I'm barely, if at all, good enough to join this discussion. I play by feel these days, and barely spend more than a minute or two on my next move. But I remember getting a draw from an IM during a simultaneous exhibition, in which he beat the reigning California champion. Fifty boards. I earned a thin book by Horowitz on endgames! I was studying MCO at the time, but made an early mistake. Surviving to a draw made me float.
That was fischer v spassky times. Fischer taught me a lot about endgames, too. Today, with my pickled brain, the opening and mid-game is sort of all about the endgame. A single pawn advantage should be enough.
those Dvoretsky tomes contain zillions of end game positions, GM Andrew Soltis has
written that there are essentially about two dozen positions that one needs to know. I
know how to win or draw with a king and a pawn and i used to know how to mate with
a knight and bishop, and that is it, i don't know Philadors position or Lucena position or
any other stuff.
Originally posted by robbie carrobieLev Alburt has made a similar claim in the introduction to his Chess Training Pocket Book (not entirely sure on the title). Unfortunately, I'm not sure which dozen or so positions he feels are the ones that you need to know. If chess could be reduced to even 1000 positions that you must know and understand to master, wouldn't someone have published that book already?
those Dvoretsky tomes contain zillions of end game positions, GM Andrew Soltis has
written that there are essentially about two dozen positions that one needs to know. I
know how to win or draw with a king and a pawn and i used to know how to mate with
a knight and bishop, and that is it, i don't know Philadors position or Lucena position or
any other stuff.
Originally posted by Maxwell Smartdidn't Alburt publish a book something like the three hundred essential chess positions
Lev Alburt has made a similar claim in the introduction to his Chess Training Pocket Book (not entirely sure on the title). Unfortunately, I'm not sure which dozen or so positions he feels are the ones that you need to know. If chess could be reduced to even 1000 positions that you must know and understand to master, wouldn't someone have published that book already?
you must know? If i remember correctly it had a sleazy cover.
I think its safe to say that one must know how to,
1. win or draw with a king and pawn
2. how to mate with a knight and bishop
3. Lucena position
4. Philador position
hopefully others will add more😀
Originally posted by robbie carrobieN+B mate is a neat thing to know, but not of any real practical value IMHO. I have only encountered the situation in one game ever, and that was a game that I was winning handily and intentionally traded down to reach the B+N situation, because I had recently studied it and was very impressed with myself at the time. 😀
didn't Alburt publish a book something like the three hundred essential chess positions
you must know? If i remember correctly it had a sleazy cover.
I think its safe to say that one must know how to,
1. win or draw with a king and pawn
2. how to mate with a knight and bishop
3. Lucena position
4. Philador position
hopefully others will add more😀
Originally posted by Maxwell Smarton the contrary, its of immense practical value, it teaches us piece co-ordination. 😀
N+B mate is a neat thing to know, but not of any real practical value IMHO. I have only encountered the situation in one game ever, and that was a game that I was winning handily and intentionally traded down to reach the B+N situation, because I had recently studied it and was very impressed with myself at the time. 😀
Originally posted by robbie carrobieThat's what they say, and I used to agree. However, in honest retrospect I never really gained anything except the cool ability to be able to force the win in that specific endgame. Come to think of it, I may go practice it again. It'd be nice to be good at some aspect of this game again...
on the contrary, its of immense practical value, it teaches us piece co-ordination. 😀
Originally posted by Maxwell Smartthen do it for the coolness 😀 what other positions do you think are essential?
That's what they say, and I used to agree. However, in honest retrospect I never really gained anything except the cool ability to be able to force the win in that specific endgame. Come to think of it, I may go practice it again. It'd be nice to be good at some aspect of this game again...
Originally posted by kbear1kI got the best feel for that endgame form a website: chessvideos.tv It was a great site, with nicely done training videos on a variety of critical endgame positions. Sadly, I can't seem to find it this morning. Hopefully it is still there and just down for a bit, it was a phenomenal resource to me when I had the time to go there. B+N, QvR, essential K+P positions, numerous essential R endings, all the basic mates...it was an incredible resource.
"N+B mate is a neat thing to know, but not of any real practical value IMHO."
I once saw a master not able to win this. I don't think he ever made that mistake again.
Essential endgame positions...
#1 Has to be complete understanding of K+P vs K. You have to be completely proficient at winning when it's a won position and drawing when it's a drawn one.
My vote for #2 is this one:
White to play and win
The rook and pawn endings are very important and will gain you many more extra half-points than learning how to checkmate with bishop and knight (something I still can't do!). It's amazing how many endings end up with king and rook each and one side with an extra pawn.
Originally posted by Fat LadyK+Q v K+P on the seventh
Essential endgame positions...
#1 Has to be complete understanding of K+P vs K. You have to be completely proficient at winning when it's a won position and drawing when it's a drawn one.
My vote for #2 is this one:
[fen]6Q1/7K/8/8/8/8/2kp4/8[/fen]
White to play and win
The rook and pawn endings are very important and will gain you many more extr ...[text shortened]... t's amazing how many endings end up with king and rook each and one side with an extra pawn.