Go back
won endgame

won endgame

Only Chess

1 edit
Vote Up
Vote Down

Hey chess-only forum,

some time ago in another thread (Thread 144521), I got the advice to exercise on endgame skills. There was other advice as well, but that's not the topic here.

Recently, I played out this game Game 9217300. At move 25, my opponent proposed a draw. I replied I needed some endgame practice and we continued. I was very proud that I could convert it into a win.

What do you think? Would you have continued? Was there an easier or more straightforward win for me or did my opponent make a mistake?

See the game below. I'm black.
Tvo

Vote Up
Vote Down

Good example of floating square--your two pawns that cannot be stopped.

Vote Up
Vote Down

What do you mean by 'floating square'? Is there also a general rule for two pawns against a king as there is for one pawn?

Vote Up
Vote Down

I'd been playing chess for years and had got to a pretty good standard before I discovered that isolated pawns could be immune from capture.
e.g

2 edits
Vote Up
1
Vote Down

Hi TV.

"There was other advice as well, but that's not the topic here...."

The whole game is the topic.


Instead of 7...Bxf3. Did you look at 7...Nxd4.


White's turn to turn down winning the d-pawn.
White played 16.g4. 16.Nxd5 wins the d-pawn (16...Qxd5 17.Bxh7+)
and White now has all kinds of threats.

The Ending:
If White had read the board he would have noticed Black has the wrong Bishop for
the h-pawn. Something I never saw mentioned in the notes. So instead of the losing 36.Ne3....


Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by tvochess
What do you think? Would you have continued?
always continue minor piece endings.always!

unless you have a non chess related reason to stop the game

Vote Up
Vote Down

GP,

not sure if I thought of 7...Nxd4, but I won the pawn anyway a move later, didn't I (although just temporarily).

15. Nxd5 is indeed very dangerous. I got away lucky there.

Thanks for pointing out that having the wrong bishop is a draw.

tvo

Vote Up
Vote Down

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by tvochess
What do you mean by 'floating square'? Is there also a general rule for two pawns against a king as there is for one pawn?
I saw the term in Dvoretsky, but here's something Google turned up: http://chessskill.blogspot.com/2010/01/floating-square.html