Dead simple. Hem him to a corner using your rook covered by your king, then bring your king up two squares opposite him, and then pull your rook onto the back rank or file. Checkmate. Your king must be two squares away or you might run into stalemate. Play with it on a board and you'll see how easy it can be.
Yes it is, you need to use the opposition. The lone king will try to stay in the center, the attacker must advance their king towards the defender.
EXAMPLE: White attacking/black defending...white king on e4, black king on e6, white rook on a1. If it is white to move, they would play Ra6+! As the black king cannot move forward (as the white king is covering d5/e5/f5, this is known as the opposition, if you haven't heard of this before you should look it up right away!) he must move backwards....say to f7. White would then move his king to f5 (keeping the opposition and preparing to move the rook onto the 6th rank, thus forcing black further back). If black started to move to the other side of the board (towards the h file for example) white simply moves across as well. When the black king get's to the edge of the board and starts to come back across to the a file, white simply moves the rook down to check him, thus forcing him further towards the edge of the board where mate is inevitable. Hope that helps 🙂
here is an example in one of my games from about move 48/49, its not quite lone king vs king and rook but it illustrates the final position
Game 929520
Well, I am overwhelm by the number of responses and while I just wanted a yes or no and if yes trying to work it out myself, I appreciate your help and yes I should start reading more books about endgames, as I loose a lot of games when I am sure a more skilled person would win, the difference is I suppose between the 1650 and above and me. But as first posting, I certainely appreciate that this forum is working. Tx again.
Originally posted by soulbyIt's possible if your opponent plays really dumb. Practically, it's not.
i thought it was possible to mate with just two knights, although its supposed to be very difficult and in most cases it would be a draw
Consider a Black King on h3, Black Knights on d4 and h5, while the White King is on g1. 1. ... Nf3ch 2. Kh1 and Ng3 is mate.
I can't foresee a situation in which you'd have three knights against a king and I haven't looked at it, but it should be easier.
Yes, to checkmate with only two Knights, your opponent would have to play very badly, by moving his King into a corner (I don't believe it's possible to "force" a King into a corner using only two knights).
However, Capablanca makes an interesting point in his "Primer of Chess".
Consider the following position:
W: Kb6 Nd6 Nh4
B: Ka8 Ph5
White wins with or without the move...thus:
1) Ng6 h4
2) Ne7 h3
3) Nc6 h2
4) Nb5 h1=Q
5) Nc7 mate
Capablanca points out that white with the two Knights can only stalemate the King, unless Black has a pawn which can (also) be moved.
Set this position up and play it...it's pretty interesting. There are probably a lot of strong chess programs which would not be able to find mate in this setup...
Originally posted by TheBloopIt will be easier to follow if you post a fen:
Yes, to checkmate with only two Knights, your opponent would have to play very badly, by moving his King into a corner (I don't believe it's possible to "force" a King into a corner using only two knights).
However, Capablanca makes an interesting point in his "Primer of Chess".
Consider the following position:
W: Kb6 Nd6 Nh4
B: Ka8 Ph ...[text shortened]... robably a lot of strong chess programs which would not be able to find mate in this setup...