of extra Pawn.

The actual game continued as a double edged struggle for 12 more moves until Tarrasch blundered.

Give it a try! Material isonly one aspect of chess. There are so many others. Try to make experience with that. It will strenghten your joy in chess! On the long run...!

well... it's a good argument, but i can't be sure i'm not just losing the pwn because i am a mere human, not a GM upgrade. :P