how much is a tempo worth?

using the standard point system, how much material should one capture for sacrificing a tempo?

In chess there is a concept named Zugswang.  It is a position where our opponent has achieved the maximum offensive and defensive position possible.  And having to move leaves a weakness that we can exploit.  If we can make a move that loses (sacrifices) a tempo. Without significantly affecting the position and thereby  making it our opponent's turn to move.  We have converted an equal position into a winning position. 

The amount of material one should capture using chess engine scoring system is at least 1 point (value of 1 pawn using standard point system)

 There are many more examples.  I thought the  above example  would be the easiest to understand.

It's not that simple. Like all things in chess, it REALLY depends on the position.

Depends on the position.

A tempo is worth the compensation you get for it ie if you rapidly develop a mateing attack after dropping a pawn to grab a tempo probably a wise choice, if a pawn sac say inflicts some positional harm(doubled pawns isolated for example) and gives you a strong follow up plan the id say go for it , and as always if it leads to a truely forced mate any amount of material is worth the tempo that secures mate. However if the tempo does not progress your board (perhaps your behind on development or are ahead on material) and holding the piece does no harm to you generally i would say don't just drop material for a tempo.

In Rudolf Spielmann's book The Art of Sacrifice, he suggests that 3 developing moves are worth about 1 pawn in the opening.  In GM Mihail Marin's Secrets of Attacking Chess, Marin points out that Spielmann would sac pawns for less than 3 tempi, and that in some positions, a tempo can be worth a pawn, but that it is "too risky to generalize."

Tempo is probably an important and interesting concept. The thing about tempo is that it's a temporary advantage unlike material which is known as a permanent advantage. So the relative value is going to be highly dependent on the continuation.

The key is usually how the temporary advantage is converted to a permanent like material or space. So in an opening, unless a tempo gain gain be converted to material it's not worth a lot. The stated .33 is probably about right. In the middle game, depending on the continuation and conversion it could range from .50 to 2.0. Of course, it would be a lot higher if the continuation includes a fork on the queen or mate, etc. But if the continuation goes nowhere it could be .00 also. In the endgame tempo can be huge as the time gain can be converted much better. For example, a tempo gain allowing the King to be better positioned can often be winning in a pawn ending.

So yeah, tempo is highly variable but one thing is usually for sure, players who understand tempo OTB are typically very tough.

Marin is of the opinion that an advantage in development (i.e. tempi) is as longlasting as any other advantage, and it is sufficient to convert it to checkmate or the queening of a pawn.

1/3 of a pawn.

wayne_thomas wrote:

Marin is of the opinion that an advantage in development (i.e. tempi) is as longlasting as any other advantage, and it is sufficient to convert it to checkmate or the queening of a pawn.

There might be a substantial difference between an advantage in development and a gain of tempo. Regardless, the typical results of opening gambit tempo gains while showing some advantage might not provide much evidence of a long term much less winning plus.

1/3rd of a pawn is my rule of thumb, as well.  If someone offers you a gambit that you can tell is going to cost you 3-4 tempi, be wary ;).

Not easy to answer. It should be subjective, and depends on the specific position you are dealing with. One thing is for sure: you need to have a good feel of the extent or degree of your development advantage (or disadvantage) because this 'element' is basically not permanent. For example, after you sac a pawn you ask: Can I hope to take back my material in the near future, perhaps with some dividends? Is the sac enough for a successful attack or break or weeken my opponent's defense? Would this advantage in development enough to put my opponent's pieces in difficulties, or my pieces in a freer/active position?, etc... again, a tempo is only a transitory element to a permanent, more stable advantage.

you can have quite a lot for few of dollars, not sure if they stack with the premium membership though. it's relative worth change from situation to situation for instance if you have a cold it may start to look quite precious.

sorry I couldn't resist 

seriously... I guess is the same than trying to answer how much is worth a pawn, and truth to be told I guess a pawn was assigned with one as standard value in order to have a unite of measure for all the other pieces. Although you can use the points (of the pieces) to get raw estimation the result may be more or less accurate so basically you have to try to figure out the whole thing looking at the entire situation on the board. 

Of course it depends on the position.Generally speaking,tempi are more crucial in open positions and less so in closed positions.Gaining a tempo is most often a good thing,though sometimes in the endgame you need to lose a tempo(e.g. triangulation of the King)to win a game.By the way,knights cannot lose a tempo.

In The Art of the Sacrifice, Spielmann frames the question squarely in terms of 'development,' writing that a pawn is worth three developing moves (in open positions during the opening and early middlegame).  He writes that "real sacrifices" (including sacrifices for development) are "combinations with a time factor," and at several points in his discussion of sacrifices for development points to the sacrificer being a tempo ahead or gaining a tempo.

Marin interprets Spielmann as saying that a pawn is worth three tempi of development.  For Marin though, development is not something that stops in the opening.  By a lead in 'development,' he means something closer to the 'initiative,' pressure resulting from more active pieces bearing on weak points in the enemy position.

Incidentally, I didn't mean to imply that gambits lead to a win. I was just trying to convey Marin's point that advantages in development/time/the initiative can last into the endgame if one finds the right moves.

one third of a pawn!? I'll defer to the judgement of much better chess players than myself, but this seems low to me.

perhaps this is becuase, at my level of play, pawns are undervalued?

I'd much rather be three good opening moves ahead of my oponent and a pawn down then roughly even in material and position.

I suggest you to take a look to evan's gambit, to Schliman gambit and why not budapest gambit then  maybe you can try to play few thematic games with both of the colors and come up with your own idea, that's probably the best way to get a better idea of the topic. 
of course you can try different gambits too.  

It may be hard for you imagine but yeah, that's how important a tempo is. But I understand this is no simple thing to explain to a 1200s, and even to some 1700s or 1800s I guess because much rests on the experience of the player in handling such an advantage. Just like the art of sacrifice, or the concept of 'initiative', you have to endeavor to experience it by doing a lot of over-the-board experments for you to appreciate it.