11 Sep 04
The boundary between opening and middle game is quite clear. A game goes from opening to middle game when the first of the players leaves the standard opening book.
What would you say is the boundary between middle game and end game (if there is a clean cut boundary)? For me it is when either:
1. Has gained a material advantage and starts going for exchanges.
2. Has developed what appears to be a superior position and thinks about a mating combination.
Of course, in clause number 2, if the person makes a mistake in going for mate, tables could turn and go back to the middle game again. Is my definition wrong? Is it possible to go from end game back to middle game?
Lau
11 Sep 04
I think the true indication of entering an endgame is when you have to use your king as an attacking unit. For example, right now I am playing an endgame with 3 minor peices vs 3 minor peices and a lot of pawns. Although we both still have a lot on the board, we are both using our kings right now.
12 Sep 04
Originally posted by lucifershammer
Personally, I think the endgame begins when the concern of one or both players shifts towards queening a pawn, or preventing the queening of a pawn. (Eventually working for mate, of course).
Or in some rare circumstances, going for a promote of another piece (most likely a knight). 😀
Can't see any situation where someone would promote to a rook rather than a queen, unless the player is sure of a win with a rook and wants to look cool. 😉
12 Sep 04
Originally posted by RabellaExample of promoting knight for checkmate:
When promoting to queen would cause stalemate..
7n/5Ppk/1p5p/p2B3P/P7/5P2/6P1/4K3 w KQ - 0 1
1. f8=N# 1-0
Example of promoting a rook to avoid stalemate:
8/k1P5/8/PK5p/7P/8/8/8 w - - 0 1
1. c8=R (1. c8=Q 1/2-1/2) 1...Kb7 2.Rc6 Ka7 3.a6 Ka8 4.Kb6 Kb8 5.a7+ Ka8 6.Rc8# 1-0
12 Sep 04
Originally posted by fawcr01Has there ever been a game on record where a player promoted to a bishop? (I mean because they had to, not just to show off.)
[b]Example of promoting knight for checkmate:
7n/5Ppk/1p5p/p2B3P/P7/5P2/6P1/4K3 w KQ - 0 1
1. f8=N# 1-0
Example of promoting a rook to avoid stalemate:
8/k1P5/8/PK5p/7P/8/8/8 w - - 0 1
1. c8=R (1. c8=Q 1/2-1/2) 1...Kb7 2.Rc6 Ka7 3.a6 Ka8 4.Kb6 Kb8 5.a7+ Ka8 6.Rc8# 1-0
[/b]
12 Sep 04
Originally posted by Natural Scienceyes, several cases. Here is one:
Has there ever been a game on record where a player promoted to a bishop? (I mean because they had to, not just to show off.)
Chan - Depasquale
Laoag city 1985
White: Kh3 Rd4 e5 f4 h4
Black: Kf7 Ne3 d3 e6 f5 g3 h5
Black to move.
The game went on
1. ... g2!
2.Rxd3 g1B!!!!
if black had played g1Q, then white would have given check on d7 and followed the king with checks until he had to take which would mean stalemate
3.Rd7+ Ke8 4.Rh7 Nd5 5.Rh8+? (better was 5 Kg3 Be3 but then 6.Rxh5 Bxf4+ would win too).
5 ... Kf7 6.Kg3 Be3 7.Rxh5 Bxf4+ 8.Kf3 Kg7! wins the rook 9.Kf2 Bh6
12 Sep 04
Originally posted by lauseyI must disagree.By your definiton,it would be impossible to improve on existing opening theory 😲🙄
[b]
The boundary between opening and middle game is quite clear. A game goes from opening to middle game when the first of the players leaves the standard opening book.
I'm afraid it's not that simple.There are no clear boundaries between the 3 stages of the game.Opening flows into middlegame,middlegame flows into endgame.
12 Sep 04
Originally posted by mateuloseLook at this game: http://www.chessgames.com/perl/chessgame?gid=1124533
I think the true indication of entering an endgame is when you have to use your king as an attacking unit. For example, right now I am playing an endgame with 3 minor peices vs 3 minor peices and a lot of pawns. Although we both still have a lot on the board, we are both using our kings right now.
13 Sep 04
Originally posted by SirLoseALot
I must disagree.By your definiton,it would be impossible to improve on existing opening theory 😲🙄
I'm afraid it's not that simple.There are no clear boundaries between the 3 stages of the game.Opening flows into middlegame,middlegame flows into endgame.
Ahhh, ok then, so basically it really depends on what the current theory is, and what knowledge the opponents/observers possess of the game?
14 Sep 04
Originally posted by lauseySort of,yes.I'll try to explain.Take the opening for example,suppose my 4th move isn't in any book or database.Would you say we're out of the opening?Of course not!We have only left the known paths.
Ahhh, ok then, so basically it really depends on what the current theory is, and what knowledge the opponents/observers possess of the game?
Basically,the opening is over when all pieces have been developed.But with current theory,that's not very accurate.In the sicilian(and some other openings as well,I'm sure),there are openinglines that go as deep as 25 moves!I,not knowing the theory,would call it a middlegame.
Same with the endgame.When does the middlegame become an endgame?Hard to say.Is it when both sides have fewer pieces left than 5?Or 4?Or 3?Nobody knows,there is no clear-cut boundary.Even GM's don't agree,one says endgame,the other says middlegame.
In the end,it doesn't matter what stage of the game you're in.You always need to find good moves 😉
