We use the terms "attack" and an "initiative"
interchangeably. If there is a real difference, it's a matter of degree of
commitment.
The player with an initiative commits some of his energy, both materially and emotionally. But if the initiative runs cold, he is able to regroup and defend against his opponent's counter-initiative. The game may peter out into a draw.
But when an attack runs out of steam, the consequences are usually worse. The attacker may have
committed too much. He can't regroup and the counterattack usually wins, according to Richard Reti, who called #46 an "old aphorism."
White's
1.Nf5
1.Nf5
looked impressive in view of 1...gxf5
2.Qh6
followed by 3.g5 or 3gxf5/Rg1+ However, after
1...Qc5
2.Nh6+
Kg7
Black began the counterattack with
3.Qd2
Rd4!
4.f4
Be4!
Now we see how useless White's pieces are when needed for defense, e.g. 4...Be4
5.g5
Rxd3!
6.gxf6+
Kxf6
and Black wins. The game ended with
5.Re3
Bxd3
6.cxd3
and now
6...Ne4!
7.Qe2
Rc8!
8.Qd1
Nf2
9.Qd2
Rxd3
10.Rxd3
Nxd3
0-1