Could black hold?

Could black hold after my 24.Re1?I can't figure it out.
In the endgame my patzer status increases 😛



When analysing the game I noticed I missed the gamewinning 23.Rbd1
I'm also not certain about 14.d5.Maybe 14.Rfd1,bringing the rook into the game at once,is better?

"When analysing the game I noticed I missed the gamewinning 23.Rbd1"

Didn't you analyse the game on the 23rd move?

Originally posted by heinzkat
"When analysing the game I noticed I missed the gamewinning 23.Rbd1"

Didn't you analyse the game on the 23rd move?

Apparently not.I probably had my moves worked out focussing on the pawns and missed his error.
Sadly not uncommon for me 😳

When going over it afterwards it hit me right away and I had to see the moves three times before I could believe it was true.Funny how the mind works.

I would say black can easily "keep" the endgame by 24...Ra8 but don't take my word for it

Originally posted by heinzkat
I would say black can easily "keep" the endgame by 24...Ra8 but don't take my word for it

But then 25.Rxc4
You think the extra pawn is meaningless?
Or perhaps black can win it?

Originally posted by heinzkat
I would say black can easily "keep" the endgame by 24...Ra8 but don't take my word for it

I agree with this analysis, after fiddling with it a bit. Black needs to play to draw, since the salient features (more remote passed pawn, more advanced passed pawn, slightly better development) all favor white. Blockading the pawn with the idea of applying pressure to it sounds like the best way. Attempting to hold on to material equality instead of seeking counterplay and stifling white's biggest threat would probably do more harm than good- as the game result tends to verify.

An interesting side note to share as I was studying this:

In Beliavsky and Mikhalchishin's "Winning Endgame Technique", they devote a chapter to rook endings with the same number of pawns on one side, and one side having a passed pawn on the other flank. They make the following observation:

"The Moscow chess player Kantorovich invented a very interesting statistical system to help evaluate this type of ending. The stronger side has the best winning chances with the knight's pawn, which he gives 0.7-0.8, i.e. from ten games one would score 7-8 points. The bishop's pawn is evaluated at 0.65, a centre pawn at 0.7, and a rook's pawn at around 0.6. It should be noted that these evaluations are averaged out, and the result of any concrete position depends in the first instance on the activity of the pieces."

An awesome book, and highly recommended.

Paul

Originally posted by Paul Leggett
I agree with this analysis, after fiddling with it a bit. Black needs to play to draw, since the salient features (more remote passed pawn, more advanced passed pawn, slightly better development) all favor white. Blockading the pawn with the idea of applying pressure to it sounds like the best way. Attempting to hold on to material equality instead o ...[text shortened]... nce on the activity of the pieces."

An awesome book, and highly recommended.

Paul

I'm not sure about the book itself, but this idea is well presented by Hans Berliner as
well, whom goes into a detailed system for such techniques.

Originally posted by Nowakowski
I'm not sure about the book itself, but this idea is well presented by Hans Berliner as
well, whom goes into a detailed system for such techniques.

Man, if I just landed on the same page as Hans Berliner, I have just hit the highwater mark of my chess development, so it's downhill from here!

Ok,so the idea is
-keep both rooks on
-block white's passed pawn giving up black's passed pawn
-try to kill white's
-if cannot kill it then at least white's forces should be tied to its defense so no progress can be made

I will continue trying to beat/draw myself with these ideas in mind

Thanks 🙂