Tit for tat sacrifice I have noted in a number of games from Master players that sacrifices are rapidly played till both sides are reduced to just about equal in material and virtually the same pieces, at least in value.  Is this a deliberate act by both players?  It seems to be strategical by clearing the board of the garbage and getting to the heart of the matter, victory.
I have noted in a number of games from Master players that sacrifices are rapidly played till both sides are reduced to just about equal in material and virtually the same pieces, at least in value.


I don't think that happens often at all. What does happen is that players exchange pieces -- say white captures a piece, in return black takes a piece back, often the piece that just captured. That is perfectly normal, but it's not a sacrifice. A sacrifice is when you let something of yourself be captured and then you don't capture anything back.

It's natural for a game between two strong players to end up with more or less the same material; they're good enough to avoid moves that simply lose material outright.


  Is this a deliberate act by both players?


Well, they would of course rather just capture pieces without having their own pieces captured in return, but the opponent doesn't want to go along with that.

It's normal to react to a piece that is threatened by defending it -- so that the capturing piece can be captured back.

Generally every move a master makes is a deliberate act, or they wouldn't be any good at the game. A decision to exchange a set of pieces is not to be taken lightly, apparently the master decided it was the best move to make in the given position.


  It seems to be strategical by clearing the board of the garbage and getting to the heart of the matter, victory.


I don't know what this means.