some of the endings are very interesting especially because the moves are not very natural there...we did not reach that position or similar positions very often and because of these we do not have the patterns...
funny how good players like Carlsen and Cheparonov play in any complicated middlegame...but how wrong they went in that "simple" ending...
maybe it is also related with their very high knowledge of a specific opening and of plans in that opening(as they played thousands of games in a specific line and they also studied it a lot)...look how kamsky got preatty easy some advantage with his "weaker" but somehow not so known openings
Originally posted by chesskid001I had this endgame milion times in OTB games.
I read through it, and while it certainly seems interesting, it just seems extremely impractical to spend the time learning it- correspondence is different of course, but for OTB, there is just too much important stuff to learn- The chances of this kind of ending coming up are probably quite slim.
Originally posted by Dragon FireI think that white can win and probably the queening pawn would be the h-pawn. But I can't quite put my finger on it...
Lets look at a position now with pawns on opposute wings.
[fen]8/8/2k5/8/1RP4P/8/3r4/7K[/fen]
[b]White to move.
I will not give you this answer now but can white win this and if not, why not? If white can win what should his plan be?
Should we move everything a single square to the left will this make a difference and if so why?[/b]
Originally posted by adam warlockSuppose I told you that this position is a draw (thanks maybe to that damn h pawn, amoung a few other things) but if you move everything 1 square to the left it is a win for white.
I think that white can win and probably the queening pawn would be the h-pawn. But I can't quite put my finger on it...
In these sort of endings the h pawn can be a disadvantage.
After Christmas I will tell you more unless someone gets here before me.
Originally posted by Dragon FireIn that case I would tell you that that's precisely the opposite of what I was thinking. But I'll try to analyse this better and see if I can work something out.
Suppose I told you that this position is a draw (thanks maybe to that damn h pawn, amoung a few other things) but if you move everything 1 square to the left it is a win for white.
In these sort of endings the h pawn can be a disadvantage.
After Christmas I will tell you more unless someone gets here before me.
Originally posted by jonrothwellOK! Now how about an assessment (anyone) of why the 1st is a draw and the 2nd a win.
I say it's a draw and if moved to the left a win.
Note - sorry dragonfire just seen that you have already said that!
What are the key elements that make this position one or the other with such a small change and how do we go about identifying these possibilities in our games and convert the loss to a draw in our games?
Whoever said that it is impractical to learn those rules because it never comes up has no idea how important it is to the game. Rooks end up on the board in an endgame more than any other piece! Doesn't it make sense to learn about the rook and endgames extensivly because of this? Learning rook endgames for me took my rating in a month from 1600 to 1760 easily.
I agree, I have never studied chess as I play merely for fun but I have been browsing through Alekhine's annotations of his own games and it is amazing how many times you read something like:
'exchanging into a won endgame' or 'leaves a difficult ending' etc. Yet to me in my ignorance the positions look full of life!
To a master, gaining a technically won endgame is as good as checkmate.
Apparently rook endgames appear in over 60% of all endgames.
How about another game as an example.
Keres v Sokolsky, 1947 reached the following position
Black to move
1. ... Ra8 (Keres suggests that 1. ... Kf6, 2. h4 ... Rh5 is the easiest way to draw);
2. h4 .. Ra1 (Keres correctly states that "after this inexact move black is lost" in his 1981 reprint of "Practical Chess Endings".
A correct assessment was given by Botvinnik who recommended 2. ... Rh8, 3. Rg5+ .. Kf6, 4. Kg4 .. Ra8 is now safely played as for example if there followed 5. h5 .. Ra1 is now safely playable as black has more space for the Rook to work. If 6. h6 .. Rg1+ (the only move to draw), 7. Rh4 (surprisingly anything else now loses for white) .. Rh1+, 8. Kg4 and now both RXh6 and Rg1 secure the draw.
3. h5 .. Rg1 (say, but other moves also lose);
4. Kh2 .. Ra1;
5. h6 .. Ra7 (too late does the rook come back);
6. Kg3 .. Rh7;
7. Rh4 .. Kg6;
8. Kg4 .. RXh6 (not the best defence);
9. RXR .. KXR;
10. Kf5 and white has converted to a simple won K & BP ending.
This example shows how easy it is to slip up. Usually the defending sides Rook must move behind the pawns but the time of that manouveur is critical as the defence must have adequate space to do its job.
Here is a position that occured after move 52. ... Rg6 in Game 4244304. Although the game is still in progress the analysis at this moment can have not further effect on the game although it may be best if you don't comment on it until the game ends.
Some of you will think white can simply play 53. Rb6+?? swopping off and winning and may wonder why I did not, therefore, move my rook off the 6th rank say by playing 52. ... Rf4?? In truth I could probably have played 52. ... Rf1 as to draw this type of ending the Rook needs to work from a distance giving checks from the side or switching behind at the approriate moment as I gave in the previous example but 52. ... Rf4?? which does not give check or move behind the pawns would probably lose after 53. Rb6 .. Ka7, 54. Kb5 .. Rf1 (is now too late), 55. Rd6 (say but other moves along the 6th rank are equally effective) .. Rb1+, 56. Kc6 and blacks checks have dried up, the white king has penetrated and the black king either driven back to the back rank or the Rooks pawn given up and the Bishops pawn queened.
It is illustrative why 52. ... Rg6 draws if white plays 53. Rb6+ for now 53. ... RXR;
54. PXR .. KXP and black has the opposition in this very basic ending. White can make no progress and the BP cannot be queened. For example
55. c5+ .. Kc6;
56. Kc4 .. Kc7;
57. Kd5 .. Kd7 (keeping the opposition. Other moves lose, e.g. 57. .. Kb7, 58. Kd6 .. Kc8, 59. Kc6 (now white has the opposition) .. Kd8, 60. Kb7 and the BP will Queen);
58. c6 .. Kc8;
59. Kd6 .. Kd8 (Kb8 obviously loses);
60. c6+ .. c8;
61. Kc6=
All these moves are elementary. I did not need to look at them but knew as soon as I got the opposition in a K vs K & P ending of this type that I had a forced draw, so when you know the principles it is not difficult to see.
In my efforts to draw my Game 4244304 I have come to a critical position after whites 57th move, Kc6 -
I feel I have now got to a stage where a single slip could cost black the game and the need for accuracy is greater than ever.
I felt it might be useful to share with you my research and thoughts on what to do next.
Once agian please no comments from you on my in progress game.
I showed you earlier how the game Bondarevsky v Keres was drawn by the inferior side. In my game I have virtually reached this position but not quite so it was useful to do more research on what positions lost and which drew.
The first position of interest is
I have reversed the sides from the example I have which is by I Maizelis, 1939
In this position the stronger side wins no matter who has the move.
1. ... Rh8;
2. Rd8 .. Rh7+ (Rh3 is no improvement);
3. Kc8 .. KXP;
4. Rd6+ .. (all other moves draw, e.g. 4. c6 .. Kb6; 5. Rd7 .. Rh8+; 6. Rd8 .. RXR+; 7. KXR .. KXP+. If 5. c7 .. RXP=);
4. ... Kb5;
5. c6 .. Kc5;
6. Rg6 .. Kb6;
7. c7+ .. Ka7;
8. Rc6 .. Rh8+;
9. Kd7 .. Rh7+;
10. Ke6 .. Rh6+;
11. Kd5 .. Rh5+;
12. Ke4 .. Rh4+;
and the rest is simply a matter of technique.
So this sort of K and BP is a loss as the RP can be given up and a won ending obtained.