capablanca quote, please explain?

Originally posted by paulbuchmanfromfics
On the bishop and rook vs two rooks question, I couldn't tell you. I haven't really studied endings like that much myself.

🙂

I don't even think I have cracked a book on knight endings.
Most of my games are decided long before the endgame as well.
🙂

lol, sadly mine are mostly decided just out of the opening! the consultation game with pawn riot is the longest game ive played with out being either fighting for survival or pretending two pawns for a piece is alright!

Of course, this is not always a reliable way to win - some engines are stronger then others....

Game 4000680

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
Capablanca: In order to improve your game, you must study the endgame before everything else, for whereas the the endings can be studied and mastered by themselves, the middle game and the opening must be studied in relation to the endgame.

i have thought about this for sometime and yet it eludes me. what is the great one trying to say other than ...[text shortened]... ards in advance Robbie, son of a thousand opening traps, usually placed there by his opponents.

Although I've heard this idea before, I don't really have any experience with this concept - And the other posters have explained the idea far better than I ever could.

But I do have one bit of information that I can add. Capablanca's quote is from the introductory paragraph of Chapter 1 in his book Last Lectures. Later in that chapter, he gives several examples to support his idea. If you can get your hands on a copy of the book (borrow from a friend, etc. It's out of print.), you might enjoy the examples straight from the man himself. 😏

I know this is off subject but some of my best games against engines (when I know from the start I am playing one) have started with this modest setup.

1.d3 2.Nf3 3.Nbd2 4.e4 5.Be2 6.0-0 7.c3 8.Qc2 9.Re1
with a slow kingside attack building up.
(sometimes Bf1 and g3, sometimes Nf1 and Ng3, sometimes even h3 and g4.

I've noticed the King's Indian Defense formations can give black good attacking chances, IF you can get out of book early without making serious concessions.

Originally posted by Mad Rook
Although I've heard this idea before, I don't really have any experience with this concept - And the other posters have explained the idea far better than I ever could.

But I do have one bit of information that I can add. Capablanca's quote is from the introductory paragraph of Chapter 1 in his book Last Lectures. Later in that chapter, he gives s ...[text shortened]... nd, etc. It's out of print.), you might enjoy the examples straight from the man himself. 😏

hi it sounds quite good rook, is it very high brow or could a simple country lad like tomtom understand it?

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
hi it sounds quite good rook, is it very high brow or could a simple country lad like tomtom understand it?

Sorry, I won't be a party to that little jab at tomtom. 😉

But the three examples don't look very complicated. In fact, I just noticed that one of them is the exact example that paulbuchmanfromfics gave for the Ruy Lopez Exchange Variation. The only difference is that Capa added the moves 6.QxP QxQ 7.KtxQ (descriptive notation left as-is for nostalgic effect), then he removed all the pieces and ended with the same pawn structure that Paul did.

Originally posted by Mad Rook
Sorry, I won't be a party to that little jab at tomtom. 😉

But the three examples don't look very complicated. In fact, I just noticed that one of them is the exact example that paulbuchmanfromfics gave for the Ruy Lopez Exchange Variation. The only difference is that Capa added the moves 6.QxP QxQ 7.KtxQ (descriptive notation left as-is for nostalgic effect), then he removed all the pieces and ended with the same pawn structure that Paul did.

I don't actually have that book !!! It seems as though Capa and I both know an instructive ending when we see it. 🙂 To be fair, Robbie did mention the Ruy Exchange in the first post.

Originally posted by paulbuchmanfromfics
I don't actually have that book !!! It seems as though Capa and I both know an instructive ending when we see it. 🙂 To be fair, Robbie did mention the Ruy Exchange in the first post.

i can get the book from amazon.co.uk for £175.00, or $25 form the US of A, plus $12.00 postage, which at today's exchange rate makes a saving of at least, i dunno £150.00

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
i can get the book from amazon.co.uk for £175.00, or $25 form the US of A, plus $12.00 postage, which at today's exchange rate makes a saving of at least, i dunno £150.00

Well, it's a fairly small and thin book, and I think it's fairly basic. (A set of basic lectures given by Capa). So you might be disappointed if you spend any significant amount of money on it.

Edit - I've seen hardcover copies go for $20 to $40 or so on ebay, depending on condition. Softcover copies are more common, and therefore cheaper. (My copy is a yellowed, trashed out softcover copy that I didn't pay much for.)

When you master the endgames, middlegames can sometimes be like these endgames just with additional pieces. Chess is pattern recognition, the basic patterns are much easier to learn with little pieces on the board, thus in endings. So start with endings to see the basic patterns, than steadily add pieces.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
Capablanca: In order to improve your game, you must study the endgame before everything else, for whereas the the endings can be studied and mastered by themselves, the middle game and the opening must be studied in relation to the endgame.

i have thought about this for sometime and yet it eludes me. what is the great one trying to say other than ...[text shortened]... ards in advance Robbie, son of a thousand opening traps, usually placed there by his opponents.

Mark Dvoretsky's Endgame Manual, 2nd edition 2004.

And soon (three years an countin my trustee feer) ye 'll awsk everbody "hey gi’e us your hand lassie, I’m a mon o’ few wurds", that is😵

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
Capablanca: In order to improve your game, you must study the endgame before everything else, for whereas the the endings can be studied and mastered by themselves, the middle game and the opening must be studied in relation to the endgame.

i have thought about this for sometime and yet it eludes me. what is the great one trying to say other than ...[text shortened]... ards in advance Robbie, son of a thousand opening traps, usually placed there by his opponents.

Capablanca here adfirms the superiority of strategy above evrything else. Studying tha endgame allows people to understand better the game beacuse you understand the consequences of moves previously made. Doubled pawns, bishops and knight, evrything can be a strenght or a weakness but it's in the endgame where you learn the difference.

Originally posted by black beetle
Mark Dvoretsky's Endgame Manual, 2nd edition 2004.

And soon (three years an countin my trustee feer) ye 'll awsk everbody "hey gi’e us your hand lassie, I’m a mon o’ few wurds", that is😵

''geez yer hawn, no way hozey'', geez yer mark dvoretsky book, i um a mon on a mission lassie! and can yeh throw in a statue of Alexander bangiev cause i heard they made him a saint!

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
''geez yer hawn, no way hozey'', geez yer mark dvoretsky book, i um a mon on a mission lassie! and can yeh throw in a statue of Alexander bangiev cause i heard they made him a saint!

To be frank I never messed with Bangiev although the idea of key/ corresponding squares arises typically at the endgame; and regarding a main strategical approach I prefer good ole Suba.

But, in order to respond to our initial question, Capa knew that the endgame is by far essential for in this phase the pieces and the pawns they display their full potential whilst the ability for concrete calculation/ evaluation and planning is crucial; so once you make it to the endgame you have to play it like a machine, and Dvoretsky is simply the best endgame trainer today -period.

And if you refrain from Irn Bru for a week or two you may happily get the change to enjoy Dvoretsky coz his Manual costs only $30 US -and your precious time, that is. Buy it not and be prepared to enter the Gates of Hell and walk through them charriots of fire which they are full of them dark angels; your Horsies will drive loco and your Jokers will become fool and your Rooks will certainly fall whilst your soldiers will finally be perished and your Queeny will sink into the dark lake of lust of the enemy King, which at last he 'll behead you oh ye unbeliever, that is😵

Originally posted by black beetle
To be frank I never messed with Bangiev although the idea of key/ corresponding squares arises typically at the endgame; and regarding a main strategical approach I prefer good ole Suba.

But, in order to respond to our initial question, Capa knew that the endgame is by far essential for in this phase the pieces and the pawns they display their full p ...[text shortened]... ark lake of lust of the enemy King, which at last he 'll behead you oh ye unbeliever, that is😵

lol, i heard that its actually very high brow, you know for dudes rated around 2000, not little ol tweety pie village peasants like me who manage to scrape through to the endgame hoping that somehow a passed pawn will be created that i can push whilst supping my irn bru and eating a cold Gregs cheese a onion pasty. i have to admit beetle dude that i love it when the board is free of all that clutter, i love the 'simplification', and the lack of complication, of concrete plans and employable techniques, it is kind of free of the uncertainty of the middle game when one can so easily stray and get lost in the complications, although redemption from mistake is possible, perhaps not so in the end game, the importance of squares rather than pieces!