Category Archives: Endgame

Bishop Endgames

Posted on by

Bishop endings are generally easier to win than rook endings
because there is no way for the defending side to exclude the
attacking King, and neither is there a perpetual check. But perhaps
because they are less common, they may be neglected in a player’s
study.

General Advice for bishop
endings

(1) The easiest endings to draw are those with opposite coloured
bishops.

  (2) Do not place pawns on the colour of your bishop.

  (3) BB vs. BN or NN are usually a real advantage.
In open positions the two bishops are murder: in most other
positions they are a real advantage.

  [See Double Bishop Endings.]
(4) In open or semi-open positions a lone bishop is usually
superior to a lone knight.
The knight is superior to the bishop in blocked positions or when
the bishop is hemmed in by pawns on the same colour squares as the
bishop.

K+B vs. K+P

Normally the bishop can keep an eye on the P from far enough away
to keep the draw in hand, even two Ps if the opposing K is not
close

K+B+P vs. K

A simple win unless it’s an a-/h-P when the lone K can blockade on
the colour square opposite to the B. Similarly, K+B vs. K+B+gP+hP
may be drawn for this reason if BxgP is allowed.

K+B vs. K+B+P

Often a draw unless the P is far advanced. The side with the P must
try to drive the B from covering the path of the P. This can
usually be done only if the Bs travel on the same colour squares –
bishops of opposite colours usually can set up immovable blockades
or threats of sacrifice – and even then, only if the Pawn is not a
central one and the defending K is not close.

K+N vs. K+B+P

The bishop can try to create zugzwang positions when the N must
move away, and although blockades are possible the ending is
promising. K+N vs. K+B+gP+hP may be drawn for the reason noted
above if NxgP is allowed.

K+B vs. K+N+P

The N+P have far more difficulty winning against the B, but again
on the wing the B may run out of squares and the K may be distant.

Key ideas in bishop
endings:

sacrifice to draw, running out of space at the edge, draw with
a-/h-pawns, draw with opposite coloured bishops, controlling the
diagonals leading to the queening square

 

space to dodge

-+-+k+-+
+-+p+-+-
-+-+j+-+
B-+-+-L-
-+-+-+-+
+-+-+-+-
-+-+-+-+
+-+-+-+-

The White King cannot control the bishop from here. 1 Bd8 Bf4, 2
Be7 Bc7, 3 Bd6! Ba4 holds.

  With both Kings distant it’s the same; with wKe8, Bke1
1.Bb4! wins (threat Be7) [thanks to Bart Robeyns for rescuing this
example].

no space at the edge

-+k+-+-+
Bp+-+-+-
-+-+-+-+
+-+-L-+-
-+-+-+-+
+-+-+-+-
-+-+-+-+
+-+-+j+-

1 Bb8 Bd4, 2 Bc7 Ba7, 3 Bb6! 1-0

 

draw with bishops of opposite colour

-+-+-+-+
+-+-+-+-
-+-+l+-+
+-K-B-+-
-+-PjP-+
+-+-+-+-
-+-+-+-+
+-+-+-+-

White cannot control the squares d5 or f5 and chase away the bishop
at the same time:

  1 Kd6 Bg8, 2 Ke7 and if later Kf6, …Bh7! when d5 is no
threat.

controlling diagonals

-+-+-+-+
+-+-+k+-
-+-+p+-+
+-L-+-+-
-+-+-+-+
+-B-+-+-
-+-+-+-+
+j+-+-+-

The short diagonal can be dominated by the White King.

1 Bf6 Kc2, 2 Be7 Be3 3 Bd6 Bg5, 4 Be5! and 5 Bf6

Studies

These comprise the selection given by John Littlewood in
Chess Coaching. Littlewood also gives an ABC for
Pawn, Knight, Rook and Queen endings.

-+-+-+-+
+-+-+-L-
-+-+-+-+
+pP-+-+-
-+-+-+-+
+-+-J-+-
-+-+-+k+
+-+-+-+-

128 BP
W to play wins

  The bishop is poorly placed. 1 c6! Be5; 2 b6
winning

-+-+-+-+
+-+-+-+-
-+-+-L-+
+pP-+-+-
-+-+-+-+
+-+-J-+-
-+-+-+K+
+-+-+-+-

129 BP
W to play draws against best defence

  Better bB position: 1 c6 Bd8! or 1 b6 Bd4! 2 b7
Be5

-+-+-+-+
+-+-+-+-
-+-+-+-+
+-+-Bx+-
-+-+-+x+
+k+-J-+-
-+-+-+-+
+-+-+-+-

130 BP
W to play draws

  The wK is just close enough to hold. 1 Kc2! f4; 2 Kd1
f3; 3 Ke1, f2+; 4 Kf1, Kf3; 5 Bd4, g3; 6 Bxf2,
gxf2 stalemate or 2…g3; 3 Ke1, g2; 4 Bxf4+! draws

-+-J-+-+
+-+-+k+-
-+-+p+-+
+-L-+-+-
-+-+-+-+
+-B-+-+-
-+-+-+-+
+-+-+-+-

131 B
W to play wins

  If Black can control e7 with the B, the pawn can never
advance without …Bxe7 drawing. White must drive off the B:
1 Bf6+ Kc8; 2 Be7, Bf2; 3 Bd6, Bh4; 4 Be5 (1…Kc7; 2 Be7, Bf2; 3
Bd6+!)

-+-+-+-+
+-+-+k+-
-+j+p+-+
+-L-+-+-
-+-+-+-+
+-B-+-+-
-+-+-+-+
+-+-+-+-

132 B
B to play draws
The bK is closer to the pawn, and can nip round to prevent 6
Bf6:
1…Kd5! 2 Bf6, Ke4! 3 Be7, Bf2; 4 Ba3, Bh4; 5 Bb2, Kf5!

-+-+-K-+
+-+-+p+-
-+-+j+-B
+-L-+-+-
-+-+-+-+
+-+-+-+-
-+-+-+-+
+-+-+-+-

133 B
W to play wins

  (check)

  1 Kg8! controlling the ‘short side’ and threatening 2
Bf8, Be3; 3 Ba3, Bh6; 4 Bb2 and 5 Bg7,
so 1…Kf5, but 2 Bf8, Be3; 3 Ba3, Bh6; 4 Bc1!

-+kB-+-+
+p+-+-+-
-+j+-+-+
+-+-+-+-
-+-+-+-+
+-+-+-+-
-+-+-+-L
+-+-+-+-

134 B
W to play wins

  (Centurini)

  Take a deep breath…

  If White’s bishop were on a7, 1 Bb8, Bg1; 2 Bg3, Ba7; 3
Bf2! wins
But 1 Bh4, Kb6! 2 Bf2+ Ka6 and wB can’t get to a7.
If the bB was on g3, 1 Bh4! Bh2; 2 Bf2 and 3 Ba7, 4 Bb8 wins.
It’s not quite zugzwang, since with Black to move 1…Bd6!
2 Be7, Bh2 holds (3 Bc5 isn’t possible here)
So, zugzwang would be on if one of the squares h2 or d6
were taken away from the bB.
1 Bh4, Kb5; 2 Bf2, Ka6; 3 Bf5! Bg3; 4 Be7, Kb5; 5 Bd8, Kc6; and now
6 Bh4! Bh2 when 7 Bf2, Bf4; 8 Ba7, Bh2; 9 Bb8, Ba7; 10 Bg3, Ba7; 11
Bf2! bingo!

-+-+k+-+
+-Jp+s+-
-+-+-+-+
+-+-+-+-
-+-+-+-+
+-+b+-+-
-+-+-+-+
+-+-+-+-

135 NB
W to play wins, B to play draws

  1 Ke7, Nd8; 2 Be4, Nf7; 3 Bf3, Nd8; 4 Bd5!
zugzwang
1… Nd6+; 2 Ke7, Nc8+! 3 Ke6, Nb6 draws
[This is a common drawing resource in Knight endings]

-+k+-+-+
+-+p+-+-
-+sJ-+-+
+-+-+-+-
-+-+-+-+
+-B-+-+-
-+-+-+-+
+-+-+-+-

136 NB
W to play wins, B to play draws

  1 Bb4+ Ke6; 2 Kc7, Kd5; 3 Ba3! zugzwang

  1…Ne7+ 2 Kd8 Nc6+ 3 Ke8, Ke6 draws

-+-+s+-B
+-+k+-+-
-+p+-+-+
+-J-+-+-
-+-+-+-+
+-+-+-+-
-+-+-+-+
+-+-+-+-

137 NB
W to play wins

  If the bK were on b5, 1 Bd4 would be an immediate
zugzwang, so

  1 Bc3! Kb6! 2 Ba5+! Kb5! 3 Bd8! (guarding f6) 3…Kc5; 4
Bg5, Kb5! (4…Kd5; 5 Be7 or 4…Kb6; 5 Be3+ Kb5; 6 Bd4!) 5 Bh4!
Kc5; 6 Bg3+ Kd5; 7 Bd4! Nd6; 8 c7 wins

-+-+-+-+
+-Kp+-+-
-+-+-+-+
+-+-+-+-
-+-N-+-L
+-+-+-+-
-+-+-+-+
+-+-+j+-

138 NB
W to play wins

  1 Nc6! Kf2; 2 Kd6 ( threat 3 Ne7, Bg3+; 4 Kc6)

  2…Bg3+! 3 Kc5! and now
3…Bc7? 4 Kb5! heading for b7
or 3…Bh4; 4 Kd5! with 5 Ke6 and 6 Ne7 winning

-+-+-+-+
+-+-K-+-
-+-+-P-+
+-+-+-+-
-+-+n+-+
+l+-+-+-
-+-+-+-+
+-J-+-+-

139 NB
W to play wins (Kosek)

1 Ng5! Bg8; 2 Nf7!! Kd2; 3 Kf8, Kh7; 4
Ng5 and now
4…Bg6; 5 Kg7, Be8; 6 Ne4+ Ke3; 7 Nd6, Kh5; 8 Kh6!
4…Bd3; 5 Ne6! Bg6 (5…Bf5 loses as above); 6 Nf4! Bb1; 7 Ke7,
Ba2; 8 Ne6 winning

l+-+-+-+
P-+-+-+-
nK-+-+-+
+-+-+-+-
-+-+-+-+
+-+-J-+-
-+-+-+-+
+-+-+-+-

140 NB
W to play wins (Horwitz)

1 Nc7, Bh1; 2 Ne6+ Ke5; 3 Nd8, Ba8! 4 Kc7,
Kd5! (idea 5 Kb8? Kd6! 6 Kxa8, Kc7! drawing)

5 Nb7! Ke6! (idea 6 Kb8, Kd7; 7 Kxa8,
Kc8! drawing)

6 Na5! Ke7; 7 Kc8! Ke8; 8 Nc4! Ke7; 9 Kb8, Kd8;
10 Nd6, Kd7; 11 Nb7! Kc6; 12 Kxa8, Kc7; 13 Nd6!
zugzwang

Example Bishop
Endings

Fischer – Taimanov #4 [B47]
Bishop Ending: B/N, 1971

1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 Qc7 5. Nc3 e6 6. g3 a6 7.
Bg2 Nf6 8. O-O Nxd4 9. Qxd4 Bc5 10. Bf4 d6 11. Qd2 h6 12. Rad1 e5
13. Be3 Bg4 14. Bxc5 dxc5 15. f3 Be6 16. f4 Rd8 17. Nd5 Bxd5 18.
exd5 e4 19. Rfe1 Rxd5 20. Rxe4+ Kd8 21. Qe2 Rxd1+ 22. Qxd1+ Qd7 23.
Qxd7+ Kxd7 24. Re5 b6 25. Bf1 a5 26. Bc4 Rf8 27. Kg2 Kd6 28. Kf3
Nd7 29. Re3 Nb8 30. Rd3+ Kc7 31. c3 Nc6 32. Re3 Kd6 33. a4 Ne7 34.
h3 Nc6 35. h4 h5 36. Rd3+ Kc7 37. Rd5 f5 38. Rd2 Rf6 39. Re2 Kd7
40. Re3 g6 41. Bb5 Rd6 42. Ke2 Kd8 43. Rd3 Kc7 44. Rxd6 Kxd6

 

-+-+-+-+
+-+-+-+-
-XsJ-+x+
XbX-+x+x
p+-+-P-P
+-P-+-P-
-P-+k+-+
+-+-+-+-

White has the classic advantage of Bishop against Knight with pawns
on both sides of the board. Black also has the disadvantage of
having his pawns advanced and fixed, with an entry point on the
Queen’s-side.

  45. Kd3 Ne7 46. Be8 Kd5 47. Bf7+ Kd6 48. Kc4 Kc6 49. Be8+
Kb7 50. Kb5 Nc8

 

-+s+b+-+
+j+-+-+-
-X-+-+x+
XkX-+x+x
p+-+-P-P
+-P-+-P-
-P-+-+-+
+-+-+-+-

Black is being stretched.

  51. Bc6+ Kc7 52. Bd5 Ne7 53. Bf7 Kb7 54. Bb3 Ka7 55. Bd1
Kb7 56. Bf3+ Kc7 57. Ka6 Nc8 58. Bd5 Ne7 59. Bc4 Nc6 60. Bf7 Ne7
61. Be8

 

-+-+b+-+
+-J-S-+-
kX-+-+x+
X-X-+x+x
p+-+-P-P
+-P-+-P-
-P-+-+-+
+-+-+-+-

zugzwang

  61… Kd8 62. Bxg6 Nxg6 63. Kxb6 Kd7 64. Kxc5 Ne7 65. b4
axb4 66. cxb4 Nc8 67. a5 Nd6 68. b5 Ne4+ 69. Kb6 Kc8 70. Kc6 Kb8
71. b6 1-0

 

-J-+-+-+
+-+-+-+-
-Pk+-+-+
P-+-+x+x
-+-+sP-P
+-+-+-P-
-+-+-+-+
+-+-+-+-

Walther – Fischer [B99] Bishop
Ending: OCB As Draw, 1960

1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 d6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 Nf6 5. Nc3 a6 6. Bg5 e6 7. f4
Be7 8. Qf3 Nbd7 9. O-O-O Qc7 10. Bd3 b5 11. Bxf6 Nxf6 12. Rhe1 Bb7
13. Kb1 Rc8 [13…b4] 14. g4 Nd7 15. g5 Nb6 16. f5 e5 17.
f6 gxf6 18. gxf6 Bf8 19. Nd5 Nxd5 20. exd5 Kd8 21. Nc6+ Bxc6 22.
dxc6 Qxc6 23. Be4 Qb6 24. Qh5 Kc7 25. Bf5 Rd8 26. Qxf7+ Kb8 27. Qe6
Qc7 28. Re3 Bh6 29. Rc3 Qb7 30. f7 Bg7 31. Rcd3 Bf8 32. Qxe5 dxe5
33. Rxd8+ Ka7 34. R1d7 h5 35. Rxb7+ Kxb7 36. c3 Kc7 37. Ra8
[37. Re8!] 37…Kd6 38. Rxa6+ Ke7 39. Re6+ Kxf7 40. Rxe5
b4 41. cxb4 Bxb4 42. h3 Kf6 43. Rb5 Bd6 44. Be4 Re8 45. Rf5+ Kg7
46. Bf3 Re1+ 47. Kc2 Rf1 48. Rd5 Rf2+ 49. Rd2 Rxd2+ 50. Kxd2

 

-+-+-+-+
+-+-+-J-
-+-L-+-+
+-+-+-+x
-+-+-+-+
+-+-+b+p
pP-K-+-+
+-+-+-+-

50… h4 51. Kd3 Kf6 52. Kc4 Ke7 53. Kb5 Kd7 54. a4 [54.
b4] 54… Kc7 55. b4 Kb8 56. a5 Ka7 57. Kc4 Bg3 58. b5 Bf2 59.
Be2 Be3 60. Kb3 Bd2 61. b6+ Kb7 62. Ka4 Kc6 63. Bb5+ Kc5 1/2-1/2

 

-+-+-+-+
+-+-+-+-
-P-+-+-+
PbJ-+-+-
k+-+-+-X
+-+-+-+p
-+-L-+-+
+-+-+-+-

Capablanca,Jose –
Janowsky,Dawid (NY 03) [D15] B ending: same colour, 1916

1. d4 Nf6 2. Nf3 d5 3. c4 c6 4. Nc3 dxc4 5. e3 Bg4 6. Bxc4 e6 7. h3
Bh5 8. O-O Be7 9. Qb3 Qb6 10. Ne5 Nbd7 11. Qxb6 axb6 12. Nxd7 Kxd7
13. Bd2 b5 14. Bd3 Bg6 15. Bxg6 hxg6 16. Rfc1 Ra6 17. a3 Rha8 18.
Na2 Nd5 19. Rab1 f5 20. Kf1 Ra4 21. Nc3 Rc4

 

t+-+-+-+
+x+jL-X-
-+x+x+x+
+x+s+x+-
-+tP-+-+
P-N-P-+p
-P-B-Pp+
+rR-+k+-

Concedes the exchange for some attack

  22. b3 Rxc3 23. Bxc3 Rxa3 24. Be1 Bf6 25. Ke2 e5 NEXT
DIAGRAM

 

-+-+-+-+
+x+j+-X-
-+x+-Lx+
+x+sXx+-
-+-P-+-+
Tp+-P-+p
-+-+kPp+
+rR-B-+-

Black’s pieces are placed as well as they can be, so now we see the
break. However, this may only serve in the long run to open lines
for the Rook.

  26. dxe5 Bxe5 27. f4 Bd6 28. Bc3 Ra2+ 29. Kf3 Bc5 30. Rd1
Ke6 31. Rd3 Bf8 32. Be5 b4 33. Rc1 g5 34. g4 g6 35. e4 fxe4+ 36.
Kxe4 Re2+ 37. Kf3 Rh2 38. Kg3 Re2 39. h4 gxh4+ 40. Kxh4 Be7+ 41.
Kg3 g5 42. Kf3 Rh2 43. Re1 Rh3+ 44. Ke4 Rh4 45. fxg5 Bxg5 46. Kf3
Rh3+ 47. Bg3+ Kd7 48. Kg2 Rh7

 

-+-+-+-+
+x+j+-+t
-+x+-+-+
+-+s+-L-
-X-+-+p+
+p+r+-B-
-+-+-+k+
+-+-R-+-

White decides to give back the exchange to get chances to advance
the g-pawn. 49. Re5 Bf6 50. Rexd5+ cxd5 51. Rxd5+ Ke8 52. Rb5 Rd7
53. Rxb4 Kf7 54. Rb6 Bd4 55. Rd6 NEXT DIAGRAM

 

-+-+-+-+
+x+t+j+-
-+-R-+-+
+-+-+-+-
-+-L-+p+
+p+-+-B-
-+-+-+k+
+-+-+-+-

-+-+-+-+
Forcing the exchange of Rooks, which are often a strong drawing
factor, giving a pure Bishop ending.

  55… Rxd6 56. Bxd6

+x+-+j+-

-+-B-+-+
+-+-+-+-
-+-L-+p+
+p+-+-+-
-+-+-+k+
+-+-+-+-
56… Kg6 57. Kf3 Bf6 58. Bf4 Kf7 59. Ke4 Ke6 60. Be3 Be7 61. g5
Bd8 62. Kf4

Bc7+ 63. Kg4 Be5 64. Kh5 Kf7 65. Kh6 Kg8 66. Bb6 Bc3 67. Kg6 Bd2
68. Kf6 Bc3+ 69. Ke6 Bd2 70. g6 Bc3 71. Kd5 Bd2 72. Bd4 b5 73. Ke4
b4 74. Be3 Bc3 75. Kd3 Be1 76. Bd2 Bf2 77. Ke4 Bc5 78. Kd5 Be7 79.
Kc4 Kg7 giving up the g-pawn for the b-pawn 80. Bxb4 Bd8 81. Bc3+
Kxg6 82. b4 Kf5 83. Kd5

 

-+-L-+-+
+-+-+-+-
-+-+-+-+
+-+k+j+-
-P-+-+-+
+-B-+-+-
-+-+-+-+
+-+-+-+-

The change of front has left White with a pawn which can Queen on a
dark square, and the Black King with difficulties in approaching.
Black resigned, but Averbach later showed an amazing save (used by
Fischer vs. Taimanov) which was known to Centurini in the last
century!

[83. Kd5 Kf4 ! and Black rushes around the
back.]

 

Menchik,V – Capablanca,JR
(Hastings 1930/31) [A47] bishop ending: same colour, 1996

1. d4 Nf6 2. Nf3 b6 3. e3 Bb7 4. Bd3 c5 5. O-O Nc6 6. c3 e6 7. Ne5
d6 8. Nxc6 Bxc6 9. Qe2 Be7 10. Bb5 Qd7 11. Bxc6 Qxc6 White is
slipping behind in development and activity. 12. Nd2 O-O 13. dxc5
dxc5 14. e4 Rad8

 

-+-T-Tj+
X-+-LxXx
-Xd+xS-+
+-X-+-+-
-+-+p+-+
+-P-+-+-
pP-NqPpP
R-B-+rK-

White would of course like to move her Knight, but the next puts a
pawnon a dark square.

  15. e5 Nd5 16. Nf3 Rd7 17. Rd1 Rfd8 18. Bd2 b5 19. Kf1
Nb6 20. Bf4 h6 21. Rxd7 Rxd7 22. Rd1 Rxd1+ 23. Qxd1

 

-+-+-+j+
X-+-LxX-
-Sd+x+-X
+xX-P-+-
-+-+-B-+
+-P-+n+-
pP-+-PpP
+-+q+k+-

Black’s next pushes the Bishop out of action on g3, then Black
makes a raid on the Queen’s-side.

  23… Qe4 24. Bg3 Qc4+ 25. Qe2 Qxe2+ 26. Kxe2 Na4 27. Kd2
Nxb2 28. Kc2 Nc4 29. Nd2 Nxd2 30. Kxd2

 

-+-+-+j+
X-+-LxX-
-+-+x+-X
+xX-P-+-
-+-+-+-+
+-P-+-B-
p+-K-PpP
+-+-+-+-

The Bishop ending that follows is very difficult for White: a pawn
down with a duff Bishop.

  30… c4 31. Bf4 a6 32. Be3 Kf8 33. Bb6 Ke8 34. Ke3 Kd7
35. Kd4 Kc6 36. Ba7

 

-+-+-+-+
B-+-LxX-
x+j+x+-X
+x+-P-+-
-+xK-+-+
+-P-+-+-
p+-+-PpP
+-+-+-+-

White is running out of squares for the Bishop.

  36… f5 37. a4

  Doing Black’s work for him.

  37… g6 38. f4 h5 39. axb5+ Kxb5 40. g3 a5 41. Ke3 Bc5+
42. Bxc5 Kxc5 1-0

General endgame advice

Posted on by

1 key idea, 3 principles, 15 general laws, 12 practical guides and 6 tips for the ending

One key idea: the passed pawn.

  1. Endgames, and some middlegames, are all about creating and advancing a passed pawn. Either the pawn queens, or your opponent gets so tied up in knots trying to stop it that they lose something else.

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)
  2. If you are two or more Pawns ahead the win should be routine by advancing the Pawns
  3. 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!
  2. Passed pawns should be advanced as rapidly as possible.
  3. If you are one or two pawns ahead, exchange pieces but not pawns.
  4. If you are one or two pawns behind, exchange pawns but not pieces.
  5. If you have an advantage, leave pawns on both sides of the board.
  6. 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.
  7. The easiest endings to win are pure King+Pawn endings.
  8. The easiest endings to draw are those with opposite coloured bishops.
  9. The King is a strong piece: use it!
  10. Do not place pawns on the colour of your bishop.
  11. Bishops are better than knights in all except blocked pawn positions
  12. Two bishops vs. B&N or N&N are usually a real advantage.
  13. 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.
  14. A rook on the seventh rank is worth a pawn.
  15. Rooks belong behind passed pawns, of your own or the opponent.

12 practical tips (Mednis)

  1. The king is a fighting piece and should be centralised and used actively.
  2. Material advantage wins endgames: hold on to your material.
  3. Be wary of sacrificing pawns for development: only in Rook+Pawn endings is an active piece worth material.
  4. Try and gain tempi whenever possible, but without giving up material.
  5. The fewer the pieces, the more important the pawns
  6. Keep a flexible, sound pawn formation: avoid doubled, isolated and blockaded pawns.
  7. Passed pawns must be pushed.
  8. The outside passed pawn is an advantage: in King&Pawns endings it is decisive.
  9. Rooks belong behind passed pawns.
  10. In open positions the two bishops are murder: in most other positions they are a real advantage.
  11. In open or semi-open positions a bishop is usually superior to a knight.
  12. The knight is superior to the bishop in blocked positions or when the bishop is hemmed in by pawns on the same colour squares as the bishop.

[cool blue cat says:]

COOL TIP: MEDNIS says ‘good technique’ means:

  1. not allowing counterplay
  2. holding on to material advantage
  3. establishing a clear plan and following it
  4. being careful
  5. never being in a hurry
  6. avoiding complications
    • (and … winning the game!)

Rook endgames in practice

Posted on by

I dug out all the rook endings of mine I could find to show both
typical positions and typical errors. Please note that these are
not, therefore, models of technique, more like comedies of error!

The club player at his worst…

regis,d (1800) – knox,stuart (ian miles cup)
(1950) [D32] rook ending: club, horrible lack of everything,
1983

1. c4 e6 2. Nc3 d5 3. d4 c5 4. Nf3 Nc6 5. cxd5 exd5 6. Bg5
Be7 7. Bxe7

[7. Bxe7 Ngxe7 8. e3 cxd4 9. Nxd4 Qb6 10. Qd2 ! (
10…Nxd4; 11 exd4, 0-0; 12 Be2 and; 13 Bf3+= or 12 Bb5!? ) 10…
Bg4 11. h3 Bh5 12. Bb5 O-O 13. O-O Nxd4 14. exd4 Nc6 15. Bxc6 !
15… Qxc6 16. Qg5 !]

7… Ngxe7

[7… Ngxe7 8. e3 c4 9. Be2 O-O 10. O-O b5 11. Ne5
Nxe5 12. dxe5 Rb8 13. a4 b4 14. Nb5 Nc6 15. f4]

8. dxc5 Qa5

[8… d4 9. Ne4 O-O 10. e3]

9. e3 Qxc5 10. Rc1 Bg4 11. Be2 O-O 12. O-O Rad8
13. Qa4 Bxf3 14. Bxf3 Ne5 15. Rfd1 Nxf3+ 16. gxf3 Qb6 17. Qb5 Qxb5
18. Nxb5 Nc6 19. Rc5 a6 20. Nd4 Ne5 21. f4 b6 22. Rc7 Nc4 23. b3
Na3 24. Nc6 Nb5 25. Rb7 Nc3 26. Rd3 Ne4 27. Ne7+ Kh8 28. Rxd5 b5
29. Ra7 Rxd5 30. Nxd5 Nc5 31. Nc7 h5 32. Nxa6 Nxa6 33. Rxa6 g6 34.
a4 bxa4 35. bxa4 Rb8 36. a5 Rb1+ 37. Kg2 Ra1 38. Ra7 Kg8 39. a6 Ra5
40. Kf3 Ra4

 

-+-+-+j+
R-+-+x+-
p+-+-+x+
+-+-+-+x
t+-+-P-+
+-+-Pk+-
-+-+-P-P
+-+-+-+-

41. e4

  I assumed this was a straightforward win, but…
41… Kf8 42. e5 Kg8 43. Kg3 Kf8 44. Ra8+ Kg7 45. Kf3 Kh7
46. Ke3 Kg7 47. f3 h4 48. Kf2 Ra2+ 49. Kg1 h3 50. a7 Kh7 51.
Rd8

[51. Kf1 Kg7

[51… Rxh2 52. Rd8]

52. Ke1 Kh7 53. Kd1 Kg7 54. Kc1 Kh7 55. Kb1 Ra4 56.
Kb2 Kg7 57. Kb3 Ra5 58. Kb4 Ra2 59. Kc5 Ra6]

51… Rxa7 52. Kf2 Ra3 53. Kg3 Kg7 54. Kg4 Re3
55. Rd1 Kh7 56. Rg1 Kg7 57. Rg3 f6 58. exf6+ Kxf6 59. Rxh3 Re2 60.
Kg3 Ke6 61. Kg4 Kf6 62. f5 gxf5+ 63. Kf4 Kg6 64. Rg3+ Kf6 65. Rg5
Rxh2 66. Rxf5+ Kg6 67. Rf8 Ra2 68. Re8 Ra1 69. Re6+ Kf7 70. Kf5
Ra5+ 71. Re5 Ra3 72. f4 Ra4 73. Kg5 Ra1 74. Rb5 Ra6 75. Rb7+ Kf8
76. f5 Ra1 77. f6 Rg1+ 78. Kf5 Rf1+ 79. Ke6 Re1+ 80. Kd7 Kf7 81.
Rb6 1/2-1/2

 

regis,d (1800) – pope,s (club ch’p) [A36]
rook ending: club, lack of attention, 1992

1. c4 c5 2. g3 g6 3. Bg2 Nc6 4. Nc3

[4. e3 soltis]

4… Bg7 5. e3 Nf6 ?! 6. Nge2 O-O 7. d4 cxd4 8.
exd4 !? 8… d6 9. O-O a6 10. d5 ! 10… Ne5 11. b3 Rb8 12. Nd4
Ned7 13. Re1 Re8 14. Rb1 ?! 14… Qc7 15. a4 Nf8 16. Ne4 !? 16…
Ng4 ?! 17. Ba3 Bf5 ?! 18. Nxf5 gxf5 19. Bb2 (Sealed: R 19.Qf3)
19… Ne5 20. Ng5 b5 21. cxb5 axb5 22. axb5 Rxb5 23. Qh5 Neg6 24.
Bxg7 Kxg7 25. Qf3 !?

[25. Nf3]

25… h6 26. Nh3 Reb8 27. Qxf5 Rxb3 28. Rxb3 Rxb3
29. Nf4 Nxf4 30. Qxf4 Ng6 31. Qd4+ Kg8 32. Be4

 

-+-+-+j+
+-D-Xx+-
-+-X-+sX
+-+p+-+-
-+-Qb+-+
+t+-+-P-
-+-+-P-P
+-+-R-K-

[32. Ra1]

32… Qc3 ?!

[32… Ne5 33. Ra1 Ra3 34. Rxa3 Qc1+ 35. Kg2 Qxa3 36.
f4 Qa2+ 37. Kh3 Qc4]

33. Qxc3 Rxc3 34. Bxg6 fxg6 35. Rxe7

 

-+-+-+j+
+-+-R-+-
-+-X-+xX
+-+p+-+-
-+-+-+-+
+-T-+-P-
-+-+-P-P
+-+-+-K-

35… Rd3 36. Re6 Rxd5 37. Rxg6+ Kh7 38. Re6 h5 ?! 39. Kg2
Kg7 40. Kf3 Kf7 41. Re4 Kg6 42. Ke3

 

-+-+-+-+
+-+-+-+-
-+-X-+j+
+-+t+-+x
-+-+r+-+
+-+-K-P-
-+-+-P-P
+-+-+-+-

42… Kg5 ?!

[42… Kf6 43. Rd4 Re5+ 44. Kf3 Ke6 when it’s still a
fight]

43. Rd4 Re5+ 44. Kf3 Re6 45. Rd5+ Kg6 46. Kf4
Rf6+ 47. Ke3 Re6+ 48. Kf3 Rf6+ 49. Kg2 Re6 50. Kh3 ! 50… Rf6 51.
f4 Kh6 52. Kh4 Kg6 53. Rg5+ Kh7 54. Rxh5+ Rh6 55. Rxh6+ Kxh6 56.
Kg4 Kg6 57. Kf3 1-0

 

woodruff,dg (1725) – regis,d (somerset vs.
devon) (1855) [A26] rook ending: club level, black lost courage,
1995

1. c4 e5 2. Nc3 Nc6 3. g3 g6 4. Bg2 Bg7 5. d3 d6 6. Nf3 f5
7. O-O Nf6 8. Bg5 h6 9. Bd2 O-O 10. Nd5 Be6 11. Ne1 Rb8 12. Nc2 Ne7
13. Nxf6+ Rxf6 14. Bc3 g5 15. Kh1 Ng6 16. d4 Bxc4 couldn’t see why
not! 17. dxe5 Nxe5

[17… dxe5]

18. Bd5+

[18. f4]

18… Bxd5+ 19. Qxd5+ Rf7 20. Rad1 Qd7 21. f4 Ng6
22. Bxg7 Kxg7 23. fxg5 hxg5 24. Nd4 Ne7 25. Qf3 c5 26. Nc2 Rf6 27.
Ne3 Rbf8 28. Nd5 Nxd5 29. Qxd5 Qc6 30. Rf3 Qxd5 31.
Rxd5

 

-+-+-T-+
Xx+-+-J-
-+-X-T-+
+-Xr+xX-
-+-+-+-+
+-+-+rP-
pP-+p+-P
+-+-+-+k

we embarked on a long endgame from this point which I never felt
happy

  with; I have thrown in some speculative lines in the
notes

31… b5

[31… Kg6 32. Rfd3 Re8 33. Rxd6

[33. e3]

33… Rxe2 34. Rd2 Rxd6 35. Rxe2 b5 -+]

32. Rfd3 Re8 33. Rd2 Ree6

[33… Re5 34. Rxd6 Rxd6 35. Rxd6 Rxe2 36. Rd5 Rxb2
37. Rxc5 Kg6 -+]

34. b4 cxb4

[34… c4 35. Rxb5 c3 36. Rc2 Re3 37. Rb7+
Rf7]

35. Rxb5 Re4 36. Rb2 Kg6 37. R5xb4 Rxb4 38. Rxb4
Re6 39. Rb2 Kf6 40. Kg2 Re4 41. Rd2 Ke5 42. h3 a5 43. Kf2 d5 44.
Rd3 Ra4 45. Re3+ Kd6 46. a3 f4 47. gxf4 Rxf4+ 48. Kg3 d4 49. Rd3
Re4 50. Kf3 Kd5 51. Rb3

[51. e3 Rxe3+ 52. Rxe3 dxe3 53. Kxe3 Kc4 54. Ke4 Kb3
55. Kf5 Kxa3 56. Kxg5 Kb3 57. h4 a4 58. h5 a3 59. h6 a2 60. h7 a1=Q
61. Kg6 -+ not all forced, I admit 61… Qh8]

51… Rf4+ 52. Kg3 Kc4 53. Rb8 Re4 54. Kf3
Rf4+

[54… Re3+ looks good 55. Kg4 Rxe2 56. Kxg5 d3 57.
Rd8 d2 58. h4 Kc3 59. h5 Re5+ 60. Kg4 Rxh5 61. Kxh5 Kc2 62. Rc8+
Kb3 63. Rd8 drawn]

55. Kg3 Kc3 56. Rb5 Re4

 

-+-+-+-+
+-+-+-+-
-+-+-+-+
Xr+-+-X-
-+-Xt+-+
P-J-+-Kp
-+-+p+-+
+-+-+-+-

draw agreed – White: 20min, Black: 2min left

[56… Re4 57. Rxg5

[57. Kf3 Re3+ 58. Kg4 Rxe2 59. Rxa5 d3 60. Kf3 Re1
-+]

57… Rxe2 58. Rxa5

[58.Rd5 a4 59. Kf3 d3 60. h4 Re1 61. Rc5+ Kd4 62. Rc8
d2]

58… d3 59. Rd5 d2 60. Kg4

[60. h4 Re3+ ?

[60… Re1]

61. Kf4 Rd3 -+]

[60. Kf4 ! 60… Re1 61. h4 d1=Q 62. Rxd1 Rxd1 63. h5
Kd4 64. h6 Kd5 65. Kf5 Rf1+ 66. Kg6 Ke6 67. h7 Rg1+ 68. Kh6 Kf7 69.
h8=N+ Kf6 70. Kh7 Rg4 71. a4 Rh4+ 72. Kg8 Rxa4 73. Kh7

[73. Nf7 Ra8+ 74. Kh7 Kxf7 75. Kh6 Ra5 76. Kh7
Rh5#]

73… Rg4 74. Nf7 Kxf7 75. Kh6 Kf6 76. Kh5 Re4 77.
Kh6 Rh4#]

60… Re1 61. h4 d1=Q+ 62. Rxd1 Rxd1 63. h5 Kd4 64.
h6 Ke5 65. Kg5 Rg1+ 66. Kh5 Kf5 winning!]

1/2-1/2

 

lane,pc – regis,d rook ending: club play,
managed a win, 1995

1. d4 g6 2. c4 d6 3. Nc3 Bg7 4. e4 Nc6 5. Nge2 e5 6. d5
Nce7 7. Ng3 h5 8. Bd3 h4 9. Nf1 f5 10. exf5

[10. f3]

10… gxf5 11. f3 Nf6 12. Qc2 c6 13. Ne3 f4 14.
Nf5 Nxf5 15. Bxf5 cxd5 16. Bg6+ Kf8 17. cxd5 Qa5 18. Bd2 Nxd5 19.
Qb3

[19. Nxd5 Qxd5 20. Rd1 suggested by PL immediately
after: 20…Qc5? 21 Qb3! +- 20… Qxa2 21. Bb4 Be6 22. Qe4 Qb3 23.
Rxd6 Kg8 24. O-O]

19… Be6 20. Qxb7 Rd8 21. Nb5 Qb6 22. Qxb6 axb6
23. Ke2 h3 24. g4 fxg3 25. hxg3 Bh6 26. Rad1 Ke7 27.
Be4

  we later suggested 27 Kf2 as better

27… Bxd2 28. Rxd2 Nf6 29. Bb1 Bc4+ 30. Bd3 Bxa2
31. Ke1 Bd5 32. Bf1 Bxf3 33. Rxh3 Rxh3 34. Bxh3 Bc6 35. Nc3 Rg8 36.
Kf2 Ng4+ 37. Ke2 Nf6 38. Kf2 Ng4+

[38… d5 ! 39. Bg2 Ke6 40. Bh3+ Kd6 41. Rd3 d4 is
simpler and safer; analysing on the night I missed the strong
…d4]

39. Ke2 Nh2 40. Rd3 e4 41. Nd5+ Bxd5 42. Rxd5
Rxg3 43. Bf5 Rg2+ 44. Ke3 Ng4+ 45. Bxg4 Rxg4 46. Rb5
Ke6

 

-+-+-+-+
+-+-+-+-
-X-Xj+-+
+r+-+-+-
-+-+x+t+
+-+-K-+-
-P-+-+-+
+-+-+-+-

47. Rxb6

[47. Kd4 ! may be better]

47… Ke5 48. Rb8 Rg3+ 49. Kf2 Rf3+

[49… Rd3 !? 50. b4 Kd4]

50. Ke2 d5 51. b4 Kd4 52. b5 Rb3 53. b6
e3

[53… Rb2+ is more likely to tempt an error? 54. Kd1
Kd3 55. Ke1 e3]

54. b7 Rb2+ 55. Kf1 Kd3

[55… Rb5 56. Ke2 Rb1 57. Re8 Rxb7 58. Rxe3

 

-+-+-+-+
+t+-+-+-
-+-+-+-+
+-+x+-+-
-+-J-+-+
+-+-R-+-
-+-+k+-+
+-+-+-+-

58… Rb2+ 59. Kf3 Rh2 60. Re8 Kd3 61. Rd8 d4 62. Rd7 Rh8 63.
Rc7 Rf8+ 64. Kg2 Kd2 65. Rd7 d3 66. Rd6 Ke2 67. Re6+ Kd1 68. Rd6 d2
69. Rd7 Rf4

all like the game but with the d-pawn not the e-pawn
– the ‘bridge’ is easier and the wK is on the long side]

56. Rd8 Rb1+

  PL missed this one

57. Kg2 Rxb7 58. Rxd5+

 

-+-+-+-+
+t+-+-+-
-+-+-+-+
+-+r+-+-
-+-+-+-+
+-+jX-+-
-+-+-+k+
+-+-+-+-

58… Ke2 !

  I did wonder about …Ke4 but PL was not impressed…
This is of course better, giving Lucena’s win, but Black didn’t
half make heavy weather of it. The wK is well-placed on the ‘short
side’

59. Rd8 Rg7+

  an important finesse

60. Kh3 Rf7

[60… Ke1]

61. Kg2 Rf4

  you can tell Black can remember about ‘building a bridge’
but this is too early!

62. Kg3 Rf7 63. Re8 Rf3+ 64. Kg2 Rf5 65. Rd8 Ke1
66. Re8 e2 67. Re7

[67. Re7 Rf2+ 68. Kg1 Rf1+ 69. Kg2 Kd2 is trivial…
70. Rxe2+]

67… Kd2

[67… Rd5 looks much simpler 68. Kf3

[68. Ra7 Rg5+ 69. Kh2 Re5 70. Kg2 Kd2 71. Ra2+ Ke3
72. Ra3+ Kf4]

68… Rd3+ 69. Kg2 Kd1]

68. Rd7+ Ke3 69.

Re7+ Kd3 70. Rd7+ Ke4 71. Re7+

  we’ve got all this way but something’s still not quite
right…

71… Kd3

[71… Re5 72. Rxe5+ Kxe5 73. Kf2 …penny
dropped!]

72. Rd7+ Ke3 73. Re7+ Kd2 74. Rd7+ Ke1 75. Re7
Rf4 76. Kg3

[76. Ra7 Rf2+ 77. Kg1 Rf1+ 78. Kg2 Kd2 +-]

76… Rd4 77. Kg2 Kd2 78. Kf2 Rf4+ 79. Kg3
Rf1

  a tough game!

80. Rd7+ Kc3 0-1

 

regis,d – walker,jn (exeter vs. teignmouth)
[C33] rook ending: club, lack of theory, 1995

1. e4 e5 2. f4 exf4 3. Bc4 d5 4. Bxd5 Nf6 5. Nc3
Nxd5

[5… Bb4 book]

6. Nxd5 Qh4+ 7. Kf1 Bg4 8. Nf3 Bd6 9. d4 O-O 10.
Bxf4

[10. e5 c6 11. Nxf4 Be7 12. Be3 Bxf3 13. Qxf3
Re8]

10… Bxf4 11. Nxf4 Qe7 12. Qd3 Nc6 13. c3 Rad8
14. Re1 Rfe8

[14… f5 15. e5

[15. h3]]

15. h3 Bxf3 16. Qxf3 Na5 17. g4

[17. Kf2 Nc4 18. Nd3 ?

[18. Re2 ! 18… c5 19. Nd5 Qg5 20. Qf4]

18… Nd2]

17… Nc4 18. Rh2 c5 19. d5 Qf6 20. Qf2 Nxb2 21.
Qxb2 Qxf4+ 22. Qf2 Rxe4 23. Qxf4 Rxf4+ 24. Rf2 Rxf2+ 25. Kxf2 Kf8
26. c4 b5 27. cxb5 Rxd5 28. a4 Rd4 29. Re5 Rxa4 30. Rxc5 Ke7 31.
Rc7+ Ke6 32. Rb7 Ra3 33. Kg2 Kf6

 

-+-+-+-+
Xr+-+xXx
-+-+-J-+
+p+-+-+-
-+-+-+p+
T-+-+-+p
-+-+-+k+
+-+-+-+-

34. b6 ! 34… axb6 35. Rxb6+ Kg5 36. Rb5+ Kg6 37. Rc5 h6
38. Rb5 f6 39. Rc5 Re3 40. Rc7 Re5 41. Kg3 h5 42. Rc3

 

-+-+-+-+
+-+-+-X-
-+-+-Xj+
+-+-T-+x
-+-+-+p+
+-R-+-Kp
-+-+-+-+
+-+-+-+-

42… hxg4 ?

[42… Kg5 gives more winning chances]

43. hxg4 Kg5 44. Ra3 g6 45. Rb3 Re4 46.
Rb5+

 

-+-+-+-+
+-+-+-+-
-+-+-Xx+
+r+-+-J-
-+-+t+p+
+-+-+-K-
-+-+-+-+
+-+-+-+-

46… f5 ?

  really anything else would have been more worrying

47. gxf5 gxf5 48. Rb8 Re3+ 49. Kf2 Ra3 50. Rb4 f4
51. Rb8

 

-R-+-+-+
+-+-+-+-
-+-+-+-+
+-+-+-J-
-+-+-X-+
T-+-+-+-
-+-+-K-+
+-+-+-+-

the basic draw: heading towards Philidor’s position.
Clearly White has been steering for this since move 33!

1/2-1/2

white,ir – regis,d (East Devon #1)

[B06] rook ending: club, all rook endings are
drawn, 1994 1. e4 g6 2. d4 Bg7 3. Nc3 d6 4. Be3 c6 5.
a4 Nf6 6. h3 Nbd7 7. Nf3 O-O 8. Qd2

[8. Be2]

8… e5 9. dxe5 Nxe5 10. Nxe5 dxe5 11. O-O-O
Qa5

[11… Qxd2+ 12. Rxd2 Be6 13. Bd3 Rfd8 14.
Rhd1]

12. Qd6 Be6 13. b4 Qd8 14.Qxd8 Rfxd8 15. Rxd8+
Rxd8 16. Bxa7 Bf8 17. Bc5 Bxc5 18. bxc5 Rd4 19. Bd3 Nd7 20. Kd2
Nxc5 21. Rb1 Bc4 22. Ne2 Rd7 23. Kc3 Bxd3 24. cxd3 Nxa4+ 25. Kb4
Nb6 26. Kc5 Nc8 27. Rb3 Kf8 28. f4 f6 29. Ra3 Ke7 30. g4 g5 31.
fxe5 fxe5 32. Ng3 Ke6 33. Nf5 Rc7 34. Ra8 b6+ 35. Kc4

 

r+s+-+-+
+-T-+-+x
-Xx+j+-+
+-+-XnX-
-+k+p+p+
+-+p+-+p
-+-+-+-+
+-+-+-+-

35… Nd6+ 36. Nxd6 Kxd6 37. Rg8 b5+ 38. Kb4 Ra7 39. Rxg5
Ra4+ 40. Kb3 Rd4 41. Kc2 b4 42. Rg8 b3+

 

-+-+-+r+
+-+-+-+x
-+xJ-+-+
+-+-X-+-
-+-Tp+p+
+x+p+-+p
-+k+-+-+
+-+-+-+-

43. Kc3 Rb4 ! 44. Kb2 Kc5 45. Re8 Kd4 46. Rd8+ Ke3 47. g5
Kf4 48. Rf8+ Kxg5 49. Rf5+ Kg6 50. Rxe5 Rd4 51. Re6+ Kf7 52. Rxc6
Rxd3

 

-+-+-+-+
+-+-+j+x
-+r+-+-+
+-+-+-+-
-+-+p+-+
+x+t+-+p
-K-+-+-+
+-+-+-+-

1/2-1/2

 

 

A Rook endgame

Posted on by

Capablanca,J – Janowsky,D [C48] New York INT (3), 1913

 This game was discussed at Exeter Chess Club training sessions on 13th/20th
October 1998. The notes are based on those of Irving Chernev
(Capablanca’s 60 Best Chess Endings (OUP)) and liberally
supplemented by comments and questions of the group, led by Tony
Dempsey.

 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.Bb5

Less experienced players are likely to be more comfortable in
the open positions that arise after 4. d4, the Scotch Four Knights
Game.

4…a6

The challenge to the Bishop, routine on move 3 of a Ruy Lopez,
is here rather dubious. White has more than one way to maintain an
advantage. Preference should be given to one of the
alternatives:

[4…Bb4 is the reliable main line 5.0-0 0-0 6.d3 d6 7.Bg5
threatening Nd5 7…Bxc3 Defending against the threat; as ever,
Black must be wary of maintaining symmetry for long. 8.bxc3 Black
now unpins (the Metger unpin) 8…Qe7 9.Re1 Nd8 10.d4 Ne6 11.Bc1 is
preferable and recommended by theory (11.Bh4?! is dubious
due to the sensitivity of the f4 square. 11…Nf4 12.Nd2 Kh8
13.Bf1 Kamsky-Timman, 1991) 11…c5 12.Bf1

+-----------------+
|r+b+.4k+|
|0p+.1p0p|
|.+.0nh.+|
|+.0.0.+.|
|.+.)P+.+|
|+.).+N+.|
|P+P+.)P)|
|$.GQ$BI.|
+-----------------+

Most of you may be scratching your heads wondering
what White is up to. According to theory the position is fairly
balanced with both sides having opportunities for active play. But
how confident would you be about handling White’s position in
practice? Do you close the centre with d4-d5, exchange with dxe5 or
maintain the tension? How do you activate your Rooks and Bishops?
Are those queen’s-side Pawns going to be liabilities?;

4…Bc5 unusual 5.0-0 0-0 6.Nxe5 Nxe5 7.d4 Bd6 8.f4 Nc6 9.e5
with unclear complications 9…a6 10.Be2 Bb4 11.d5 Bc5+ 12.Kh1 Nxd5
13.Nxd5 d6 14.Bd3 dxe5 15.fxe5 Nxe5 16.Bxh7+ Kxh7 17.Qh5+ Kg8
18.Qxe5 Bd6 19.Qh5 f6 20.Bf4 Be6 21.Rad1 Bf7 22.Qf3 Bxf4 23.Nxf4
Qc8 24.Nd5 Bxd5 25.Qxd5+ Rf7 26.Rd3 c6 27.Qh5 Re7 28.Rh3 Qf8
29.Qh8+ Kf7 30.Rg3 Ke8 31.Rd1 g5 32.Qh5+ Qf7 33.Qh8+ Qf8 34.Qh5+
Qf7 35.Qh8+ Qf8 36.Rh3 Rg7 37.Re3+ 1-0 Short Nigel D-Adams
Michael/Ch England (play-off), England 1992;

4…Nd4 Rubinstein’s dynamic move]

5.Bxc6 dxc6 6.0-0

Capablanca characteristically opts for a quieter, more
positional, approach to the position, one in which is however
sufficient to retain some advantage.

[After 6.Nxe5! Black maintains material equality with 6…Nxe4
7.Nxe4 Qd4 8.0-0 Qxe5 but after 9.Re1 Be6 10.d4

+-----------------+
|r+.+kg.4|
|+p0.+p0p|
|p+p+b+.+|
|+.+.1.+.|
|.+.)N+.+|
|+.+.+.+.|
|P)P+.)P)|
|$.GQ$.I.|
+-----------------+

Black’s uncastled King and lack of development
portend a winter of discontent

A) 10…Qf5 has been tried several times 11.Bg5 is
natural, continuing development while preventing castling 11…Bd6
(11…h6!? 12.Qd3! and White’s initiative persists)
12.Qd2 h6 (12…0-0? 13.Nxd6 cxd6 14.Be7) 13.Bh4 g5
14.Nxd6+! cxd6 15.Bg3 White enjoyed a clear plus in
Yudasin-Sagalchik, Kemerov 1995;

B) 10…Qd5 was tried, but after 11.Ng5 (11.Bg5
plays for an attack on the King 11…Kd7 (idea …Re8)
12.Rc1!? intending c2-c4 (Nunn)) 11…0-0-0 12.Nxe6
fxe6 13.Qg4 Qxd4 14.Qxe6+ Qd7 15.Qxd7+ Rxd7 16.Re8+ Rd8 17.Rxd8+
Kxd8 18.b3 Bc5 19.Bb2 Rf8 20.Rd1+ Kc8 21.Rd2 the resultant endgame,
typical of the Ruy Lopez Exchange Variation, was better for White,
there being no compensation for the doubled c-Pawns.; 6.d3 is
possible refinement of White’s plan, keeping open the option of
castling long.]

6…Bg4 7.h3 Bh5

[7…Bxf3 submissive relinquishment of the Bishop pair hardly
comes into the question, certainly for a two-Bishop man like
Janowsky. 8.Qxf3 White would calmly prepare the pawn break f2-f4 as
in the game.]

8.Qe2

[8.g4 “Winning the e-Pawn” with 8…Nxg4 (8…Bg6 9.Nxe5
does merit consideration, as the extra Pawn appears to outweigh the
loosening of the castled King’s defences, but Janowsky would
undoubtedly have sacrificed a piece for two Pawns) 9.hxg4
Bxg4 Janowsky would be in his element pursuing the initiative
against the exposed White King.]

8…Bd6 9.d3 Qe7

+-----------------+
|r+.+k+.4|
|+p0.1p0p|
|p+pg.h.+|
|+.+.0.+b|
|.+.+P+.+|
|+.HP+N+P|
|P)P+Q)P+|
|$.G.+RI.|
+-----------------+

How should White proceed?

10.Nd1!

Once familiar with the Metger unpin manoeuvre, the purpose of
this slightly surprising move will be quite clear. As the position
is going to remain closed for some time yet, Capablanca needn’t be
in a hurry to develop the queen’s-side, particularly when it is not
yet clear where they belong.

[10.Bg5 attracted some support on the night, but, as usual, it
is inadvisable to pin the opponent’s King’s Knight when we have
castled but our opponent has not. In the absence of a threat to
capture, the Bishop sortie would merely provoke …h6 and …g5-g4,
with an initiative for Black against the White King.;

10.Be3 was also suggested. But what is the plan? A future d3-d4
might prove double-edged, opening the position for the Black
Bishops and Rooks. Black might restrain the advance with …c6-c5:
although the d6 Bishop looks none too attractive, White has still
to solve the problem of the pin on the Nf3.]

10…0-0-0

Janowsky optimistically seeks to hold on to the Bishop pair, but
to no avail.

[10…Nd7 was proposed by Lasker to seek counterplay 11.Ne3 Bxf3
12.Qxf3 g6 with the idea of …f7-f5]

11.Ne3 Bg6 12.Nh4 Rhg8 anticipating the attack on g7 by a
Knight on f5

13.Nef5 Qe6

14.f4!

The tactical threat is 15. Nxd6+ Qxd6 16. f5 Bh5 17. g4 and
Black’s once-proud Bishop is caught in a Noah’s Ark Trap. The
strategical idea is to open the f-file, when White will have no
doubt where the Rooks are headed.

14…Bxf5 15.Nxf5 exf4 16.Bxf4 Bc5+ 17.Be3 Bf8

The Bishop is passively placed but plays an important role in
shoring up the King’s-side. Capa elects to exchange it off.

18.Qf2 Rd7 19.Bc5 Bxc5 20.Qxc5

threat Qc5-a7-a8+

20…Kb8

The Pawn position is in White’s favour, and he plans to turn it
to account like this:

(a) to double Rooks on the f-file to induce the inevitable
advance …f7-f6;

(b) to exchange Queens and Knights,

(c) to advance the g-Pawn to g5, eliminate the f-Pawn and create
a passed White e-Pawn. [If Black recaptures with the Pawn on f6, he
will then acquire a permanent weakness; this minority attack by
White has a subtle sting]

(d) then – well, the rest is a matter of endgame technique,
which, even then, Capablanca had at his finger-tips.

21.Rf2

idea Ra1-f1 and Nxg7!, winning a Pawn

21…Ne8 22.Raf1 f6

sooner or later this move had to be made

[22…Qxa2? 23.Ne7 Rh8 24.Rxf7 lets the enemy into camp]

23.b3 Nd6 24.Rf4

Black now faces a critical decision – to stay in a middlegame or
exchange into an ending. It’s not unusual for errors to be made at
this key moment…

24…Nxf5?

Janowsky undoubtedly recognised that he stood worse, but
evidently felt he would be less badly off in the double-Rook
ending, underestimating White’s chances. Moral: studying the ending
improves your handling of the middlegame. Recommended reading:
MEDNIS, From the Middlegame to the Endgame.

25.Qxf5 Qxf5 26.Rxf5 Re8

+-----------------+
|.i.+r+.+|
|+p0r+.0p|
|p+p+.0.+|
|+.+.+R+.|
|.+.+P+.+|
|+P+P+.+P|
|P+P+.+P+|
|+.+.+RI.|
+-----------------+

White has several advantages (active Rf5, pressure on
f6, potentially more active King which will run to e3 supporting
the central Pawns).Black’s Rooks are hampered by being defensive.
[The activity of the Rooks is key in these endgames.]

The hobbled c-Pawns cannot be easily dissolved since …b6 is
met by b3-b4.Capa plans to create a passed e-pawn, which will be
his winning trump. He will move the King to e3, advance the g-Pawn,
and then advance the central Pawns. He will do this while
restraining any attempt by Black to become active on the
queen’s-side.

27.g4!

The first step in the process. Note that with Queens still on
the board, the minority attack would involve the liquidation of the
White King’s Pawn cover. This would probably mean that another plan
would have to be found for White, unless the King could first be
separated over to the Queen’s-side. This same strategy – the
minority attack – is also seen in the Queen’s Gambit Exchange
Variation. There the White b-Pawn advances to strike a target at
c6. Black’s preferred response would be a minority attack with
…f7-f5-f4, though, due to the positioning of the minor pieces,
this is difficult to achieve.

Recommended reading:

Black holes on the Chess Board – Cougar Irons

The Tao of Chess – Frijtof Fischer

The Tao of Potboilers – R D Keene.

27…b6

hoping for something like …c5, …Kb7-c6, …b5 and …c4,
liquidating the doubled Pawns and empowering the Rooks.

28.b4! Stopping any undoubling of the Pawns. Capablanca
must expose his Pawns trying to restrain Black, and could make this
move only after carefully calculating that this looseness could not
be exploited. 28…Kb7 29.Kf2 b5 Planning now to open the
a-file. 30.a4! Rd4

[30…bxa4 31.Ra1]

31.Rb1 What’s this? The White Rook forced to be passive?
Back at move 28 this is what White had to calculate: that,
temporarily, White drops the Rook back, so the Black Rook can next
be expelled, and the White Rook returned to active duty.

31…Re5 32.Ke3 Rd7

[32…Rxf5 33.gxf5 Rd7 34.d4 and White is winning]

33.a5!

fixes Black’s Pawns on the Queen’s-side, and lets White
concentrate on the King’s-side.

33…Re6

34.Rbf1

“I’m back!”. Recommended reading for Black: The Book of Common
Prayer.

34…Rde7 35.g5 fxg5

[35…Rf7 36.d4 with Rf1-f4 and e4-e5]

36.Rxg5

+-----------------+
|.+.+.+.+|
|+k0.4.0p|
|p+p+r+.+|
|)p+.+.$.|
|.).+P+.+|
|+.+PI.+P|
|.+P+.+.+|
|+.+.+R+.|
+-----------------+

Capablanca says at this point that his chances of
winning are excellent. He cites these advantages:

(a) he has a passed Pawn;

(b) his King position is ideal, eyeing d4, c5 and the
King’s-side

(c) his Rook commands the only open file.

36…Rh6 37.Rg3 Rhe6

restraining d3-d4

38.h4 g6 39.Rg5

planning h4-h5, fixing some sort of isolated weakness

39…h6

[39…Re5 40.Rf8 Re8 41.Rxe5 Rxe5 42.Rf4 is also easy sailing
for White]

40.Rg4 Rg7

(else Rf1-f8-g8)

41.d4 Kc8 42.Rf8+ Kb7

[42…Kd7 43.Ra8]

43.e5 g5 44.Ke4 Ree7 45.hxg5 hxg5

[45…Rxg5 46.Rxg5 hxg5 47.Rg8 loses a Pawn without affording
any relief]

46.Rf5 Kc8 47.Rgxg5 Rh7 48.Rh5 Kd7 49.Rxh7 Rxh7
50.Rf8 Rh4+ 51.Kd3 Rh3+ 52.Kd2 c5

[52…Rh4 53.Kc3 Rh3+ 54.Kb2 Rh4 55.c3 Rh2+ 56.Kb3]

53.bxc5 Ra3 54.d5 1-0

[54.d5 Rxa5 55.Rf7+ Kd8 56.c6 b4 57.Rf8+ Ke7 58.d6+! cxd6
(58…Kxf8 59.dxc7) 59.c7 winning]

“Capablanca’s play was beyond reproach, and he executed his
plan in a very able manner.” said Lasker. It is also important
to note that Black’s unsuccessful attempt to generate play on the
queen’s-side in the end left an embarrassing set of weaknesses –
c5,c6,a6 – each of which played its own role in his demise. Could
Janowsky have improved his defence around moves 27-29?

1-0

 

Passed Pawn pandemonium

Posted on by

Studies:

A familiar breakthrough:

Chess Choice Challenge

{Our analysis ran:}
1. Nxh7 ( 1. h5 Kxf4 ( 1… gxh5 2. Nxh7 Nxh7 ( 2… Ng6 ) 3. g6 ) 2. Nxh7 Nxh7 3. hxg6 ) 1… Nxh7 2. f5 ( 2. h5 Nf8 3. f5 ) 2… Nf8 ( 2… exf5 3. e6 ) ( 2… gxf5 3. g6 ) 3. h5 ( 3. fxg6 Nxg6 4. h5 Ne7 5. g6 ( 5. h6 Ng6 ) 5… Ng8 ) 3… exf5 ( 3… gxf5 4. g6 ) ( 3… gxh5 4. g6 ) 4. h6 ( 4. e6 Nxe6 5. h6 Nf8 ) 4… f4 5. e6 Nxe6 6. h7 f3 7. h8=Q f2 8. Qh3+ ( 8. Qe5+ Kf3 ) 8… Kd2 ( 8… Ke2 9. Qxe6+ ) 9. Qf3 ( 9. Qf1 Ke3 10. Kc2 Nxg5 11. Kd1 ) ( 9. Qg2 Ke1 )
{The book gives h7 first, queening on e8 with check}

Staunton’s exercise:

I had a fairly amusing evening being beaten up by Simon in this position. Try it!

Click […] to see list of games

Rook and Pawn endings – a spot of theory

Posted on by

Rook and Pawn endings – a spot of theory

All Rook Endings are Drawn… (except for those that aren’t!)

Here’s what got me started on this session. After an entertaining earlier struggle, Black is trying to win a Rook ending in a quickplay finish. I say “trying”: the first move made the spectators wince…

Position 1: Bartlett, S – Regis, D, Devon vs. Cornwall, 08.11.1997

50…Rb2+?
[50…h3+! would have helped! 51.Kf2 Rh1 52.Ra7 Rxh2+ 53.Ke3 g6u 54.Rxf7 Rg2 55.Rg7 Rxg3+ 56.Kf2 Kxf4 57.Rf7+ Kg4]

51.Kg1 g6 52.Rc3 hxg3 53.hxg3 Kh3 54.Kf1 Rg2 55.g4+ Rg3 56.Rc4

[56.Rc7 Rf3+ 57.Ke2 Rxf4; or

56.Rxg3+ Kxg3 57.f5 g5]

56…Kxg4 57.Ke2 f5?

[57…Rf3! 58.f5+ Rf4 PCL] 58.Rb4 Rf3?! [58…Rg2+!?] 59.Rb6 Kxf4 60.Rxg6 Rb3 [60…Rg3 61.Ra6 Kg4 62.Kf2 holds – PCL]

61.Re6 [61.Ra6= PCL] 61…Rb2+ 62.Kf1 Kf3 [DIAGRAM]

63.Re1

“Draw claimed; draw agreed” says my score sheet. Thereby hangs a tale: I was the last board to finish, with two minutes to his one, and White decided I was trying to win a drawn position just on time, and claimed a draw.

I was indeed trying to win, and the clock may have helped, but White has lots of ways to lose: his last move was actually the last chance to draw!

Quite exactly why we’ll see in a bit, but on the day a bit of discussion broke out amongst the audience (yertis notisnt yertis notisnt…) and we decided we’d had enough.

It’s certainly true that some very similar positions are drawn, and are maybe even claimable under the “two minute” rule, but not this one! The interesting thing is, nobody there knew it well enough to carry the day, and I’ve had positions like this lots of times. If my opponent knew how to draw it he would never have played Re1; Capablanca won two positions similar to this where his opponent did not know the drawing technique in one year, 1931 (one against Turover). Moral: know your onions!

Another thing that decided me on having another crack at a session on Rook endings is, well, a bit of a tease:

“…the number of positions that must be known exactly is relatively small. It is only in Rook endgames that it is essential to memorise thirty or forty concrete positions; in other types of endgame there are even fewer.”

Mark Dvoretsky in Dvoretsky & Yusupov, Technique for the Tournament Player

Forty sounds quite a few to me, but, OK Mark, which forty? He doesn’t say! I still don’t know, really, but here is my suggestion for some of them.

One way to work your way into this is to get a chessboard and a few pieces and see if you can work out some of the basic rules for yourself. You should quickly discover that, in common with many other endings, two passed Pawns pretty well always win, and so situations with a single Pawn are most critical. Also, if both Kings are distant, one Rook can’t force through a Pawn against another Rook (not like Queens, for instance).

So, we quickly get to our first two critical positions out of Dvoretsky’s forty, where the Kings are in range: Lucena’s position and Philidor’s position. Oh, and you need to know about Rook’s Pawns, and checking distance.

Position 2: Lucena 1496

White has control of the sixth/seventh with the King and the Black King is cut off: Lucena’s position is won for White is two ways…

First, White can get the Pawn to the seventh:

1…Kc7 2.Rc2+ Kb6 3.e6 Rd1 4.Ke8 Rg1 5.e7 Rf1

Now what?

6.Rc4 the critical manoeuvre: ‘BUILDING A BRIDGE’

[6.Rh2 although the ‘bridge’ manoeuvre is always emphasised in the books, there is also a win by getting the king out on the short side, e.g. 6…Kc7 7.Rh7 Rf2 8.Rf7 Rh2 9.Rf8 Rh7 (9…Re2 10.Kf7) 10.Rf1 Rh8+ 11.Kf7 Rh7+ 12.Kf8 Rh8+ 13.Kg7 Re8 14.Kf7 This is important because the bridge-building manoeuvre may not be available]

6…Rf2 7.Kd7 Rd2+ 8.Ke6 Re2+ 9.Kd6 Re3 10.Rb4+ Ka7 [10…Ka5 11.Rb8] 11.Rb5 Rd3+ 12.Ke6 Re3+ 13.Re5 1-0

Position 3: Philidor’s position

Black’s King holds the Queening square, and the Black Rook holds the sixth rank. This is Philidor’s position, which is drawn without too much trouble by Black.

Once the White Pawn goes to the sixth, Black runs back to the first rank:

1.Kf5 Rb1 2.e6 now there is no shelter on the board from the checks

[2.Ke6 Rb6+ 3.Kd5 Rb1]

2…Rf1+ 3.Ke5 Re1+ 4.Kd6 Rd1+ 5.Kc6 Re1 1/2-1/2

Position 4: Rook’s Pawns

Rook’s Pawns are a strong drawing factor.
So, here, even with the Black King distant, White can force nothing.

Oddly, Black must not try to approach with the King because of Ra8-h8; instead the Black King sticks to g7/h7, and the Rook checks the White King when it approaches.

1.Kf3 Ra4 2.Ke3 Kh7 3.Kd3 Kg7 4.Kc3 Kh7 5.Kb3 Ra1 6.Kb4 Kg7 7.Kc5 Rc1+ 8.Kb6 Rb1+ 9.Kc6 Ra1 10.Kb7 Rb1+ 11.Kc7 Ra1 1/2-1/2

Position 5: Rook’s Pawns 2

With the Pawn further back White can create trouble with the King because it can hide on e.g. a6 from check on the files (Tarrasch), but Black can then check along the ranks. Euwe and Alekhin struggled with one of these in their 1935 match. Although we can’t easily summarise the analysis of this type of position there is a summary of results possible.

If the White King is closer than the marked area, White wins: in the marked area, Black should draw.

Even further back, and we’re into a lot of ifs and buts…

Position 6: checking distance

You can draw without getting Philidor’s position, by checking along the ranks. With a central Pawn this is just possible as long as you take the furthest possible file: here the a-file.

1…Ra8+ 2.Kd7 Ra7+ 3.Kd6 Ra6+ 4.Kd5 Ra5+ 5.Kc6 Ra6+ 6.Kb7 Re6 1/2-1/2

Checking distance is three empty files.

Position 7: checking dist. (2)

The b-file (two empty files) fails by a whisker:

1…Rb8+ 2.Kd7 Rb7+ 3.Kd6 Rb8 4.Kc7 Ra8 5.Ra1! 1-0

It is popularly supposed that Q vs. R is difficult: it surely is difficult against an opponent who plays perfectly, like a computer (as GM Browne once discovered), but in actual play it may be easier. Black can be herded to the edge, when a Rook on the third (sixth) rank must keep out the White King. You can achieve positions like the following:

Position 8: Aside: Queen vs. Rook

1.Kg5
The Black Rook is shut out from the third rank, and is vulnerable to forks:

[1…Rh1 2.Qc8+ Kf7 3.Qb7+;

1…Ra6 2.Qc8+;

1…Rh2 2.Qd6+]

And if 1…Rh8 2.Kg6 Rg8+ 3.Kf6 1-0

Position 9: Study (Lasker)

Here is an instructive study: Black to move.
A tense position: on whose side will it resolve? 5-piece Rook endings (KRP/KR) all hinge around access of the sixth and seventh ranks in front of the P by the attacking King – if it can be kept out, the defence holds, but if not…

1…Re1

[1…Rh6+ 2.e6 +-;

1…Rd1+ 2.Ke6 Kf8 (2…Kd8 3.Ra8+ Kc7 4.Ke7 Rh1 5.e6) 3.Ra8+ Kg7 4.Ke7 Rd2 5.e6 +-;

1…Rh2 2.Ra8+ Kf7 3.e6+ Kf6 4.Rf8+ Kg7 5.e7 +-]

2.Ke6 Kf8

Critical – on the other side the Black King gets in the way of checks from the Black Rook, and the White King can make a little shelter for itself behind the Pawn. When the defending king ‘takes the short side’ there is no refuge for the White King.

3.Ra8+ Kg7 4.Re8 [4.Kd6 Kf7 =] 4…Ra1 5.Rd8

[5.Kd7 Ra7+ 6.Kc6 Ra6+ 7.Kb7 Ra1 =]

5…Re1 6.Re8 Ra1 = the White K is in, but has no escape from the checks! 1/2-1/2 Remember this type of draw, we’ll be meeting it later.

Position 10: Meanwhile…

Now, back in Liskeard, how do we compare? We can see that compared to the last few drawing ideas White is badly placed: the defending Rook is passive (no harassing checks) and the King threatened with mate. White must run for the short side with the King, and send the Rook away to draw:

[63.Kg1! f4 64.Re8 (64.Ra6) 64…Rb1+ 65.Kh2 Kf2 66.Ra8 f3 67.Ra2+ Ke1 68.Kg3;

Instead 63.Re1? f4! wins for Black:

A) 64.Kg1 Kg3 65.Rc1 (65.Kf1 Rh2 66.Re8 Rh1+ 67.Ke2 f3+ 68.Kd3 Rd1+ 69.Kc2 f2) 65…f3 66.Ra1 Rh2 67. Kg1 f2+;

B) 64.Ra1 64…Kg3 B1) 65.Kg1 f3 66.Rc1 (66.Kf1 Rh2) 66…Rg2+ 67.Kf1 Rh2; B2) 65.Ra8 65…Rb1+ 66.Ke2 f3+ 67.Ke3 Re1+ 68.Kd2 f2;

[63.Ke1? on the long side is an obvious no-no: 63…f4 64.Re8 Rb1+ 65.Kd2 Kf2 66.Rf8 f3 67.Kd3 Kf1 68.Ke3 Rb3+ 69.Kd2 f2 70.Rg8 Rb5]

For other positions it really depends who can get their King in first, or at all; if the side with the Pawn can keep out the defending King they can win. John Nunn has written a whole book about positions with just one Pawn on the board, so you will forgive me, I hope, if I say they are sometimes tricky. We have seen a hint of this when we looked at Rook’s Pawns above. There is, however, a guiding principle:

Position 11: The rule of five

If the sum of the number of the rank on which the Pawn stands and the number of files that separate the Black King from the Pawn is five or less, then it’s a draw; greater than five, it’s a win. (Dvoretsky)
Here the Black King is cut off by three files = 3

The Pawn is on the third rank = 3

The sum is = 6

6 > 5, so it should be a win. But how? White keeps out the Black King and advances the Pawn; Black defends with harassing checks, this time from the front. The White Rook would be even better placed on f7, cutting the Black King off from the last rank and ready to intervene on the other side.

OK, how are we doing? Could you bear another Pawn on the board? Positions with a Pawn on each side may readily simplify to some fairly obvious simpler state, but not always…

Position 12: Lasker, 1890

draw?
1… Rb2+ 2.Ka7 Rc2 3.Rh5+ Ka4 4.Kb6 Rb2+ 5.Ka6 Rc2 6.Rh4+ got the idea? we’ve gained another rank 6…Ka3 7.Kb6 Rb2+ 8.Ka5 Rc2 9.Rh3+ Ka2

10.Rxh2 ! 10…Rxh2 11.c8Q 1-0

What about another Pawn on the same side? I claimed above that two passed Pawns on the board pretty well always win, and so they do. The exceptions, as we might expect, involve Rooks Pawns.

Position 13: drawn RP+NP (same side)

This is an important blockade: White, oddly, can do nothing.

Consider the drawn position with just an a-Pawn above, and now add a Pawn:

Position 14: drawn RP+NP

1…Ra5 the a-pawn is nearly there, but with a distant White King everything can (just) be held

[1…Kxg6?? 2.Rg8+]

1/2-1/2

With the Pawns further back we have another realm of headaches: White is generally better placed to manoeuvre and Black less well.

Position 15: won RP+BP

This is quite different – with the other White Pawn further away from the short side there is a skewer opportunity. once you know you can steer for this one you can win from more complex positions 1.f6+ Kf7 2.Rh8 Rxa7 3.Rh7+ 1-0

Position 16: win with a – pawn + 2 f-pawns

1.Kd1 DIAGRAM

(1) break the blockade

(2) win the f-pawn

(3) win as we know how

1…Kh7 2.Kc1 Kg7 3.Kb1 Ra3 4.Kb2 Ra4 5.Kb3 Ra1 6.Kb4 Ra2 7.Kb5 Ra1 8.Kc6 Ra5 9.Kd6 Kh7 10.Ke7 Ra6 11.Kf7 Ra4 12.Ke6

this is the critical bit: zugzwang!

12…Ra5 13.Kf6 Ra1 14.Kxf5

nearly there now

14…Ra5+ 15.Ke4 Ra4+ 16.Kd3 Ra3+ 17.Kc2 Ra2+ 18.Kb3 Ra1 19.f5 1-0

Smyslov, V – Botvinnik, M [C17] 1954

1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 Bb4 4.e5 c5 5.a3 Ba5 6.b4 cxd4 7.Nb5 Bc7 8.f4 Ne7 9.Nf3 Nbc6 10.Bd3 Bb8 11.Nbxd4 a6 12.Be3 Ba7 13.0-0 Nxd4 14.Bxd4 Bxd4+ 15.Nxd4 Qb6 16.Kh1 Bd7 17.c3 Rc8 18.Qe1 h6 19.a4 a5 20.Nb3 Qc7 21.Nc5 Bc6 22.Qf2 0-0 23.Nb3 Bd7 24.Qc5 Qxc5 25.Nxc5 Rc7 26.Nxd7 Rxd7 27.bxa5 Ra8 28.a6 bxa6 29.c4 dxc4 30.Bxc4 Rd4 31.Be2 Nd5 32.g3 Nc3 33.Bf3 Rb8 34.Ra3 Nb1 35.Ra2 Nd2 36.Rf2 Nc4 37.h4 g5 38.hxg5 hxg5 39.fxg5 Nxe5 40.Be2 Rb1+ 41.Kg2 a5 42.Rc2 Rb3 43.Rf4 Rd5 44.Re4 Kg7 45.Bh5 Ng6 46.Rg4 Re3 47.Bxg6 Kxg6 48.Rf2 Rf5 49.Rxf5 exf5 50.Rc4 Re4 51.Rc7 Rxa4 52.Ra7 Ra3

A relevant position has arisen. In the event Black won quickly:

53.Kh3? f4 54.Kh4 fxg3 55.Ra6+ Kf5 56.Rf6+ Ke4 57.Kh3 Rf3 58.Ra6 Rf5 0-1

But White did not pick the best defence! Let’s try another:

Position 17: analysis of Smyslov-Botvinnik (RP+BPs)
53.Kf2 (Euwe’s suggestion)

53…a4 54.Kg2 Ra1 55.Kf3 a3 56.Kg2

(56.Kf4 a2 57.Kf3 Rf1+)

56…a2 57.Kh2 Kxg5 58.Kg2 Kf6 !

(58…f4? only draws)

59.Ra5 Ke6 60.Kh2 f4 61.gxf4 f5

which we should know how to win.

(58…f4? 59.gxf4+ Kg4 60.f5 f6 61.Ra5

no zugzwang is now possible with the White Pawn on the 5th)

My faithful analyst Fritz successfully embarked on:

62.Kg2 Kd6 63.Kh2 Kc6 64.Kg2 Kb6 65.Ra8 Kc5 66.Ra4 Kb5 67.Ra8 Kc4 68.Kh2 Kd4 69.Ra4+ Kd3 70.Kg2 Ke3 71.Kh2 Kf3 72.Ra8 Kxf4

As you might expect, adding a Rook’s Pawn to a Rook’s Pawn doesn’t make it much more promising.

Karpov An – Yusupov A [A18] Linares 51/18, 1991

1.c4 e6 2.Nc3 Nf6 3.e4 d5 4.e5 d4 5.exf6 dxc3 6.bxc3 Qxf6 7.d4 e5 8.Nf3 exd4 9.Bg5 Qe6+ 10.Be2 Be7 11.cxd4 Bxg5 12.Nxg5 Qe7 13.Qd2 0-0 14.0-0 h6 15.Nf3 Bg4 16.Rfe1 Nc6 17.h3 Bxf3 18.Bxf3 Qf6 19.Re4 Rad8 20.Rd1 b6 21.Qe3 Na5 22.Rc1 Rd7 23.h4 Qd8 24.h5 Nc6 25.d5 Ne7 26.Rg4 f5 27.Rf4 Nc8 28.c5 bxc5 29.Qxc5 Nb6 30.Rd4 Rf6 31.a4 Rfd6 32.Rcd1 Re7 33.a5 Nd7 34.Qxa7 Ne5 35.Qc5 Nxf3+ 36.gxf3 Qe8 37.Rh4 Red7 38.Qc4 Qa8 39.Qc3 Rxd5 40.Rxd5 Qxd5

41.a6 Qa2 42.Qc4+ Qxc4 43.Rxc4 Rd1+ 44.Kg2 Ra1 45.Rc6 Kf8 46.f4 Ra3! 47.Kf1 Ra2 48.Ke1 Ke8 49.Kd1 Kd8! 50.Rg6 c5 51.Kc1

“There comes a point when you have to stop making your moves by common sense, and instead, after analysing a concrete path to a draw, you must force events.” – AY

51…Kc7! 52.Rxg7+ Kb6 53.Rg6+ Ka7 54.Rc6

[54.Rxh6 Rxf2]

54…Rxf2 55.Rxc5 Rxf4

[55…Kxa6 may be better, except that Black would have to keep thinking carefully how to draw with time running out.]

56.Rc6 Rg4 57.Kd2 Rg5 58.Rxh6 f4 59.Ke2

Position 18: Karpov-Yusupov 1991 (RP+RP)

59…f3+
“Black has absolutely no need for this Pawn, then try not to be distracted by non-essential details (like, a ‘non-essential’ Pawn)” – AY

Artur has confidence because he has studied this position. GM Gurevich actually managed to lose one of these in the US Championship in 1989 (and I don’t think he was the first). Miles wrote it up in NIC, commenting: “This ending is of course drawn, but the defence is not easy”. Dvoretsky interjects: “No, it is very easy” – if you know what to do!

60.Kxf3 Rc5 61.Rh8

(adjourned: the game could be given up here but Karpov saw no reason not to test Yusupov’s technique.)

White will attack the side away from the defending King with his own King. Black cannot touch the Pawn with the King here, but will keep the Rook away from the opposing King for checking distance: here the c-file is best so it can check from the seventh rank.

The White Rook is passively placed which is the downfall of his winning hopes. Black draws just as he would without the a-Pawn on the board.

(N.B. With the White Rook active and the Black Rook passive White can and should win by getting the King in.)

61…Rg5 62.Ke4 Rc5 63.Kf4 Rc4+ 64.Ke5 Rc5+ 65.Ke6 Rg5 66.Kf7 Rc5!

[66…Rd5? lacks checking distance and loses 67.h6 Rd6 68.h7 Rd7+ 69.Ke6]

67.Rh7

[67.h6 Rc7+! (67…Rh5? 68.Kg7) 68.Kf6 Rc6+]

67…Kxa6 68.h6 Rc7+ 1/2-1/2

Now, adding a Bishop’s Pawn on the same side as Rook’s Pawn is a real borderline case: theoretically drawn, but quite possible to lose it if you’re muddle-headed.

Marshall, F – Rubinstein, A [D32] San Sebastian (4), 1911

1.d4 d5 2.c4 e6 3.Nc3 c5 4.cxd5 exd5 5.Nf3 Nc6 6.Bg5 Be7 7.Bxe7 Ngxe7 8.e3 cxd4 9.Nxd4 Be6 10.Nxe6 fxe6 11.Qg4 Nf5 12.e4 d4 13.0-0-0 Qh4 14.Qxh4 Nxh4 15.Nb5 0-0-0 16.e5 Rhf8 17.Nd6+ Kb8 18.f4 g5 19.Bb5 gxf4 20.g3 Nf3 21.Bxc6 bxc6 22.Rhf1 fxg3 23.hxg3 Kc7 24.Ne4 Kb6 25.b4 Rf5 26.Nd6 Rff8 27.Ne4 Kb5 28.Nc5 Nxe5 29.Rxf8 Rxf8 30.Nxe6 Rf2 31.Rxd4 Rxa2 32.Nc7+ Kb6 33.Ne6 Rg2 34.Ng5 Rxg3 35.Nxh7 Kb5 36.Kc2 Nc4 37.Rd7 Ra3 38.Rb7+ Nb6 39.Nf6 Kxb4 40.Nd7 Kb5 41.Kb2 Ra4 42.Kb3 c5 43.Ne5 Rb4+ 44.Kc3 a5 45.Rb8 Ka4 46.Kc2 Nd5 47.Rc8 Kb5 48.Nd7 Rc4+ 49.Kb2 Nb6 50.Nxb6 Kxb6
Position 19: Marshall-Rubinstein 1911 (RP+BP)

This is the game that made this type of ending notorious; not the first time that it had occurred, but Rubinstein, such a master of endings and particularly Rook endings, may have fancied his chances here…
51.Kb3 Rb4+ 52.Kc3 Kb5 53.Rb8+ Ka4 54.Rc8 Rb3+ 55.Kc2 Rb5 56.Rh8 Kb4 57.Rh1 a4 58.Kb2 a3+ 59.Ka2 Ka4 60.Rc1 Ra5 61.Rb1 c4 62.Rb8 Rc5 63.Ra8+ Kb4 64.Rxa3 c3 65.Rb3+ Kc4 66.Rb8

1/2-1/2

Keres Paul GM (EST) – Sokolsky A [C71/14] Moskva Chigorin-mem (28.11.4, 1947

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 a6 4.Ba4 d6 5.c4 Bg4 6.d3 Nge7 7.h3 Bxf3 8.Qxf3 Ng6 9.Nc3 Be7 10.Be3 Bg5 11.0-0 0-0 12.Qg4 h6 13.Ne2 Bxe3 14.fxe3 Qg5 15.Qg3 Qxg3 16.Nxg3 Nge7 17.Kf2 g6 18.Ke2 Kg7 19.Kd2 h5 20.a3 h4 21.Ne2 f5 22.Nc3 fxe4 23.Nxe4 Rf5 24.Rg1 Raf8 25.Bd1 Rf1 26.Bf3 Rxa1 27.Rxa1 Nd8 28.b4 Ne6 29.Rb1 b6 30.a4 Rb8 31.Nc3 Ng5 32.Nd5 Nxf3+ 33.gxf3 Nxd5 34.cxd5 Ra8 35.Rc1 Ra7 36.e4 Kf6 37.Ke3 g5 38.d4 exd4+ 39.Kxd4 Ke7 40.e5 dxe5+ 41.Kxe5 Kd7 42.Rg1 Ra8 43.Rxg5 Re8+ 44.Kd4 Re1 45.Rg7+ Kd6 46.Rg6+ Kd7 47.Rg4 Kd6 48.Rg6+ Kd7 49.a5 Rb1 50.Kc4 Rc1+ 51.Kd3 Rd1+ 52.Ke3 Rxd5 53.axb6 cxb6 54.Rxb6 a5 55.Ke4 Rh5 56.Kf4 axb4 57.Rxb4 Ke6 58.Kg4 Rh8 59.Kg5 Rg8+ 60.Kxh4
Position 20: Keres-Sokolsky 1939 (RP+BP)

You can win these positions, by working your pieces right in and trying to achieve “Lucena” without allowing the “short side draw”. This cannot be forced. Black should resist the advance, get the King to the King’s-side and only once the Pawns are advanced send the Rook away to a1.
60…Kf5 61.Rg4 Rh8+ 62.Kg3 Ra8 63.h4 Ra1

Right square, wrong moment. White gets the Rook active behind the h-Pawn and threatens to run it with the King cut off.

64.h5 Ra6 65.Rh4 Rh6 66.Rf4+ Kg5 67.Rg4+ Kf5 68.Kh4 Rh8 69.Rg5+ Kf6 70.Kg4 Kf7 71.Rf5+ Kg7 72.Kg5 Rg8 73.Rf6 Kh7+

Well, the King has made it to h7 but the Black Rook now need to be on the far rank (a1-h1). White whips the King in to win.

74.Rg6 Ra8 75.f4 Ra1 76.Re6 Rg1+ 77.Kf6 Rf1 78.f5 Rf2 79.Re5 Rh2 80.Re7+ Kh6 81.Re8 Kh7 82.Ke6 Re2+ 83.Kf7 Ra2 84.f6 Ra6 85.Ke7 Ra7+ 86.Kf8 Ra6 87.f7 Ra7 88.Rc8 Ra1 89.Ke7 1-0

Here’s a successful defence.

Bondarevsky I – Keres Paul GM (EST) [D95/04] Leningrad-Moskva (25.01.39), 1939

1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 g6 3.Nc3 d5 4.e3 Bg7 5.Qb3 c6 6.Nf3 0-0 7.Bd2 e6 8.Bd3 b6 9.0-0 Bb7 10.e4 c5 11.exd5 cxd4 12.Na4 e5 13.Nxe5 Nxd5 14.Nc5 Ne7 15.Nxb7 Qc7 16.Ng4 h5 17.Nd6 Qxd6 18.c5 bxc5 19.Nh6+ Bxh6 20.Bxh6 Rd8 21.Bc4 Kh7 22.Bd2 Nbc6 23.Bxf7 Rab8 24.Qh3 Ne5 25.Bf4 Rf8 26.Rae1 N7c6 27.Bxg6+ Qxg6 28.Bxe5 Rbe8 29.Bd6 Rxe1 30.Rxe1 Qxd6 31.Re6 Qd5 32.Qd3+ Qf5 33.Qxf5+ Rxf5 34.Rxc6 Re5 35.Kf1 d3 36.Rd6 c4 37.b3 Rb5 38.Ke1 cxb3 39.axb3 Rxb3 40.Kd2 Rb2+ 41.Ke3 Re2+ 42.Kf3 Rd2 43.Ra6 Rd1 44.Kg3 Kg7 45.Rxa7+ Kf6 46.Rd7 Kf5 47.Kf3 h4 48.h3 d2 49.Rd8 Kf6 50.Rd3 Kf5 51.Rd6 Ke5 52.Rd8 Kf6 53.Rd4 Kf5 54.Rd7 Ke6 55.Ke2 Rg1 56.Rxd2 Rxg2 57.Rd4 Kf5 58.Rxh4

58…Rg1 59.Kf3 Ra1 60.Rg4 Ra3+ 61.Kg2 Rb3 62.f3 Rb2+ 63.Kg3 Rb1 64.h4 Rg1+ 65.Kh3 Rb1 66.Kg2 Rb2+ 67.Kg3 Rb1 68.h5 Rb6 69.Rh4 Rh6 70.Ra4 Rb6 71.Ra5+ Kf6 72.Kg4 Rb1 73.Ra6+ Kg7 74.f4 Rg1+ 75.Kf5 Rh1 76.h6+ Kh7 77.Re6 Rb1 78.Ke5 Rb5+ 79.Ke4 Rb1 80.f5 Rb2 81.Kf4 Rg2 82.Ke5 Ra2 83.Rb6 Ra1 84.Kf4 Rg1

Black is in a good defensive position.

85.Ra6 Rg2 86.Rc6 Rg1 87.Rd6 Rg2 88.Ra6 Rg1 89.Re6 Rg2 90.Ke5 Ra2 91.Kd6 Ra5 92.f6 Kg6 93.Re8

And now a cute finish to draw.

93…Ra6+ 94.Ke7 Rxf6 95.Rg8+ Kh7 96.Rg7+ Kh8 97.Kxf6 stalemate

1/2-1/2

Example games: more complex Rook Endings

Alekhin, A – Capablanca, J [D51] Wch13-Buenos Aires (34), 1927: active Rook in attack

1.d4 d5 2.c4 e6 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.Bg5 Nbd7 5.e3 c6 6.a3 Be7 7.Nf3 0-0 8.Bd3 dxc4 9.Bxc4 Nd5 10.Bxe7 Qxe7 11.Ne4 N5f6 12.Ng3 c5 13.0-0 Nb6 14.Ba2 cxd4 15.Nxd4 g6 16.Rc1 Bd7 17.Qe2 Rac8 18.e4 e5 19.Nf3 Kg7 20.h3 h6 21.Qd2 Be6 22.Bxe6 Qxe6 23.Qa5 Nc4 24.Qxa7 Nxb2 25.Rxc8 Rxc8 26.Qxb7 Nc4 27.Qb4 Ra8 28.Ra1 Qc6 29.a4 Nxe4 30.Nxe5 Qd6 31.Qxc4 Qxe5 32.Re1 Nd6 33.Qc1 Qf6 34.Ne4 Nxe4 35.Rxe4 Rb8 36.Re2 Ra8 37.Ra2 Ra5 38.Qc7 Qa6 39.Qc3+ Kh7 40.Rd2 Qb6 41.Rd7 Qb1+ 42.Kh2 Qb8+ 43.g3 Rf5 44.Qd4 Qf8 45.Rd5 Rf3 46.h4 Qh8 47.Qb6 Qa1 48.Kg2 Rf6

It’s all in the details. White swaps Queens when he can keep his Rook active. 49.Qd4 Qxd4 50.Rxd4 Kg7 51.a5 Ra6 52.Rd5

52…Rf6 53.Rd4 Ra6 54.Ra4!

That’s the one. Now White wants his King in. 54…Kf6 55.Kf3 Ke5 56.Ke3 h5 57.Kd3 Kd5 58.Kc3 Kc5 59.Ra2! (pass: Black decides to put the King on guard duty) 59…Kb5

[59…Ra7 60.a6 Kb6 61.Kb4]

60.Kb3 Kc5

[60…Rxa5 61.Rxa5+ Kxa5 62.Kc4]

61.Kc3 Kb5 62.Kd4! Rd6+ 63.Ke5 Re6+ 64.Kf4 Ka6 65.Kg5! Re5+ 66.Kh6 Rf5 67.f4

[67.Kg7 Rf3 White triangulates. 68.Kg8 Rf6 69.Kf8 Rf3 70.Kg7 Rf5 71.f4!]

67…Rc5! 68.Ra3 Rc7 69.Kg7 Rd7 70.f5! gxf5 71.Kh6 f4! Black’s doing his considerable best. 72.gxf4 Rd5 73.Kg7 Rf5 74.Ra4 Kb5 75.Re4! Ka6 76.Kh6 Rxa5 77.Re5 Ra1 78.Kxh5 Rg1 79.Rg5 Rh1 80.Rf5 Kb6 81.Rxf7 Kc6 82.Re7! 1-0

Bakulin – Dvoretsky,M, Moscow, 1974 (active Rook in defence)

18…Re6
I tried to think of something after

[18…Nc6 I became suspicioous of the endgame after 19.c4 d4 20.Nc5 b6 21.Nd3 Vaganian, a specialist in the French Defence, assessed this position as highly unfavourable to Black.]

19.Nc5 Rxe1+ 20.Rxe1 Another intriguing idea immediately occurred to me: 20…Rc8!

[20…Ng6 21.Nxb7 Rb8 22.Nc5 Rxb2 23.Re8+ Nf8 looks very dubious 24.g3 f6 25.Nd7 Kf7 26.Rxf8+ Ke7 27.Rb8]

21.Rxe7 Kf8 An eye for combinations is sometime essential even in ‘boring’ endgames! 22.Rxb7

[22.Re2 Rxc5=]

22…Rxc5 23.c3 d4 24.Kf1

[24.Rb3?? d3 25.Kf1 Re5]

24…dxc3 25.bxc3 Rxc3 26.Rxa7 Rc2

I knew for certain that this was a draw, and a fairly simple one at that, and so went for my combination without hesitation. 27.g3 g6 28.Kg2 Kg7 29.Kf3 h5 30.h4 Kf6 31.Ke3 Rc3+ 32.Ke4 Rc2 33.f3 Re2+ 34.Kf4 Rb2 35.Ra6+ Kg7 36.Ra3 Kf6 37.Ra6+ Kg7 38.Ra4 Kf6

[38…Rf2!?]

39.g4 hxg4 40.fxg4 Rf2+ 41.Kg3 Rc2 42.Rf4+

[42.g5+ Ke5]

42…Ke6 43.a4

[43.Rf2 Rc3+ 44.Kf4 f6]

43…f5 44.gxf5+ gxf5 45.Rf2 Rc4 46.Ra2 Rc3+ 47.Kf4 Rc4+ 48.Kg3

[48.Kg5 Rg4+ 49.Kh5 Kf6 50.a5?? Rg8]

48…Rc3+ 49.Kg2 Rc4 50.h5 Rh4 1/2-1/2

Duras, O – Capablanca, J [D37] rook ending: 4P/3P on same side (11), 1913

1.d4 d5 2.Nf3 Nf6 3.c4 e6 4.Nc3 dxc4 5.e3 a6 6.Bxc4 b5 7.Bd3 Bb7 8.a4 b4 9.Nb1 c5 10.0-0 Nc6 11.dxc5 Bxc5 12.Qe2 Qd5 13.Rd1 Qh5 14.Nbd2 Na5 15.Nf1 0-0 16.Ng3 Qg4 17.e4 Nb3 18.Rb1 Rfd8 19.Be3 Nxe4 20.Bc2 Bxe3 21.Qxe3
[21.Bxb3 Bxf2+ 22.Kh1 Bxg3]

21…Nbc5 22.h3 Qg6 23.Nxe4 Rxd1+ 24.Rxd1 Bxe4 25.Bxe4 Nxe4 26.Qd4 h6 27.Qxb4 Nf6 28.Qb7 Qe4 29.Qxe4 Nxe4 30.b4 Nc3 31.Rd3

[31.Ra1 Rb8 32.Ra3 Nd5]

31…Nxa4 32.Ra3 Nb6 33.Ne5 Kf8 34.Nd3 Nd5 35.Ra4 Rb8 36.Rxa6 Nxb4 37.Nxb4 Rxb4

Capa’s play in this ending was so strong and convincing it took people a while to realise that this type of ending is probably a draw in theory

38.Ra7 h5 39.g3 h4 40.gxh4 ?

[40.g4]

40…Rxh4 41.Kg2 e5 42.Kg3 Rd4 43.Ra5

[43.h4]

43…f6 44.Ra7 Kg8 45.Rb7 Kh7 46.Ra7 Kg6 47.Re7 Rd3+

[47…Rd3+ idea 48.Kh4 Rf3]

48.Kg2

[48.f3 Kf5 49.Rxg7 e4 50.h4 Rxf3+;

48.Kg4 f5+ 49.Kh4 Kf6 50.Ra7 g5+ 51.Kh5 Rxh3#]

48…Rd5 49.Kg3 f5 50.Ra7 Rd3+ 51.Kg2 e4 52.Ra4 Kg5 53.Ra5 g6 54.Rb5 Kf4 55.Ra5 Rd2 56.Ra4 Kg5

[56…g5 the game from Chernev gives this move as the game continuation, and then… 57.Rb4 Ke5 58.Rb5+ Rd5 59.Rb8 f4 60.Rg8]

57.Kg1 Kf4 58.Kg2 g5 59.Rb4 Ke5 60.Rb5+ Rd5 61.Rb8 f4 62.Rg8

this is the same position as in Chernev ‘s book 62…Kd4

[62…Rd2 this also looks good: 63.Rxg5+ Kf6 64.Rg4 Kf5 65.Kf1 f3 66.Ke1 Re2+ 67.Kf1 Ra2 68.Ke1 Ra1+ 69.Kd2 Rf1 70.Ke3 Re1+ 71.Kd4 Re2 72.Rg8 Rd2+ 73.Ke3 Rd3#]

63.Kf1 Kd3 64.Ra8 e3 65.Ra3+ Ke4 66.fxe3 f3

[66…fxe3 this looks good, but fails: 67.Ra8 Rf5+ 68.Ke2 Rf2+ 69.Ke1 Kf3 70.Rf8+ Kg3 71.Re8 Rf3 72.Ke2]

67.Kg1

[67.Kf2 Rd2+ 68.Kg3 Rg2#]

67…Rd3

[67…Rd3 IDEA 68.Rxd3 Kxd3 69.Kf2 Ke4 70.Kf1 Kxe3 71.Kg1 Ke2]

68.Ra8

[68.Ra5 Kxe3 69.Re5+ Kf4 70.Ra5 g4 71.Ra4+ Ke3 72.Ra1 g3]

68…Kxe3 69.Re8+ Kf4 70.Rg8 Rd1+ 71.Kf2 Rd2+ 72.Kf1

[72.Kg1 g4 73.Rxg4+ Ke3 74.Rg8 having been lured to g4 there is no check for the rook on the e-file 74…Rd1+ 75.Kh2 f2 76.Re8+ Kd2 77.Rd8+ Kc2 78.Rxd1 else the Black K will run up the Q-side at the checking White rook 78…Kxd1 79.Kg2 Ke2]

72…Rh2 73.Kg1 Rxh3 74.Rg7 g4 75.Rg8 Kg3 …and White resigned. So impressive was Capa’s play that for years books suggested that this ending R+4P v. R+3P was a win, even with all the pawns on the same side of the board. Now, improvements for Duras are known.

[75…Kg3 76.Rf8 f2+ 77.Rxf2 Rh1+ 78.Kxh1 Kxf2 79.Kh2 g3+]

0-1

Capablanca, J – Kreymbourg, A [D02] 1910: a double Rook ending

1.d4 d5 2.Nf3 Nf6 3.Bf4 e6 4.e3 c5 5.c3 Nc6 6.Bd3 Bd6 7.Bxd6 Qxd6 8.Nbd2 e5 9.dxe5 Nxe5 10.Nxe5 Qxe5 11.Bb5+ Bd7 12.Qa4 Qc7 13.0-0-0 0-0 14.Bxd7 Nxd7 15.Nf3 Qc6 16.Qxc6 bxc6 17.Nd2 Ne5 18.Kc2 c4 19.Rhf1 f5 20.Nf3 Nxf3 21.gxf3 Rae8

Black appears to have better Rooks, but the Q-side pawns are advanced and vulnerable. This vulnerability costs Black the a-file, and that costs him the activity of his Rooks. 22.Rd4 Rf6 23.b3 cxb3+ 24.axb3 Kf7 25.Kd3 Re7 26.Ra1 Ke6 27.Ra6 Rc7 28.Rda4 g5 29.h4 g4 30.Ke2 gxf3+ 31.Kxf3 Rff7 32.Ke2 Kd6 33.b4 Rb7 34.h5

White is well placed to attack several Black pawns. 34…h6 35.f4 Rg7 36.Kd3 Rge7 37.Ra1 Rg7 38.Kd4 Rg2 39.R6a2 Rbg7 40.Kd3 Rxa2 41.Rxa2

We are now in a single-Rook ending. Black now gives up the open file. 41…Re7 42.Rg2 Re6 43.Rg7 Re7 44.Rg8 c5 45.Rg6+ Re6 46.bxc5+ Kd7 47.Rg7+ Kc6 48.Rxa7 Kxc5 49.Rf7 1-0

Capablanca, J – Tartakower, S [A80] NY, 1924

1.d4 f5 2.Nf3 e6 3.c4 Nf6 4.Bg5 Be7 5.Nc3 0-0 6.e3 b6 7.Bd3 Bb7 8.0-0 Qe8 9.Qe2 Ne4 10.Bxe7 Nxc3 11.bxc3 Qxe7 12.a4 Bxf3 13.Qxf3 Nc6 14.Rfb1 Rae8 15.Qh3 Rf6 16.f4 Na5 17.Qf3 d6 18.Re1 Qd7 19.e4 fxe4 20.Qxe4 g6 21.g3 Kf8 22.Kg2 Rf7
[22…Qc6 23.Qxc6 Nxc6 24.c5 Re7]

23.h4 d5 24.cxd5 exd5 25.Qxe8+ Qxe8 26.Rxe8+ Kxe8 27.h5 Rf6

[27…gxh5 28.Rh1 Kf8 29.Rxh5 Kg8 30.Rxd5]

28.hxg6 hxg6 29.Rh1 Kf8

[29…Ke7 30.Rh7+ Rf7 else 31.Rg7 31.Bxg6]

30.Rh7

rook on the seventh 30…Rc6 31.g4

[31.Rd7 ? 31…Nc4 32.Rxd5 Ne3+]

31…Nc4 32.g5 Ne3+ 33.Kf3

33…Nf5

[33…Nd1 this counterattack fails, because of White’s strong King and K-side pawns 34.Rh6 Kg7 35.f5 Nxc3 36.Kf4 Ne4 37.Bxe4 dxe4 38.f6+ Rxf6+ 39.gxf6+ Kxh6 40.Kxe4 Kh7 41.Kd5 Kg8 42.Kc6 g5 43.Kxc7 g4 44.d5 g3 45.d6 g2 46.d7 g1Q 47.d8Q+ Kh7 48.Qe7+ Kh6 49.Qg7+ Qxg7+ 50.fxg7 Kxg7 51.Kb7 Kf7 52.Kxa7 Ke7 53.Kxb6 Kd7 54.Kb7]

34.Bxf5 gxf5 35.Kg3 Rxc3+ 36.Kh4 Rf3 37.g6 Rxf4+ 38.Kg5 Re4

39.Kf6 using the f-pawn as cover 39…Kg8 40.Rg7+ Kh8 41.Rxc7 Re8 42.Kxf5 Re4 43.Kf6 Rf4+ 44.Ke5 Rg4 45.g7+

45…Kg8

[45…Rxg7 46.Rxg7 Kxg7 47.Kxd5 Kf7 48.Kd6 ! 48…Ke8 49.Kc7 Ke7 50.d5]

46.Rxa7 Rg1 47.Kxd5 Rc1 48.Kd6 Rc2 49.d5 Rc1 50.Rc7 Ra1 51.Kc6 Rxa4 52.d6

[52.d6 ! by declining the Kxb6 capture White’s K gets shelter 52…Rd4 53.d7 Rc4+ 54.Kb7 Rd4 55.Kc8]

1-0

Capablanca, J – Kupchik, A [C49] rook ending: various themes, 1913

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.Bb5 Bb4 5.0-0 0-0 6.Bxc6 bxc6 7.Nxe5 Qe8 8.Nd3 Bxc3 9.dxc3 Qxe4 10.Re1 Qh4 11.Qf3 Ba6 12.Bf4 Rac8 13.Be5 Bxd3 14.cxd3 Qg4 15.Bxf6 Qxf3 16.gxf3 gxf6

An early Rook ending: White is better not just because of the neater pawns but because he can immediately activate the Rook. 17.Re4 Rfe8 18.Rae1 Re6 19.R1e3 Rce8 20.Kf1 Kf8 21.Ke2 Ke7 22.Ra4 Ra8 23.Ra5 d5 24.c4 Kd6 25.c5+ Kd7 26.d4 f5 27.Rxe6 fxe6 28.f4 Clearing the third rank for the Rook. 28…Kc8 29.Kd2 Kb7 30.Ra3 Rg8 31.Rh3 Rg7 32.Ke2 Ka6 33.Rh6 Re7 34.Kd3 Kb7 35.h4 Kc8 36.Rh5 Kd7 37.Rg5 Rf7 38.Kc3 Kc8 39.Kb4 Rf6 40.Ka5 Kb7 41.a4 a6 42.h5 Rh6 43.b4 Rf6

White is poised on both fronts. 44.b5 The only break, which also allows Black to become active. 44…axb5 45.axb5

Defend or counterattack? 45…Rf8

[45…Rf7 46.h6 Re7 47.Rg7 is hopeless: so Black must counterattack.]

46.Rg7 Ra8+ 47.Kb4 cxb5 48.Kxb5 Ra2 49.c6+ Kb8 50.Rxh7 White has an h-pawn. Can the lone Black Rook do enough to compensate? 50…Rb2+ 51.Ka5 Ra2+ 52.Kb4 Rxf2 53.Re7 Rxf4 54.h6 Rxd4+ 55.Kb5 Rd1 56.h7 Rb1+ 57.Kc5 Rc1+ 58.Kd4 Rd1+ 59.Ke5 Re1+ 60.Kf6 Rh1 61.Re8+ Ka7 62.h8Q Rxh8 63.Rxh8 Kb6 64.Kxe6 Kxc6 65.Kxf5 Kc5 66.Ke5 c6 67.Rh6 Kb5 68.Kd4 1-0

Selected games in play-through format

Winning a drawn endgame

Posted on by

Two observations:

1.

When you look at the games of club players, you often see draws agreed in positions which are clearly better for one side, e.g.:

Blackmore – Isaac (116) (3), 1995

Black to move
Move chosen: draw agreed

Better move(s): 33…c4

Commentary:
Black has generally better pieces and two Bishops, while White has little play. If you look around the position there are lots of little ideas for Black (…Rb3, …Be2) and few for White. The pawn move suggested gives the Black Knight a superb post and releases the Bishop on e7. I don’t mean to pick on Mark, I’ve done the same myself (more than once!), but the point must be made.

2.

When you read books about Capablanca, you read comments like:

“Whether this advantage is decisive or not does not interest Capablanca. He simply wins the ending! That’s why he is Capablanca!” — EUWE

Can we become more like Capablanca?

Most people would say no, because Capa is a genius, with almost faultless insight into the theory of endgames. But you don’t need to be a genius to win drawn endgames. Have a look at this one from “Chess for Tigers”:

Miles,AJ – Webb,S (Birmingham) 1975
(wKg2,Qd4,Rb1,d1,Pa2,f2,g3,h2; bKg7,Qf5,Rc8,f7,Pa7,f6,g6,h7)

Webb was surprised and I guess a little peeved that Miles refused a draw in this position.
23… Rc2 24. a3 Qc5 25. Rb3 Qxd4?

Simplifying but going on the defensive – a needless concession.

[25… Re7]

[25… Rc7 26. Rf3 Qc6]

26. Rxd4 Re7 27. Ra4 Kf7 28. Ra6

White has contrived a little threat, which costs nothing, and Black might be careless…

28… Rce2 29. Rb4

[29. Rf3 R2e6]

29… Rd7 30. Rba4 Ree7 31. g4! h5?

Creating targets on the King’s-side – another concession. Holding tight would have allowed a weakened square on f6 but White has no way through.

[31… Kg7 32. h4 Kf7 33. g5 fxg5 34. hxg5 Kg7 35. Rf6]

32. gxh5 gxh5 33. R4a5 Kg6 34. h4

Now, this is probably still drawn, but Black has slipped a long way back since the first diagram.
34… Rc7? Careless.

[34… Rf7]

35. Rg5+ Kf7 36. Rxh5 Kg7

Now it’s lost. The technical phase may give White problems, but that’s not the point: Black should never have lost the Pawn.

37. Rf5 Rf7 38. Kg3 Rc3+ 39. f3 Rc1 40. Rfa5 Rcc7 41. Kg4 Rc4+ 42. f4 Rcc7 43. Kf5 Rb7 44. a4 Rbc7 45. h5 Rb7 46. h6+ Kxh6 47. Rxf6+ Kg7 48. Rxf7+ Kxf7 49. Ra6 Rc7 50. Kg5 Kg7 51. f5 Rd7 52. a5 Rc7 53. Rd6 Kf8 54. Rd8+ Ke7 55. Rh8 Kd6 56. Kg6 Rc1 57. Ra8 Ke5 58. Re8+ Kf4 59. f6 Rg1+ 60. Kf7 Ra1 61. Kg7 Kf5 62. f7 Rg1+ 63. Kf8 Kg6 64. Re6+ 1-0

What’s going on here? It’s not chess theory or insight, but psychology.

White was playing as though he was going to win. He kept trying to put pressure on the opponent, collecting little advantages, looking for opportunities.

Black was playing as thought he was trying to draw. In fact, he tried and failed. He kept solid, but passive, and kept making little concessions – and the biggest concession really was his attitude.

Black should have been playing much more assertively, not thinking about the result, but the position, trying to play the strongest and most active moves, making concessions only when forced to. In fact, it is said in truth that the best way to draw is to play for a win. Not in a reckless way that Tarrasch wryly termed “playing for the loss”, but rather like Miles did – keep playing actively – and not like Webb did – don’t give an inch that you aren’t forced to.

Once we have realised this, we can see it in other games:

Cooper – Hebden (Lutterworth) 1986
(wKg1,Qf4,Rf2,Pa2,b2,g2,h2; bKg8,Qe6,Rf8,Pa7,f7,g7,h6)

Completely drawn, but probably so is the starting position of a game of chess! You must play actively, make the most of your assets, and set your opponent problems. White has a Queen’s-side majority, which must be advanced. Black must advance his majority on the King’s-side.
1. b3 Rd8 2. Qf3 Rc8 3. g3 Rc1+ 4. Kg2 Re1 5. Qa8+ Kh7 6. Qf3

[6. Qxa7 Qe4+]

6… Kg6 7. Qd3+ f5 8. Qf3

White is just hacking about, perhaps thinking vaguely about perpetual check, waiting for the draw to turn up. These hopeful checks are actually time-wasters, and hope gradually fades…

8… Re3 9. Qb7 Kh7 10. Rf3 Re1 11. Rf2 h5 12. Qf3 g6 13. Qb7+ Kh6 14. Qf3

 

Black is making progress, White none. Compare the first diagram!
14… Re4 15. Qc3 g5 16. Qh8+ Kg6 17. Qc3 Qd5 18. Kg1 h4 19. Qd2 Rd4 20. Qe2 Rd1+ 21. Rf1 Qd4+

 

White is almost lost.
22. Kh1

[22. Qf2 Qxf2+ 23. Kxf2 Rd2+ loses a Pawn, but that may have been the best chance.]

22… Qd5+ 23. Kg1 Rd2

 

Winning? White must go for perpetual, Black must make a break for the Queen’s-side.
24. Qe8+ Kg7 25. Qe7+ Kh6 26. Qf6+ Kh5 27. Qh8+ Kg4 28. Rf4+ gxf4 29. Qxh4+ Kf3 30. Qxf4+ Ke2 31. Qf1+ Ke3 32. Qf4+ Kd3 0-1

And, if you will forgive the immodesty, once you have seen this done, you can even imitate it.

Wilcox, RJ (154) – Regis, D (168) (Paignton #3) 1996

I did have the advantage earlier, but was now struggling to draw.
40. b4 Re4

Time control, and I offered a draw. Declined! So, Black must fight like fury. Activity is everything, going passive is equivalent to resigning.

41. b5

[41. Rf1]

41… Qd3 42. Qa2

 

I had to seal a move here. While I was fiddling with envelopes, Peter overheard him say to a friend of his “I should win this one pretty quickly” (!). Black is genuinely in difficulty (once that Pawn takes another step, Black can start to worry!) But Black has the move.
42… Re2 (Sealed)

43. Qa8+?

This “hopeful check” actually just exposes the Rook.

43…Kh7 44. Rf1 Re7

White obviously hoped Rf1 was strong; he and his colleagues had overlooked Black’s best reply. This can be seen as a simple oversight, but also as reward for Black using his pieces as actively as possible.

45. Qf3 Qxb5 46. Qf6=

OK, we have have now a new phase. This is objectively a drawn position, I believe. I thought this at the time, but was happy to play on, knowing that White had to adjust his mood to suit the new situation. I had the example of the Miles-Webb game very much in my mind while playing.

46…Qe2 47. Ra1 Qe6! 48. Qd4

[48. Qxe6 fxe6 obtaining a passed Pawn is very much what I hoped for]

48… Qe5!? (bluff)

49. Qa4?

[49. Qxe5 Rxe5 50. Ra7= is absolutely level. Normally you try to keep pieces on when trying to draw, but while Black has an extra Pawn, with Pawns on only one side, it’s a draw. White should have known this.]

49… Qd5 50. Rf1?

Passive. [50. Rd1]

50… Re2 51. Rg1 Re3 52. Kh2 Qe5+ 53. Kh1

[53. g3 Re2+ 54. Rg2 Rxg2+ 55. Kxg2 Qe2+ 56. Kg1 Qf3 57. Kh2 Qf2+ 58. Kh1 Qxg3-+ ]

53… Qf5 54. Qa2 h4

Collecting another advantage (weak g-Pawn, maybe a passed f-Pawn if White exchanges g- for h-Pawn).

[54… Rc3 55. Qe2 Rc2]

55. Qd2?

Another do-nothing move, and this time it’s fatal. The position is still interesting and may be no more than drawn, but I hope you can see the same attitudes at work here.

55… Qe4 56. Qf2 Rxh3# 0-1

A couple from Capa: the first is the game about which Euwe made his remark.

Capablanca,Jose – Vidmar,Milan sr [New York ] (12) [C98] 1927

1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bb5 a6 4. Ba4 Nf6 5. O-O Be7 6. Re1 b5 7. Bb3 d6 8. c3 Na5 9. Bc2 c5 10. d4 Qc7 11. Nbd2 O-O 12. h3

These days played before d2-d4, otherwise a fairly typical Lopez position.
12… Nc6 13. d5 Nd8 14. a4

A typical undermining thrust in the Ruy Lopez; Black’s Pawns offer a target for White and counterplay for Black!

14… b4 15. Nc4 a5

 

16. Nfxe5! Ba6 17. Bb3 dxe5 18. d6 Bxd6 19. Qxd6 Qxd6 20. Nxd6 Nb7 21. Nxb7 Bxb7

White has the two Bishops and pressure against Black’s advanced but rather immobile Queen’s-side Pawns.
“Whether this advantage is decisive or not does not interest Capablanca. He simply wins the ending! That’s why he is Capablanca!” — EUWE

22. cxb4 cxb4 23. f3 Rfd8 24. Be3 h6 25. Red1 Bc6 26. Rac1 Be8 27. Kf2

KUFTE – “King Up For The Ending”!

27… Rxd1 28. Rxd1 Rc8

 

Poor Black’s Rook has no entry point, as the unmoved White Pawn on b2 secures the c3 square. This is a concrete example of Tarrasch’s statement that every Pawn move loosens the position.
29. g4 Bd7 30. Bb6

Decisive. Now there are a couple of exchanges, which leave only White’s best piece (Bb6) and Black’s worst piece (Nf6) on the board! 30… Be6

[30… Ra8 31. Bc7 snookering the Rook [31. Rc1 and Rc5]]

31. Bxe6 fxe6 32. Rd8+ Rxd8 33. Bxd8 Nd7 34. Bxa5 Nc5

 

35. b3 Nxb3 36. Bxb4 Nd4 37. a5 1-0
Capa seemed born with this facility at endgames.

Capablanca,Jose – Corzo y Principe,Juan (Havana m ) (09) [A83] 1901

1. d4
This is the ninth game of the match for the Cuban Championship, which Capa played at the age of 12. He took 24 minutes over this game.

1… f5 2. e4 fxe4 3. Nc3 Nf6 4. Bg5 c6 5. Bxf6 exf6 6. Nxe4 d5 7. Ng3 Qe7+ 8. Qe2 Qxe2+ 9. Bxe2 Bd6 10. Nf3 O-O 11. O-O Bg4 12. h3

Black could try to play for a win with the two Bishops, but instead exchanges apparently seeking a draw.

12… Bxf3 13. Bxf3 Bxg3 14. fxg3 Nd7 15. Rfe1 Rae8 16. Kf1 f5 17. Rxe8 Rxe8 18. Re1 Rxe1+ 19. Kxe1 Nf6

 

20. Kd2 (tempting…) Ne4+ 21. Ke3 Nd6
[21… Nxg3 22. Kf4 Ne4

[22… Nf1 23. Be2 Nd2 24. Kxf5]

23. Kxf5]

22. Be2 Kf7 23. Kf4 Kf6

Chernev comments “The position may look drawish, but it is to Capablanca’s liking; he often manages to squeeze a win out of a theoretical draw”. I haven’t seen a GM assessment of this position and Chernev (by no means a weak player) does not commit himself as to the ‘proper’ result of this endgame. Without wishing to enter the (possibly fruitless) debate about whether this position is in fact drawn, White does have the advantage of Bishop over Knight, with play on both sides of the board. If White can create tension in more than one area of the board, Black’s Knight will find itself over-committed. While all the Black Pawns are on the board and are all on light squares, White’s Bishop lacks scope, but if things open up a little, the Black Pawns may become vulnerable.

24. h4 g6

[24… h6 25. h5]

25. g4 h6 26. g5+ hxg5+ 27. hxg5+ Ke7 28. g4 fxg4 29. Bd3

 

Now the King’s-side has opened up the strength of the Bishop begins to show itself.
29… Nf5

concedes a passed Pawn

[29… Kf7 (Hooper) 30. Kxg4 Nb5 31. c3 Nc7 “with good drawing chances”; neither Bishop nor King have an obvious entry point.]

30. Kxg4 Nxd4

[30… Ke6 31. Bxf5+ gxf5+ 32. Kf4 and who has the most tempi to lose on the Queen’s-side? Chernev assumes Black will run out of moves, but it’s worth being sure! Perhaps..

32… a5

[32…b6 33. b4 a6

[33… a5 34. bxa5 bxa5 35. a4]

34. a4 a5 35. bxa5 bxa5 36. c3]

33. a4 b6 34. b3 b5 35. c3 b4 36. cxb4 axb4 37. a5]

31. Bxg6 c5 32. Kh5 Ne6 33. Kh6 Kf8 34. Bf5 Ng7

[34… Nd4 35. Bd7 Nxc2 36. g6 Kg8 37.

Be6+ Kh8 38. g7#]

35. Bc8 b6 36. g6 d4

 

Black’s only hope is to do something with the Queen’s-side Pawns, but they lack support.
37. b3 Kg8 38. a4 Kf8 39. Bg4 Ne8 40. Kh7 Ng7 41. Kh6 Ne8 42. Be2 Ng7 43. Bc4 Ne8

 

White begins a long King-march
44. Kg5 Ke7

[44… Kg7 45. Bb5 Nd6 46. Bd3 Ne8 47. Kf5]

45. Kf5 Ng7+ 46. Ke5 Nh5

[46… Kd7 47. Kf6 Ne8+ 48. Kf7 Nd6+ 49. Kf8]

47. Be2 Ng7 48. Kd5 Ne8

[48… Kd7 49. Bg4+]

49. Kc6 Ng7 50. Kb7 Kd6

 

White attacks the Pawn chain at the base!
51. Kxa7 Kc7 52. Ka6 Ne8 53. Bf3 Ng7 54. Bd5 Ne8

[54… Nf5 55. Be4 Ng7 56. Kb5 Ne8 57. a5 Nd6+ 58. Ka6 Nxe4 59. axb6+ Kb8 60. g7 Nf6 61. Kb5 Kb7 62. Kxc5 Ng8 63. Kxd4]

55. Bf7 Ng7 56. Kb5

Now the White King covers the break at a5, and the Pawns at b6 and d5. 56… Nf5

 

57. a5 Nd6+
[57… bxa5 58. Kxc5]

58. Ka6 bxa5

[58… Nf5 59. axb6+ Kb8 60. Kb5]

59. g7 1-0

 

Two last examples, which illustrate the same problem, although at rather different levels of the game…

Marshall-Capablanca, 1909

1.d4 d5 2.c4 e6 3.Nc3 c5 4.cxd5 exd5 5.Nf3 Nc6 6.g3 Be6 7.Bg2 Be7 8.O-O Nf6 9.Bg5 Ne4 10.Bxe7 Qxe7 11.Ne5 Nxd4 12.Nxe4 dxe4 13.e3 Nf3+ 14.Nxf3 exf3 15.Qxf3 O-O 16.Rfc1

“He should have advanced his K-side pawns at once to counterbalance the advance of Black on the Q-side. White’s inactivity on his stronger wing took away all the chances he had of drawing the game.” CAPABLANCA
16…Rab8 17.Qe4 Qc7 18.Rc3 b5 19.a3 c4 20.Bf3 Rfd8 21.Rd1 Rxd1+ 22.Bxd1 Rd8 23.Bf3 g6 24.Qc6 Qe5 25.Qe4 Qxe4 26.Bxe4 Rd1+ {!} 27.Kg2 a5 28.Rc2 b4 29.axb4 axb4 30.Bf3 Rb1 31.Be2 b3 32.Rd2 Rc1 33.Bd1 c3 34.bxc3 b2 35.Rxb2 Rxd1 36.Rc2 Bf5 37.Rb2 Rc1 38.Rb3 Be4+ 39.Kh3 Rc2 40.f4 h5 41.g4 hxg4+ 42.Kxg4 Rxh2 43.Rb4 f5+ 44.Kg3 Re2 45.Rc4 Rxe3+ 46.Kh4 Kg7 47.Rc7+ Kf6 48.Rd7 Bg2 49.Rd6+ Kg7 0-1

There are some bones to pick in the details of this game, but the flow of it is very convincing. I believe that it is helpful to play over the whole of games like this quite quickly to start with, and then go back over the moves more slowly. Knowing what happens later can help you unpick the thread of the game to the point where a mistake was made, although here Capa points his finger firmly at the move of the King’s Rook to defend the King’s-side.

 

Democrito – DrDave: EICS rated blitz game EICS, Aarhus, Denmark (-), 1997

1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bb5 Bc5 4. Nc3 Nf6 5. d3 O-O 6. O-O d6 7. Bg5 h6 8. Bxf6 Qxf6 9. Nd5 Qd8 10. c3 a6 11. Ba4 b5 12. Bc2 Ne7 13. Ne3 f5 14. exf5 Nxf5 15. Nxf5 Bxf5 16. d4 Bxc2 17. Qxc2 exd4 18. Nxd4 Qf6 19. Rad1 Rae8 20. Rfe1 d5 21. Qd2 Bd6 22. Nf3 c6 23. Qd4 Qxd4 24. Nxd4 Rxe1+ 25. Rxe1 c5 26. Nf3 Kf7 27. Ne5+ Bxe5 28. Rxe5 Rd8

Very much analogous, I think. Black can create a passed Pawn straight away, but I would advise White to try and create trouble or at least force some exchanges with f2-f4, Kg1-f2, g2-g4 and so on. Instead, my opponent plays “safe”, which is actually fatal!
29. Kf1?! Kf6 30. Re2?

That Rook was fine where it was.

30…d4 31. cxd4 cxd4 32. f3?

Again, merely solid, not active.

32…d3 33. Rd2 Ke5 34. Ke1 Kd4 35. Kd1 Rd5 36. g3 Ke3 37. f4 g5 38. fxg5 hxg5 39. h4 Rf5 40. Ke1 gxh4 41. gxh4 Rf1+ 42. Kxf1 Kxd2 43. h5 Kc1 44. h6 d2 45. h7 d1=Q+ 46. Kf2 Qh5 White resigned 0-1

Ruy Lopez, Exchange Variation: White wins

Posted on by

The Exchange Variation of the Ruy Lopez: examples of White wins

Introduction

You may know that after:

1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bb5 a6 4. Bxc6 dxc6

…White cannot win a pawn with 5. Nxe5 because of 5….Qd4.

What you may not know is that White can play this line to win, because in some sense, he is already a pawn up!

Let me explain.

If you have an extra pawn, you should:

  1. exchange off pieces, not pawns
  2. create a passed pawn
  3. advance the passed pawn and either:
    1. – force your opponent to give up material to stop it queening, or
    2. – force your way into the opponent’s position to take material yourself (usually pawns)

With this in mind, let’s look at the pawn formation after

1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bb5 a6 4. Bxc6 dxc6 5. d4 exd4 6. Qxd4 Qxd4 7. Nxd4

 

-+-+-+-+
XxX-+xXx
-+x+-+-+
+-+-+-+-
-+-+p+-+
+-+-+-+-
pPp+-PpP
+-+-+-+-

Now, if there were only Kings on the board, White could easily create a passed pawn with f4, e5 and f5 and e6.

But Black cannot do the same on the other side, unless White allows all the front pawns to come to a4,b4 and c4, when there is a trick with …b3! e.g. axb3, c3! bxc3 and …a3. As long as White avoids that trap, the passed pawn on the King’s side should win.

This is what I mean by already being a pawn up. You have an extra pawn on the King’s-side, and Black’s extra Queen’s-side pawn is useless.

Emanuel Lasker played this several times, and more recently, Bobby Fischer discovered that you could also play 5. O-O! with an awkward moment for Black, because now there really is a threat to the e5 pawn which is not easy to meet e.g. 1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bb5 a6 4. Bxc6 dxc6 5. O-O f6 6. d4 exd4 7. Nxd4 c5 8. Nb3 Qxd1 9. Rxd1 and compared to Lasker’s line, you are even further ahead in development. You do need to be prepared for other lines e.g. 5…Bg4.

I quote Lasker’s most famous successes with this line below; just in case you think this is all ancient history, here is an example from the German Bundeslige from recent years.

White’s plan, as ever, is to advance on the King’s-side to get a passed pawn or entry for attack.

Deffner,R – Brueggemann,J [C68], NRW

1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bb5 a6 4. Bxc6 dxc6 5. d4 exd4 6. Qxd4 Qxd4 7. Nxd4 Bd7 8. O-O O-O-O 9. Nc3 Bd6 10. Re1 f6 11. f4

 

-+jT-+sT
+xXl+-Xx
x+xL-X-+
+-+-+-+-
-+-NpP-+
+-N-+-+-
pPp+-+pP
R-B-R-K-

11… Bg4 12. Nf3 Nh6 13. h3 Bc5+ 14. Be3 Bxe3+ 15. Rxe3 Bxf3 16. Rxf3 Rd2 17. Rf2 Rhd8 18. Re1 b5 19. Rxd2 Rxd2 20. Re2 Rxe2 21. Nxe2

 

-+j+-+-+
+-X-+-Xx
x+x+-X-S
+x+-+-+-
-+-+pP-+
+-+-+-+p
pPp+n+p+
+-+-+-K-

21… c5 22. Kf2 Kd7 23. g4 Kd6 24. Ke3 c4 25. Nd4 c5 26. Nf3 Nf7 27. h4 a5 28. g5

 

-+-+-+-+
+-+-+sXx
-+-J-X-+
XxX-+-P-
-+x+pP-P
+-+-Kn+-
pPp+-+-+
+-+-+-+-

28… a4 29. Nh2 h5 30. gxf6 gxf6 31. Nf1 Nh8 32. f5

 

-+-+-+-S
+-+-+-+-
-+-J-X-+
+xX-+p+x
x+x+p+-P
+-+-K-+-
pPp+-+-+
+-+-+n+-

32… Ke5 33. Ng3 Nf7 34. Nxh5 Nd8 35. Ng3 b4 36. h5 b3

 

-+-S-+-+
+-+-+-+-
-+-+-X-+
+-X-Jp+p
x+x+p+-+
+x+-K-N-
pPp+-+-+
+-+-+-+-

37. cxb3 axb3 38. axb3 cxb3 39. h6 c4 40. Ne2 Nf7 41. h7 Nh8 42. Nf4 Nf7 43. Ng6+ Kd6 44. Kd4 1-0

 

 

Lasker,Emanuel – Steinitz,W, Moscow, 1896

1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bb5 a6 4. Bxc6 dxc6 5. Nc3 f6 6. d4 exd4 7. Qxd4 Bd6 8. Be3 Ne7 9. Nd2 c5 10. Qd3 b5 11. Qe2 c4 12. Qh5+ g6 13. Qh6 Kf7 14. f4 Qf8 15. Qh4 Nc6 16. Nd5 f5 17. Qf6+ Kg8

 

t+l+-DjT
+-X-+-+x
x+sL-Qx+
+x+n+x+-
-+x+pP-+
+-+-B-+-
pPpN-+pP
R-+-K-+r

18. Qxf8+ Bxf8 19. Nxc7 Rb8 20. O-O-O Kf7 21. Nf3 h6 22. e5 Be7 23. Nd5 Bd8 24. h4 Rg8 25. Rhe1 Be6 26. Bc5 b4 27. Ne3 Rb5 28. Bd6 c3 29. b3 a5 30. Rd3 a4 31. Nd4 Nxd4 32. Rxd4 Bxh4 33. Re2 axb3 34. cxb3 Be7 35. Nc2

 

-+-+-+t+
+-+-Lj+-
-+-Bl+xX
+t+-Px+-
-X-R-P-+
+pX-+-+-
p+n+r+p+
+-K-+-+-

35… g5 36. Bxe7 Kxe7

 

-+-+-+t+
+-+-J-+-
-+-+l+-X
+t+-PxX-
-X-R-P-+
+pX-+-+-
p+n+r+p+
+-K-+-+-

37. Nxb4 gxf4 38. Nc6+ Kf7 39. Rxf4 Rg4 40. Rd4 h5 41. Nd8+ Ke7 42. Nxe6 Kxe6 43. Rd6+ Ke7 44. Rh6 Re4 45. Rf2 Rbxe5 46. Rxh5 Ke6 47. Rh6+ Kd5 48. Rf6 Kd4 49. Rd6+ Kc5 50. Rd8 Re2 51. Rf3

 

-+-R-+-+
+-+-+-+-
-+-+-+-+
+-J-Tx+-
-+-+-+-+
+pX-+r+-
p+-+t+p+
+-K-+-+-

51… Rxa2 52. Rxc3+ Kb4 53. Rc2 Rxc2+ 54. Kxc2 Re2+ 55. Rd2 Re4 56. Rf2 Rg4 57. Kb2 Re4 58. g3 Re5 59. Rf4+ Kb5 60. Ka3 Rd5 61. Rf3 Ka5 62. b4+ Kb5 63. Kb3 Kb6 64. Kc4 Kc6 65. Rb3 Re5 66. b5+ Kb6 67. Kd4 Re4+ 68. Kd5 Re8 69. Kd6 Re1 70. Rf3 Kxb5 71. Rxf5+ Kc4 72. g4 Kd4 73. g5 Rg1 74. Ke6 Ke4 75. Kf6 Ra1 76. g6 Ra7 77. Re5+ Kf4 78. Re7 1-0

 

Lasker,Emanuel – Tarrasch,S, Duesseldorf, 1908

1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bb5 a6 4. Bxc6 dxc6 5. d4 exd4 6. Qxd4 Qxd4 7. Nxd4 c5 8. Ne2 Bd7 9. b3 Bc6 10. f3 Be7 11. Bb2 Bf6 12. Bxf6 Nxf6 13. Nd2 O-O-O 14. O-O-O Rd7 15. Nf4 Re8 16. Nc4 b6 17. a4 a5 18. Rxd7 Nxd7 19. Rd1 Ne5 20. Nxe5 Rxe5 21. c4

 

-+j+-+-+
+-X-+xXx
-Xl+-+-+
X-X-T-+-
p+p+pN-+
+p+-+p+-
-+-+-+pP
+-Kr+-+-

21… Re8 22. Nh5 Rg8 23. Rd3 f6 24. Kd2 Be8 25. Ng3 Bd7 26. Ke3 Re8 27. Nh5 Re7 28. g4 c6 29. h4 Kc7 30. g5 f5 31. Ng3 fxe4 32. Nxe4 Bf5 33. h5 Rd7 34. Rc3 Rd1 35. Kf4

 

-+-+-+-+
+-J-+-Xx
-Xx+-+-+
X-X-+lPp
p+p+nK-+
+pR-+p+-
-+-+-+-+
+-+t+-+-

35… Bd7 36. Re3 Rh1 37. Ng3 Rh4+ 38. Ke5 Rh3 39. f4 Kd8 40. f5 Rh4 41. f6

 

-+-J-+-+
+-+l+-Xx
-Xx+-P-+
X-X-K-Pp
p+p+-+-T
+p+-R-N-
-+-+-+-+
+-+-+-+-

41… gxf6+ 42. Kxf6 Be8 43. Nf5 Rf4 44. g6 hxg6 45. hxg6 Rg4 46. Rxe8+ Kxe8 47. g7 Kd7 48. Nh4 Rxg7 49. Kxg7 Ke6 50. Nf3 Kf5 51. Kf7 Ke4 52. Ke6 Kd3 53. Kd6 Kc3 54. Kxc6 Kxb3 55. Kb5 1-0

 

Lasker,Emanuel – Janowski,D, Paris, 1909

1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bb5 a6 4. Bxc6 dxc6 5. d4 exd4 6. Qxd4 Bg4 7. Nc3 Qxd4 8. Nxd4 O-O-O 9. Be3 Bb4 10. Nde2 Bxe2 11. Kxe2 Bxc3 12. bxc3

 

-+jT-+sT
+xX-+xXx
x+x+-+-+
+-+-+-+-
-+-+p+-+
+-P-B-+-
p+p+kPpP
R-+-+-+r

12… Nf6 13. f3 Nd7 14. Rad1 Ne5 15. Rd4 b6 16. f4 Nd7 17. Rhd1 c5 18. R4d3 Nb8 19. Kf3 Rde8

 

-Sj+t+-T
+-X-+xXx
xX-+-+-+
+-X-+-+-
-+-+pP-+
+-PrBk+-
p+p+-+pP
+-+r+-+-

20. f5 f6 21. g4 Re7 22. Bf4 Rhe8 23. Re3 Nc6 24. g5 Na5 25. h4 Nc4 26. Re2 Rf7 27. Rg1 Kd7 28. h5 Nd6 29. h6 fxg5 30. Rxg5

 

-+-+t+-+
+-Xj+tXx
xX-S-+-P
+-X-+pR-
-+-+pB-+
+-P-+k+-
p+p+r+-+
+-+-+-+-

30… g6 31. fxg6 hxg6 32. Rxg6 Ref8 33. Rg7

 

-+-+-T-+
+-Xj+tR-
xX-S-+-P
+-X-+-+-
-+-+pB-+
+-P-+k+-
p+p+r+-+
+-+-+-+-

33… Rxg7 34. hxg7 Rg8 35. Rg2 Ne8 36. Be5 Ke6 37. Kf4 Kf7 38. Kf5 1-0

 

Lasker – Capablanca, St.Petersburg, 1914

1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bb5 a6 4. Bxc6 dxc6 5. d4 exd4 6. Qxd4 Qxd4 7. Nxd4 Bd6 8. Nc3 Ne7 9. O-O O-O 10. f4 Re8 11. Nb3 f6

 

t+l+t+j+
+xX-S-Xx
x+xL-X-+
+-+-+-+-
-+-+pP-+
+nN-+-+-
pPp+-+pP
R-B-+rK-

12. f5 b6 13. Bf4 Bb7 14. Bxd6 cxd6 15. Nd4 Rad8 16. Ne6

 

-+-Tt+j+
+l+-S-Xx
xXxXnX-+
+-+-+p+-
-+-+p+-+
+-N-+-+-
pPp+-+pP
R-+-+rK-

16… Rd7 17. Rad1 Nc8 18. Rf2 b5 19. Rfd2 Rde7 20. b4 Kf7 21. a3 Ba8 22. Kf2 Ra7 23. g4 h6 24. Rd3 a5 25. h4

 

l+s+t+-+
T-+-+jX-
-+xXnX-X
Xx+-+p+-
-P-+p+pP
P-Nr+-+-
-+p+-K-+
+-+r+-+-

25… axb4 26. axb4 Rae7 27. Kf3 Rg8 28. Kf4 g6 29. Rg3 g5+ 30. Kf3 Nb6 31. hxg5 hxg5 32. Rh3 Rd7 33. Kg3 Ke8 34. Rdh1

 

l+-+j+t+
+-+t+-+-
-SxXnX-+
+x+-+pX-
-P-+p+p+
+-N-+-Kr
-+p+-+-+
+-+-+-+r

34… Bb7 35. e5 dxe5 36. Ne4 Nd5 37. N6c5 Bc8 38. Nxd7 Bxd7 39. Rh7 Rf8 40. Ra1 Kd8 41. Ra8+ Bc8 42. Nc5

 

r+lJ-T-+
+-+-+-+r
-+x+-X-+
+xNsXpX-
-P-+-+p+
+-+-+-K-
-+p+-+-+
+-+-+-+-

1-0

Mate with the two Bishops

Posted on by

This is worth a go once you have completed all the other elements of the One-Minute Endgame Challenge. It doesn’t turn up very often, but Capablanca thought it worth practising, to get a feel for the power of the Bishop pair, and how they work together.

The technique is as you might expect: herd the defending King to the side, then towards a corner, and then rearrange the pieces to deliver checkmate

Double Bishop Endgames

Posted on by

by

Chris Bellers

“Deux fous gagnent toujours, mais trois fous,
non!“

— Alexander Alekhin, on the advantage of the Two Bishops at
amateur level

This session looks mainly at endings involving BB vs. BN
or NN and no other pieces. They demonstrate that, even where pawns
are evenly placed, the two bishops are often enough to force a
win.

  If you have the two bishops, be prepared for patient
manoevring, and do not assume an automatic win. Game 3.1 is a
particularly long encounter where White gradually builds up a
winning position but slips at the end and should have only
drawn.

1. Opposite coloured bishops While many
opposite coloured bishop endings do end in draws, it is a mistake
to think that all such endings are automatically drawn. It is true
that an extra pawn often does not suffice, and sometimes not even
an extra two or three. However, there are a couple of ideas in
these endings that might be of interest.

  Firstly, there is ‘creeping round the edges’. In the
following position, Black seems to have a successful blockade.

1.1 ?? – ?? (cb), 1995

(wKe4,Be6,Pb7,f5; bKf6,Bb8)

 

-L-+-+-+
+p+-+-+-
-+-+bJ-+
+-+-+p+-
-+-+k+-+
+-+-+-+-
-+-+-+-+
+-+-+-+-

1. Kf3 Bc7 ?

  Black must prevent Kg4, so …Kg5 is necessary

[After 1… Kg5 the game is drawn: 2. Bc8 Bc7 3. Ke4
Kf6 4. Kd5 Bh2 5. Kc6 Ke7 6. Kb6 Bb8]

2. Kg4 Bb8

[2… Kg7 3. Kg5 Bd8+ 4. f6+ Bxf6+ 5. Kf5]

3. Kh5 Bf4 4. Bc8 Bc7

[4… Kg7 5. Kg4 Bc7 6. Kg5 Kf7 7. f6]

 

5. Kh6 Bb8 6. Kh7 Kf7 7. Be6+ Kf6 8. Kg8 Bd6 9.
Bc8

  Again, Black is in zugzwang, and must give way allowing
the f-pawn to advance; once it reaches f7, the bK must go to f8,
and the wK can go ’round to support the other pawn.

9… Ke7 10. Kg7 1-0

 

  The other idea I learned the hard way. In the following
position, Black had lost a [pawn in the opening, and is now forced
to exchange rooks. However, I was not too unhappy about this as I
assumed the position was drawn. What does it look like to you?

1.2 Soesan – Bellars, Paignton, 1976

(wKe3,Bd4,Rb2,Pa5,c4,f3,g3,h2; bKc6,Bg6,Rd7,Pa6,f6,g7,h7)

 

-+-+-+-+
+-+t+-Xx
x+j+-Xl+
P-+-+-+-
-+pB-+-+
+-+-KpP-
-R-+-+-P
+-+-+-+-

1… Rb7 2. Rxb7 Kxb7 3. Bc5 Bf7 4. Kd4 Kc6 5. Bf8 g6 6.
Be7 f5 7. f4 Kd7 8. Bc5 Kc6 9. Bb6 Kd6 10. c5+ Kc6

 

 

-+-+-+-+
+-+-+l+x
xBj+-+x+
P-P-+x+-
-+-K-P-+
+-+-+-P-
-+-+-+-P
+-+-+-+-

?! Now the wK penetrates and the bishop is short of squares. The
rest of the game is an object lesson in how difficult it is to
defend with a bishop when the pawns are on the same colour.

[10… Ke6 11. c6 Be8 12. Kc5 also wins]

11. Ke5 Be8 12. Ke6 Kb5 13. Ke7 Bc6 14. Kf7 Kc4
15. Kg7 Kd5 16. Kxh7 Be8 17. Kg7 Ke6 18. h4 Kd5 19. Kf8 Bd7 20. Kf7
Bc6 21. Kxg6 Ke6 22. h5 Be8+ 23. Kg5 Bd7 24. Bc7 Kf7 25. Be5 Kg8
26. Kf6 1-0

 

2. Two bishops with an unbalanced pawn
position

The two bishops are particularly powerful and this alone is often
sufficient to win. The winning process consists of four steps:

place the pieces in the best possible positions
(i.e. where they cramp the opponent’s pieces)

set up an outside passed pawn (or a potential
outside passed pawn) – this means advancing the pawns as far as you
can

if the opponent’s king goes to the threatened
sector, go to the other wing – either to capture pawns with the
bishops or force an entry for the king

If the opponent does not try to stop the pawns
with his king, then advancing the passed pawn will cost him a
piece

2.1 Leonhardt – Bernstein, Barmen,
1905

(wKd3,Be3,g2,Pa2,b3,d4,d5,f4,h3; bKf8,Ng3,Bg7,Pa7,b7,e7,f7,g6,h7)

 

-+-+-J-+
Xx+-XxLx
-+-+-+x+
+-+p+-+-
-+-P-P-+
+p+kB-Sp
p+-+-+b+
+-+-+-+-

1. d6 exd6

[1… b6 2. d7]

2. Bxb7 Nf5 3. Bf2 Bh6 4. Ke4 Ne7 5.
d5!

  ! cramping the Black pieces

5… f5+ 6. Kf3 a6

[6… a5 7. Bb6]

7. a4

 

 

-+-+-J-+
+b+-S-+x
x+-X-+xL
+-+p+x+-
p+-+-P-+
+p+-+k+p
-+-+-B-+
+-+-+-+-

threatening b4-b5 and if …axb, the a-pawn will not recapture but
run to a8. So, if the pawn gets to a5, it cannot be stopped

7… Bg7 8. Ke2

[8. b4 Bc3 9. b5 axb5 10. axb5 Ke8 11. Ba7 Kd7 and if
now 12. b6 ? 12… Bd4 and the win is not straightforward]

8… Bc3

  the second step is over; now we have the fourth idea

 

9. Kd3 Bb4 10. Bxa6 h6

[10… Nxd5 11. Kc4 Nc7 12. Kxb4 Nxa6+ 13. Kb5 Nc7+
14. Kb6 Nd5+ 15. Kb7 winning]

11. Bb7 g5 12. fxg5 hxg5 13. Kc4 Bd2 14.
b4

  and soon won

…1-0

 

2.2 Perlis – Baird, Barmen, 1905

(wKd2,Bb6,c2,Pa3,b4,e4,f3,g3,h2; bKe8,Nd8,Be6,Pb7,c6,e5,f6,g7,h7)

 

-+-Sj+-+
+x+-+-Xx
-Bx+lX-+
+-+-X-+-
-P-+p+-+
P-+-+pP-
-+bK-+-P
+-+-+-+-

1. f4 exf4 2. gxf4 Ba2 3. Kc3 Ne6 4. Be3 Nf8 5. a4 Nd7 6.
Bd3 Kd8 7. Kd4 Nf8 8. f5 ! 8… Nd7 9. Bf4 Ke7 10. h4 Bb3 11. a5 h6
12. Be2 Ba2 13. Bd1 Bf7 14. Bc7 ! 14… Ba2 15. Ba4 Bf7

 

 

-+-+-+-+
+xBsJlX-
-+x+-X-X
P-+-+p+-
bP-Kp+-P
+-+-+-+-
-+-+-+-+
+-+-+-+-

White cannot improve his position any more, and breaks through with
sacrifice to create a passed pawn

16. Bxc6 bxc6 17. a6 c5+ 18. Ke3

[18. bxc5 Nb8 19. Bxb8 Be8 20. Kd5 was
simpler]

18… Nb6 19. Bxb6 Be8 20. Bxc5+ 1-0

 

  Against a doubled pawn the two bishops will generally be
able to force a gain of material, or an outside passed pawn.

2.3 Soultanbieff-Flohr, Folkestone, 1933

(wKg1,Nh1,Bd2,Pb2,b3,d4,e3,f4,h3; bKg7,Bc6,h4,Pa6,b7,e4,e6,f5,h6)

 

-+-+-+-+
+x+-+-J-
x+l+x+-X
+-+-+x+-
-+-PxP-L
+p+-P-+p
-P-B-+-+
+-+-+-Kn

The key here is White’s weak b pawns. The plan is to force b4, play
the K to the Q-side, capture one of the b-pawns and create an
outside passed pawn.

1… Kg6 2. Kg2 Bd5 3. b4 Kf7 4. Ng3 Ke8 5. Ne2
Kd7 6. Nc3 Kc6 7. Kh2 Bb3 8. Kg2 Bc4 9. Kg1 Bd3 10. Kg2 Bc4 11. Nb1
b6 12. Kg1 Bd3 13. Nc3 Be7 14. Kf2 Bxb4 15. Nxe4 Be7 16. Nc3 Bh4+
17. Kg1 Bc4 18. Kg2 a5 19. Kg1 b5 20. Kg2 h5 21. Kg1 Bb3 22. Kg2 b4
23. Ne2 Bd5+ 24. Kf1 Bc4 25. Be1 Bxe1 26. Kxe1 Bxe2 27. Kxe2 a4
0-1

 

2.4 Zagorovsky – Bryson, Corr, 1994

(wKh1,Nd4,Bd2,Pa5,b2,f4,g3,h2; bKg8,Bd7,f8,Pa6,b4,e4,f7,g7,h7)

 

-+-+-Lj+
+-+l+xXx
x+-+-+-+
P-+-+-+-
-X-NxP-+
+-+-+-P-
-P-B-+-P
+-+-+-+k

Here Black is a pawn up, but must play carefully because he is
unable to cramp the knight

36… Bc5 37. Be3 b3 ! 38. Kg2 !! 38…
Be6

[38… Ba4 39. Kf2 Bb4 40. Bc1 ! and
Kf2-e3xe4]

[38… Bg4 39. Kf2 Bd1 40. Nc6 !]

39. Kf2

 

[39. Nxe6 Bxe3 40. Nc7 Bc5 41. Nxa6 Ba3 42.
Kf2

[42. Kf1 Kf8 43. Ke2 Ke7 44. Kd2 Kd6 ! 45. bxa3 e3+
46. Kxe3 b2]

42… Bxb2 43. Nc5 Bd4+]

39… Bd5 40. Nf5 Bb4 41. Bd4 g6 42. Nh6+ Kf8 43.
Ng4 f5 44. Nf6 Bc6 45. Nxh7+ Ke7 46. Ng5 Kd6 47. Ke3 Bxa5 48. g4
Be1 49. Be5+ Kd5 50. gxf5 gxf5 51. Nh7 a5 52. Nf6+ Kc4 53. Ke2
Bb4

 

-+-+-+-+
+-+-+-+-
-+l+-N-+
X-+-Bx+-
-Lj+xP-+
+x+-+-+-
-P-+k+-P
+-+-+-+-

0-1

  54. h4 a4 55. h5 a3 56. bxa3

[56. h6 a2 57. h7 a1=Q 58. h8=Q Qe1#]

  56… Bc3 57. Bxc3 Kxc3 58. h6 b2 59. Nxe4+ Bxe4 60. h7
b1=Q 61. h8=Q+ Kb3

  An isolated pawn may be serious enough for a forced
loss

 

2.5 Rubinstein – Gajdos, Bremen,
1905

(wKg1,Bd4,e2,Pa2,b2,e3,f3,g2,h2; bKf7,Nd6,Bc8,Pa6,b7,d5,f6,g7,h7)

 

-+l+-+-+
+x+-+jXx
x+-S-X-+
+-+x+-+-
-+-B-+-+
+-+-Pp+-
pP-+b+pP
+-+-+-K-

1. Kf2 Bd7 2. Ke1 Nb5

[2… Bb5]

3. Bc5 Ke6 4. Kd2 f5 ?

  a positional blunder

5. b3 Nd6 6. a4 Nc8 7. Kc3 Ne7 8. Bd4 g6 9. Kb4
Bc6 10. Kc5 Kd7 11. a5 Nc8 12. Bd1 Na7 13. h4 Nb5 14. Bc2 Nc7 15.
g3 Ne8 16. Be5 ! 16… Ke6 17. f4

 

-+-+s+-+
+x+-+-+x
x+l+j+x+
P-KxBx+-
-+-+-P-P
+p+-P-P-
-+b+-+-+
+-+-+-+-

17… Kd7 18. b4 Nc7 19. Bxc7 ! 19… Kxc7 20. Bb3 h5 21.
Ba2 Kd7 22. Bxd5 Bxd5 23. Kxd5 Kc7 24. Ke5 1-0

 

  Where there is a weak colour complex the two bishops can
usually clear a path for the king by constricting the enemy
pieces

2.6 Kasenfuss – Fine, Kemeri, 1937

(wKg1,Nc2,Be3,Pa4,b3,d4,e5,f4,g3,h2;
bKg8,Bd7,e7,Pa7,b7,d5,f7,g4,g7,h5)

 

-+-+-+j+
Xx+lLxX-
-+-+-+-+
+-+xP-+x
p+-P-Px+
+p+-B-P-
-+n+-+-P
+-+-+-K-

1… Bf5 2. Ne1 Bb1 3. Bd2 Kh7 4. Kf2 Kg6 5. Ke3 Kf5 6. a5
g5

  outside passed pawn

7. Nd3 Bc2 8. Nc5 gxf4+ 9. gxf4 b6 10. axb6 axb6
11. Nd7 b5 12. b4 h4 13. Nc5 g3 14. hxg3 hxg3 15. Kf3 Bh4 16. Be3
Bd1+ 17. Kg2 Kg4 18. Bd2 Bf3+ 19. Kg1 Kf5 20. Be3 Be4 21. Bd2 g2
22. Nxe4 Kxe4 23. Kxg2 Kxd4 24. Kh3 Be7 25. Kg4 Kd3

  and the d-pawn decides

1-0

 

  Another theme is to exchange a B for N leaving pawns on
the colour of the opposing B.

 

2.7 Van Scheltinga – Fine, Amsterdam,
1936

(wKh2,Nf3,Bd2,Pb4,c5,e4,f2,g2,h3; bKg8,Bd3,g7,Pa6,b7,e6,f7,g6,h7)

 

-+-+-+j+
+x+-+xLx
x+-+x+x+
+-P-+-+-
-P-+p+-+
+-+l+n+p
-+-B-PpK
+-+-+-+-

1. e5 Be4 2. Bc3 Bxf3 3. gxf3 Kf8 4. Kg3 Ke8 5. Kf4 Kd7 6.
Ke4 Kc6 7. Kd4 Kb5 8. Bd2 h5 9. f4 Bf8 10. f3 a5 0-1

 

  Finally there is opposite coloured bishops theme

  In the following game belongs in the ‘blocked pawn
structure’ section, but soon becomes unbalanced.

2.8 Bellars – James, Paignton, 1976

(wKg1,Bd3,e3,Pa2,b2,c3,e4,f2,g3,h3;
bKg8,Ne6,Bg7,Pa7,b6,c5,e5,f7,g6,h7)

 

-+-+-+j+
X-+-+xLx
-X-+s+x+
+-X-X-+-
-+-+p+-+
+-PbB-Pp
pP-+-P-+
+-+-+-K-

30… Bf6 ? 31. f4 exf4 ?

32. gxf4 Kg7 33. Kg2 Bd8 34. Kf3 h5 35. Bf2 Bc7
36. Be3 Bd8 37. Bc4 Be7 38. Bd2 Bd8 39. e5 Bh4 40. Be3 Be1 41. Ke4
Bh4 42. a4 a5 43. Bf1 Bd8 44. Kd5 Bh4 45. Be2 Bd8 46. f5 gxf5 47.
Bxh5 Ng5 48. Bxg5 Bxg5 49. Kc6 Bd8 50. c4 Kf8 51. Kd7 Bh4 52. Kc7
Bg3 53. Kxb6 Bxe5 54. b3 Bc3 55. Kxc5 1-0

 

3. Pawns blocked and/or balanced

The defender drawing chances are greater, but still has a difficult
game. The winning process consists of 5 steps:

1. weaken the opponent’s pawns

2. cramp the opponent’s peces

3. clear a path for the king

4. after the king has penetrated as far as
possible, force the exchange of the blocking piece

5. penetrate with the King and capture
material

 

3.1 Berger-Tchigorin, Carlsbad 1907

(wKe1,Bf4,f5,Pa2,b3,c4,f2,g2,h3; bKe8,Nf6,Bc5,Pa7,b7,c6,f7,g7,h6)

 

-+-+j+-+
Xx+-+xX-
-+x+-S-X
+-L-+b+-
-+p+-B-+
+p+-+-+p
p+-+-Pp+
+-+-K-+-

1… Ke7 2. Be5

[2. Bc8]

2… Ne8 3. Ke2 Bd6 4. Bc3 b6 ?

[4… Kd8]

5. g3 f6 ?

  step 1 is completed, and now (after the errors) there is
a forced win! 6. f4 Bc5 7. Be4 Kd7 8. b4 Be7 9. Kf3 Nd6 10.
Bd3 Ke6 11. g4 g5 ?

  step 2 is now completed

[11… Kd7 12. Kg3 Kc7 13. Kh4 f5+ 14. Kh5]

[11… Kf7 12. Bd4 Ke6 13. a3 Kf7 14. c5 bxc5 15.
Bxc5 Nc8 16. Bf5 Bxc5

17. bxc5 Ne7 18. Bd7 zugzwang – the wK will go to the
Q-side]

12. a3 Nf7 13. Bf5+ Kd6 14. Bg6 Nd8 15. fxg5 hxg5
16. Ke4 Ne6 17. Bf7 Ng7

[17… Nf4 18. Kf5 Nxh3 19. Bxf6 Bxf6 20. Kxf6 and id
the N moves, the g-pawn

goes]

18. Be1 Kd7 19. Bc3 Bd8 20. b5 ! 20… Ke7 21.
Bg8 Kf8 22. Bh7 cxb5 23. cxb5 Ke7

  step 3 now complete: the wK now has a clear path

24. Bb4+ Ke6 25. Bg8+ Kd7 26. Kd5

  zugzwang

26… Be7

[26… Kc7 27. Bf8 Ne8 28. Be6 Kb7 29. Bd7 Nc7+ 30.
Ke4 a6 31. a4 axb5 32. axb5 Kb8 33. Bd6 Kb7 34. Bc6+ Kc8 35.
Kf5]

27. Bxe7 Kxe7

  step 4 now complete

28. Kc6 Ne8 29. a4 Nd6 30. Kc7 Ne4 31. Bb3 Nc5
32. Bc2 Ke6 33. Kb8

[33. Kc6 ? game continuation 33… Ke5 34. a5 Ne6 35.
axb6 Nd4+ 36. Kb7 axb6 37. Bd3 when 37… f5 38. gxf5 Nxb5 draws by
wrong RP]

33… Kd6

[33… a6 34. Kc7 axb5 35. axb5 Ke5 36. Kxb6 Kd6 37.
Ka7 Kc7 38. b6+ Kc6 39. Be4+]

34. Kxa7 Kc7 35. a5 bxa5 36. b6+ Kc6 37. Be4+
Nxe4 38. b7 1-0

 

3.2 Tarrasch – Rubinstein, San Sebastian,
1912

(wKg2,Nh3,Bc2,Pa2,d3,f5,g3; bKd6,Ba6,d4,Pa5,d5,f6,g7)

 

-+-+-+-+
+-+-+-X-
l+-J-X-+
X-+x+p+-
-+-L-+-+
+-+p+-Pn
p+b+-+k+
+-+-+-+-

Here, the first three steps can be regarded as complete

1… Ke5 2. g4 Be3

  ‘stalemating’ the knight – a common idea

3. Kf3

[3. Nf2 Bxf2 4. Kxf2 Kf4]

3… Kd4 4. Bb3 Bb7

 

[4… Bxd3 also wins 5. Bxd5 Bf1 6. Bb7 Bxh3 7. Ba6
Kc3 8. Kg3 Kb2 some delicate footwork on both sides here! it’s the
opposite coloured B possibilities that are at issue 9. Bc4 Bf1 10.
Bxf1 Kxa2 11. Kf3 Bh6 12. Bb5 Kb3 13. Ke4 a4 14. Kd4 a3]

5. Ke2 Ba6 6. Bc2

[6. Bxd5 transposes to the previous note]

6… Bb5 7. a4 Bd7 8. Kf3 Kc3 9. Kxe3 d4+ 10. Ke2
Kxc2 11. Nf4 Bxa4 12. Ne6 Bb3 13. Nxd4+ Kb2 14. Nb5 a4 15. Ke3 a3
16. Nxa3 Kxa3 17. Kd4 Kb4 0-1

 

3.3 Bellars-Goodman, Paignton 1977

(wKg2,Bd3,e3,Pa2,b5,c3,e4,f2,g3,h3;
bKg8,Nd7,Bd6,Pa7,b6,c5,e5,f7,g6,h7)

 

-+-+-+j+
X-+s+x+x
-X-L-+x+
+pX-X-+-
-+-+p+-+
+-PbB-Pp
p+-+-Pk+
+-+-+-+-

cf. 2.8

26… Kf8 27. f4 Ke7 28. Kf3 Nf8 29. a4 Ne6 30.
f5 Nf8 31. g4 f6 32. g5 Nd7 33. h4 Nf8 34. Bc4 Nd7 35. Bg8 Nf8 36.
gxf6+ ?

  (time trouble)

[36. Bxh7 Nxh7 37. fxg6 Nf8 38. g7]

[36. Kg4 best, idea h5 when White will have a passed
pawn and King entry (step 3)]

 

36… Kxf6 37. Bg5+ Kg7 38. Bd5 Nd7 39. Be6 Nf6
40. c4 ?

  closing the last entry point for the wK!

40… Ne8 41. Bd8

  can White win at all? Black is cramped but what is
White’s plan? As it happens…

41… Bc7 ? 42. f6+ Kf8 ?? 43. Be7#
1-0

  A tough one: White has to work hard for an opening before
running out of pawns; Black’s pieces are more active

 

3.4 ?? – ?? (cb), 1995

(wKg3,Bd2,d3,Pa3,b2,c2,f4,g4,h4; bKe8,Nc6,Bf7,Pa6,b7,d5,f6,g7,h6)

 

-+-+j+-+
+x+-+lX-
x+s+-X-X
+-+x+-+-
-+-+-PpP
P-+b+-K-
-PpB-+-+
+-+-+-+-

1. g5 hxg5 2. hxg5 fxg5 3. fxg5 Ne5 4. Bf5 g6 5. Bc8 Nc4 6.
Bc1

[6. Bc3 Nd6 7. Bh3 Ne4+]

6… Nd6 7. Bg4 Ke7 8. Kf4 Be6 9. Bf3 Bf5 10.
Bxd5 Bxc2 11. Ke5 Bf5 12. Be3

  idea Bc5

12… Nf7+ 13. Kd4 Nd8 14. Kc5 Bc8 15. b4 Bd7 16.
Bd2

[16. Bd4 Ne6+]

16… Bb5 ?! 17. Be4 Kf7 18. Kd6 Bc4 19. Kd7 Nc6
20. Kc7 Nd4 21. Bxb7 Nb5+ 22. Kb6 Nxa3 23. Bxa6 Be6 24. Kc5 Bf5 25.
b5 Nxb5 26. Bxb5 1-0

 

  The bishops are at their worst in blocked positions, and
in positions where the pawns are all on the same side. Here, even
an extra pawn may not be enough to win

 

3.5 Euwe – Alekhin, 3rd Match Game,
1937

1. d4 d5 2. c4 c6 3. Nf3 Nf6 4. Nc3 e6 5. e3 Nbd7 6. Bd3
Bb4 7. O-O O-O 8. a3 Bxc3 9. bxc3 Qc7 10. Nd2 e5 11. Bb2 e4 12. Be2
b5 13. cxb5 cxb5 14. a4 bxa4 15. c4 dxc4 16. Nxc4 Nb6 17. Nxb6 axb6
18. Rxa4 Bb7 19. Rxa8 Rxa8 20. Qb1 Re8 21. Rc1 Qd6 22. Qc2 h6 23.
Qc7 Qxc7 24. Rxc7 Rc8 25. Rxc8+ Bxc8 26. f3 Bb7 27. Kf2 Ne8 28. Ba3
Bd5 29. Be7 f5 30. fxe4 fxe4 31. Bd8 Nd6 32. Bxb6 Nc4 33. Bc7
Kf7

  (wKf2,Bc7,e2,Pd4,e3,g2,h2; bKg8,Nc4,Bd5,Pe4,g7,h6)

 

-+-+-+j+
+-B-+-X-
-+-+-+-X
+-+l+-+-
-+sPx+-+
+-+-P-+-
-+-+bKpP
+-+-+-+-

1… Kf7 2. h4 g5

  else Bf4 and h5 frees the wK

3. Bh5+ Ke7

[3… Kf6 4. Bd8+ Kf5 5. g4+]

[3… Kg7 4. Bd8 gxh4 5. Bxh4 andBh4-g3-f4]

4. Bg4 Bb7

  white can make no further progress with the Bishops, so
offers to exchange the strong Knight

5. Be5 Nxe5 6. dxe5 gxh4 7. Kg1 Ba6 8. Kh2
Kf7

  and White eventually had to settle for a draw.

Q

 

[34. h4 g5 35. Bh5+ Ke7 36. Bg4 Bb7 37. Be5 Nxe5 38.
dxe5 gxh4 39. Kg1 Ba6 40. Kh2 Kf7]

41. Kh3 Bf1 42. Bf5 Ke7 43. Kh2 Be2 44. Kh3 Bf1
45. Bxe4 Ke6 46. Kxh4 Kxe5 47. Bf3 Kf6 48. Kh5 Kg7 49. e4 Bd3 50.
e5 Bg6+ 51. Kg4 Kf7 52. Bd5+ Ke7 53. Kf4 Bh7 54. g3 Kf8 55. Be4 Bg8
56. Bf3 Ke7 57. Kg4 Ke6 58. Kf4 Ke7 59. Bg4 Bb3 60. Bc8 Kf7
Q

 

  Endings with the pawns all on one side are ALMOST ALWAYS
drawn if the superior side has 3 pawns or less, USUALLY drawn if he
has 4 pawns

 

4. Conclusion

The two bishops are better than two knights or bishop/knight
partnership in most normal positions.

  If the pawns are unbalanced, so that the side with
the bishops can set up an outside passed pawn, it is virtually a
forced win.

  If the pawns are blocked, the slightest weakness in the
pawn structure may be fatal.

  The three ideas in all such endings are:

limit the opponent’s mobility

stalemate the knight

exchange off pieces to transpose into favourable
simpler endings (especially those where the opponent’s pawns are on
the same colour as their bishop