Recent B&N mate at GM level.

This is from the latest Grand Prix tournament in Jermuk. Alekseev proved he has read his endgame books against Cheparinov in a knight and bishop vs king ending.

Everybody wonders "does it really come up?", so I thought I might share this.

Thank you for sharing 🙂

Hi good post

I have taken position from when the last pawn was taken.
(to save the lads from going through the whole game).
And added the mate.

Black tries to get to the corner NOT controlled by the Bishop.
White digs him out and forces him to h8.

Black resigned after 16.Bd8 (move 89 in the full game).

I've never had to do it, even in blitz - but there again if i'm ever
in an ending then something has gone wrong.

I've had KNB three times in blitz so far (with up to 25s time left), screwed up all of them. the closest one got flagged one move to mate.

also had one Q vs. R mate with 18s left, panicked and totally screwed it up.

B+N, that's something I could do with two minutes on the clock (OTB) when I had never actually seen how it should be done. 😛

I found the endgame Navara vs. Cheparinov much more impressive, complete with a Q vs. R in the end. Let's see, found it, check it out:

Jeremy Silman, in his "Complete endgame course" states that B+N engame mating patern is not necessary to learn and completely excluded it from the book. Do you guys agree that it is not worthwile to learn? I think that there comes a time (a level, say 2100?) when you will have to know it, even if just for the sake of your chess knowledge

here's another interesting endgame from the same tournament. it's a "kind of" Q vs R ending by Ivanchuk and Kamsky.

the ending is said to be equal until the last move. the resulting position is actually winning for black but it's draw by the 50 move rule. I guess this was the first GM game I ever saw that ended with that rule.

Originally posted by orion25
Jeremy Silman, in his "Complete endgame course" states that B+N engame mating patern is not necessary to learn and completely excluded it from the book. Do you guys agree that it is not worthwile to learn? I think that there comes a time (a level, say 2100?) when you will have to know it, even if just for the sake of your chess knowledge

I guess its made a bit easier with the opponents king not starting in the centre but its still impressive OTB.

I have done it once on rhp after being challenged to by someone I know. I still made a mistake even with plenty of time, wikipedia's guide and the use of an analyze board function. Im pretty sure I couldnt do it in Blitz.

Originally posted by orion25
Jeremy Silman, in his "Complete endgame course" states that B+N engame mating patern is not necessary to learn and completely excluded it from the book. Do you guys agree that it is not worthwile to learn?

Originally posted by JonathanB of London
Coincidentally a club player mating with B+N appears on our blog today.

http://streathambrixtonchess.blogspot.com/2009/08/good-things-come-to-those-who-wait.html

It may not be 'necessary' to learn the way to mate but then what is?


I'm wondering, though, about calling a book a "complete" course if it omits this fundamental ending. The rest of the book may be fabulous but it's hardly complete is it?

I've had to win the Q v R ending twice OTB and managed to do it
due to opponent errors.

You should try it v a computer, that is hard.

RE; Should one 'know' the B & N ending.

If you know which corner you chase the King to then any average
player should be able to do this OTB without much effort.
Again try it v a box.

I know and have seen strong players mess this up but that it because
they tried to mate the King in the wrong corner.
(it can be done in the wrong corner but needs an error by the lone King player)

If you have a limited time to study I'd advise invest it in Rook endings.
They are the most common and have many subtle and cute tricks
that is essential knowledge.

I recall a game (on chessgames.com) of a GM totally messing up the B/N endgame (it ended as a draw). Who can find it?

http://www.chessgames.com/perl/chessgame?gid=1533865

Epishin, yes! Is it true that he has messed up on more than one occasion?