Coaching Zone at East Devon Congress 2026

Thanks to all those who attended, shared games, contributed comments and heckled; I hope you got something out of taking part.

LINK to Lichess study for Saturday game analysis: https://lichess.org/study/6WyVNXpv/

LINK to Lichess study for Sunday game analysis: https://lichess.org/study/QIirDybT

Short talks

Not all the talks actually happened but here are the intended slides; the slides were designed to support a talk and not to stand alone.

The trebuchet

In an all-parent encounter last week, the players stumbled upon this position, known as the Trebuchet. A trebuchet is a big wooden catapult, and its connection with this position is not known, except that it may catapult a player from joy to despair…

Normally, it’s an advantage for it to be your turn so you can get on with your plan, but in this position, whoever has to move next, loses! Can you see how?

The situation of an unhappy forced move is called Zugzwang; it’s not ever so common but more unusual is this situation where BOTH sides are in Zugzwang.

P.S. Interested in this sort of thing? Here are some more:
http://exeterchessclub.org.uk/content/simplest-mutual-full-point-zugzwangs

Who would win in a fight between a lion and a bear? (endgame fortresses)

My young colleague Leif enjoys endgames, and has an endless curiosity about unbalanced endgames. So he asks:
can you win with three pawns against a Bishop?
how about a Knight?
what about two Knights?

A pattern we kept running into was:
united pawns on their start squares don’t win against a piece (a)
united and *advanced* pawns win against a piece (b)
but
there are some special cases where the side with the piece can set up a blockade or fortressagainst advanced pawns (c)



So it’s less like that famous Internet question
who would win in a fight between a lion and a bear?
but
who would win in a fight between a fox and a hedgehog?

Anyhow, we ended up looking at a few fortresses, some I knew, some I had
to look up, and some I found out more about.

There are cases where a lone King can be a ‘toad in a stone’, wedged in and impossible to shift.

The Japanese might say a ‘bear in the hole’… Notice that these cases
are all in the corner of the board. Edges and corners are friends of the defending side.

With a pawn to help, the King can resist near a corner without being in
it:

It’s perfectly possible to draw when you are the exchange behind, if you
can keep out the enemy King. That’s another theme: keeping out the
attacking King.

The mighty Queen can be kept at bay, as long as the attacking King can’t
get in:

We played around with variations on that last fortress, and then looked
it up. It’s sort of interesting: if the pawn is advanced, the Queen can
get behind your defences and you lose, but if the pawn is advanced and
on the edge, you are able to hold again.

To break down the defence, you have to use zugzwang to make the Rook
abandon the King.

The same ideas occur in the ‘simple’ Q vs R endgame, which six-times US
champion GM Walter Browne failed to win against a computer in the 1970s,
before looking up the right technique… Try it against your own
computer!

Fortresses in practice

Here’s one from a game I had a year or two ago: I got through, but I
think I shouldn’t have been allowed to.

A couple of well-known ones at GM level: a great swindle by Zsuzsa
Polgar:

Another sad tale of the wrong Rook’s Pawn!

And a spectacular save:

P.S. Foxes are said to eat hedgehogs by rolling them into water, when the hedgehog will unroll to swim, and loses its life.

Jokes

I usually have about my person some positions to amuse young players at the end of an evening.

Here are some of my favourites:

Problems
Hints
Solutions

Problems.

White to play and…

1. Mate in half a move (?)

2. Mate in 6 (Halumbirek)

3. Mate in 2 (?)

The board is the right way around — those are eight pawns ready to promote!

4. Mate Black without taking a pawn (Brown)

5. Mate in 2 (Loyd)

6. Mate in…14!

Hints.

1. Is there a move in chess that you make in two halves?

2. Seriously, if you can’t solve this one, you should give up chess!

3. Two piece moves will give mate — but which piece do you move first?

4. A puzzle inspired by the Iron Cage of Tamerlane.

5. A puzzle called ‘Organ Pipes’: imagine it’s Black to move?

6. With the White King on g6, and Black to move…

Solutions.

1. 1.Ra1-d1 completes Queen’s-side castling.

2. All moves are forced: 1. d4 b5 2. d5 b4 3. axb4 a3 4. b5 a2 5. b6 a1=Q 6. b7# 1-0

3. 1. Nc6! and now e.g. 1…a1=Q 2. Ba6# by discovered check.

Also:
(1… f1=Q 2. Bf5#)
(1… e1=Q 2. Be6#)
(1… d1=Q 2. Bd7#)
(1… b1=Q 2. Bb7#)
(1… c1=Q 2. Be6#)
(1… f1=Q 2. Bf5#)
(1… g1=Q 2. Bg4#)
(1… h1=Q+ 2. Bh3#)

4. 1. Nec6+ dxc6 2. dxe3+ fxe3 3. Rh4+ Be4 4. Rhxe4+ dxe4 5. Be5+ dxe5 6. Rxd8+
Nd5+ 7. Rxd5+ cxd5 8. Nc6# 1-0

5. 1. Qa5 Bb7 2. Nf5# or…

(1… Bd7 2. Qd5#)
(1… Be6 2. Qe5#)
(1… Bf5 2. Nxf5#)
(1… Rd6 2. Qxb4#)
(1… Rd5 2. Qxd5#)
(1… Re5 2. Qxe5#)
(1… Bc5 2. Qa1#)
(1… Bb7 2. Nf5#)

6. 1. Kg7 Qh3 2. Kf8 Qh4 (2… h4 3. Kg7 Ne5 4. Nxe5#) 3. Ke7 Qh3 4. Kd8 Qh4
5. Kc7 Qh3 6. Kc8 Qh4 7. Kd8 Qh3 8. Ke7 Qh4 9. Kf8 Qh3 10. Kg7 Qh4 11. Kg6 Qh3
12. Kxg5 Qh4+ 13. Kxh4 Nc3 14. Nd4# 1-0

Rook and Pawn endgames strike back 2014

I’ve done more than one session on this topic in the past, so the
examples are all already on the website, but some pointers for newcomers
might be helpful:

A. Many Rook and Pawns endgames can be judged as win or drawn at a
glance, some are more critical. Some basic cases with one side a pawn
up have been worked out and must be learned:

1. Philidor’s position shows how to draw when your King has control of
the Queening square.

2. Lucena’s positions shows how to win when the defending King does not
have control of the Queening square.

3. With the defending King distant, you can draw against an advanced a-pawn.

4. If you know the basic positions, you can use them to guide your play,
combined with a bit of general endgame science:

a. Regis-Walker shows White a pawn down but drawing without trouble when
focussed on swapping pawns and reducing to Philidor’s position.

b. Smyslov-Botvinnik is tough, but we know from (3) that an a-pawn may
not be enough, and indeed an extra a- and g-pawn may not be enough.
What you need to go with an a-pawn is an f-pawn. Euwe’s analysis shows
that Black can wangle a position with locked f-pawns, win the f-pawn,
and call House.

B. There are some recurring tactics in Rook endgames:

1. Skewering the defending Rook (examples: (a) Lasker’s study, and (b)
the case with a- and f-pawns)

2. Stalemate (Bernstein-Smyslov)

C. General endgame principles can be seen in classic endgames by
Capablanca and Tartakower:

1. Attacking weaknesses
2. Rook on the seventh
3. Probing and stretching defences across the whole board
4. Limiting counterplay

See, in particular, Capa’s games against Kreymbourg, Janowski and Kupchik
[LINK]

Could you take on one of those endgames against another member of the
club, or against your computer, and get the right result?

Endgame study

Two things to think about today: a study by Dierdle and a game by Capa. We did each as an exercise, trying to work out the best moves for each side.



Endgame workout

Endgames are worth taking seriously – you can get extra points and
half-points by improving your endgame play.
Some endgames turn up rather often, certainly more often than some
of the odd bits of opening theory we end up looking at sometimes.

There are bits of theory to know, but as always the thing is to test
your understanding and practise.

The things you need to know are widely available, not least from our
website, so I won’t trot through it all, just give some examples.

Endgame Theory: PRQNB

Here’s a basic K+P endgame, where you should know enough to win it
for White.

And here’s a basic R+P endgame – same again.

There are a couple of essential positions for each type of ending: PRNBQ…

As you gain more experience, you can add to your range of ‘solved’ positions.

See also:
http://exeterchessclub.org.uk/content/queen-against-pawn
http://exeterchessclub.org.uk/content/rook-endings-theory
http://exeterchessclub.org.uk/content/bishop-endgames
http://exeterchessclub.org.uk/content/double-bishop-endgames

Endgame Tactics: PRQNB

Rooks and Queens lend themselves to tactical shots.  Here are a
few:

It’s not easy to be as definitive about essential tactical knowledge; each peculiar position may harbour a new trick, or a new spin on an old one.

Endgame studies

These are pure tactics, always good for sharpening your awareness of tactical possibilities.

One of the most famous, and most instructive, is this one:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saavedra_position#History

And another, showing the wonderful co-operation between Queen and Knight:

Endgame Strategy: PRQNB

There are some general endgame principles which you should know:

3 principles (Fine)

  1. Without pawns, you must be at least a Rook ahead in order to force mate (exceptions: R+R wins against two minor pieces; four minor pieces win against a Queen)
    If you are two or more Pawns ahead the win should be routine by advancing the Pawns
    With only one Pawn advantage, you will win if you can use it to gain more material – it is not usually enough just to advance the Pawn. Often one Pawn advantage is thought to be a theoretical draw, although the practical difficulties may be very great. Winning by the advance of the Pawn may be won because it allows entry with the King, or causes distraction from one vulnerable side, or allows simplification into a known won ending.

15 general laws (Fine again)

  1. Doubled, isolated and blockaded pawns are weak: avoid them!
    Passed pawns should be advanced as rapidly as possible.
    If you are one or two pawns ahead, exchange pieces but not pawns.
    If you are one or two pawns behind, exchange pawns but not pieces.
    If you have an advantage, leave pawns on both sides of the board.
    If you are just one pawn ahead, in 99 cases out of 100 the game is drawn if there are pawns on only one side of the board.
    The easiest endings to win are pure King+Pawn endings.
    The easiest endings to draw are those with opposite coloured bishops.
    The King is a strong piece: use it!
    Do not place pawns on the colour of your bishop.
    Bishops are better than knights in all except blocked pawn positions
    Two bishops vs. B&N or N&N are usually a real advantage.
    Passed pawns should not be blockaded by the king: the only piece which is not much harmed by watching over an opponent’s pawn is the knight.
    A rook on the seventh rank is worth a pawn.
    Rooks belong behind passed pawns, of your own or the opponent.

See also:
http://exeterchessclub.org.uk/content/outside-passed-pawns

http://exeterchessclub.org.uk/content/two-weaknesses

With this under your belt, you should then work your way through
these examples:

http://exeterchessclub.org.uk/content/planning-endgame

Endgame Training: PRQNB

If you’ve got a computer or a chess-playing friend, then make use of
the opportunity.  I’ve just been working with an A-level
student who spent a lot of her time ‘revising’, ie. reading and
making notes, without seeing if she could get any of that
information out in the right format ie. doing past exam.
questions.  You must combine the two.

Your best single resource is the Iceland Endgame Challenge, which I
can offer you in PGN/CBV formats as well as a worksheet.  Don’t
agonise over the mate with B+N!

Everything in one book:
Yuri Averbakh, Chess Endgames: Essential Knowledge
Glenn Flear, Improve your Endgame Play *
Glenn Flear, Mastering the Endgame  *
Steve Giddins, 101 Endgame Tips
Ian Snape, Chess Endings Made Simple *
Paul Keres, Practical Chess Endings

Endgame theory:
[br style=”font-weight: bold;”]
Iceland Endgame Challenge *
Bruce Pandolfini, Pandolfini’s Endgame Course *
Jeremy Silman, Silman’s Complete Endgame Course *
Jonathan Speelman et al. Batsford Chess Endgames
Mark Dvoretzky, Dvoretzky’s Endgame Manual (also a ChessBase CD)
Karsten Mueller Chess Endgames 1: Basic Knowledge for Beginners (DVD)

Endgame tactics:
Irving Chernev, Practical Chess Endgames *
AA Troitzky, 360 Brilliant and instructive endgames *
John Nunn, Tactical Chess Endings*
GC van Perlo, Endgame Tactics
Endgame strategy:
MI Shereshevsky, Endgame Strategy
Endgame training:
Iceland Endgame Challenge: Bronze, Silver, Gold *
Bernd Rosen, Chess Endgame Training *

  • Additional positions for playing out:

Irving Chernev, Capablanca’s 60 Best Chess Endgames
Vasily Smyslov, Endgame Virtuoso
Karolyi & Alpin, Endgame Virtuoso: Anatoly Karpov
Giddins, Greatest Ever Chess Endgames

* including test exercises

How to play out exercises against a computer

1. Set ‘play against Fritz’ (ALT_A).
2. Set up a position (S)
3. Go!

Or:

1. Load a position from a database.
2. Click ‘Move Now’ (SPACEBAR)

I think this works in Fritz 5.32 and Fritz 11, although my copy of 5.32 is NBG at the moment.

The simplest mutual full-point Zugzwangs

Tim came to the club buzzing with these a few weeks ago.

[Skip intro]

A Zugzwang (German: forced move) is a chess position where, if it’s your turn to move, you lose, and if your opponent has the move, you might be OK.

Here’s an example from one of my own games: anything White does loses. We say, White is in Zugzwang.

Black can doodle happily with pawn moves, but any move of a white Pawn or piece loses at least a Pawn. White in fact threw himself on the sword with
43. c4 Ra3+ 44. Kh4 Be7+ 45. Kh5 Rh3#

The simplest Zugzwang position of all is known from the theory of Pawn endgames, with two Kings and one pawn trying to promote.

Black to move loses, but with White to move, it’s a draw.

A mutual or reciprocal Zugzwang is where neither side wants to move, and this position is indeed a mutual Zugzwang.

A mutual full-point Zugzwang (m-f-p-Z) is where both sides are in Zugzwang. In the Pawn endgame, White to move concedes a half-point to Black, but in a m-f-p-Z White loses a whole point. Here’s an example, known as the trebuchet:

All OK? So, these ideas have been around for dickey’s years, but what Tim was enthusiastic about was learning of positions with King each, a Pawn each and a single white piece (Bishop, Knight or Rook), which met the conditions of a m-f-p-Z. In fact, Tim was more mischievous than just to show us: he set us the task of finding the positions! I’ll give you an hour or so now to have a go yourselves…

(…)

Finished? How many did you get?

Solutions for 5-men positions:

Bishop:

A couple with a Knight:

and

Rook:

Nothing so simple exists for a Queen, but if you are prepared to add extra pawns, or an enemy Queen:

and

Here are solutions for 6-men positions with B N or R:

and

or

And if you have a Rook each, we have examples like:

More?

Full set:

http://www.k4it.de/egtb/zugzwang.php/

Article about 6-man tablebases:
http://ticc.uvt.nl/icga/acg12/proceedings/Contribution104.pdf

John Nunn got a bit interested in all these, and I refer you to his excellent books based on comprehensive computer endgame databases, recently updated since the emergence of the 6-man tablebases:

P.S.

Candidates for the Immortal zugzwang game include this classic from Nimzowitsch:

Samisch – Nimzovitch [E06] Carlsbad, 1923

And two he would rather forget:

Nimzovitch,A – Capablanca,J [B12] New York, 1927

Alekhin – Nimzowitsch [C17] San Remo, 1930

All are to be found in the Canon:

P.S. in 2026: a complicated mfpZ

https://chess.stackexchange.com/questions/9062/full-board-with-full-point-mutual-zugzwang

Noam Elkies chipping in tuppence there

as-Suli’s Diamond

From Wikipedia (English):

The problem called “as-Suli’s Diamond” went unsolved for over a thousand years. In shatranj, the “queen” (counsellor) is a very weak piece, able to move only a single square diagonally. It is also possible to win in shatranj by capturing all pieces except the king.

as-Suli commented:

“This ancient position is so difficult that there is no one in the world who would be able to solve it, except those I have taught to do so. I doubt whether anyone did this before me. This was said by al-Suli.”

David Hooper and Ken Whyld studied this problem in the mid-1980s but were unable to crack it. It was finally solved by Russian Grandmaster Yuri Averbakh.

as-Suli gave the first move of the solution (1.Kb4) which was the same as Averbakh’s solution; Averbakh was impressed with the obvious prowess of the Arab master.

Solution (from the German Wikipedia) is in the comments. You have 1000 years, starting NOW…
Continue reading →