| Feb-07-04 | | capanegra: This is probably one of the most interesting and controversial pawn endings ever seen (apparently it took more than fifty years to find the right solution), and I would like to share it and discuss one variation with you. For many years, some analysts weren’t convinced about the quality of moves from 57 to 59. Berger expressed his doubts about the possible 58. h3, but he didn’t follow the analysis and abstained from giving a general appreciation of the position. In 1941 Reuben Fine approved Blackburne’s winning maneuver starting from move 57. In 1950, Bonch-Osmolovski and Ter-Pogosov criticized Fine’s line, and stated that if Teichmann had had his king on g2 instead of h2 before 59… h4, he would have drawn. The correct continuation was 58.h3! (and no 58.g2? as it happened) g6 59.g2 h4 60.f4!. If 60…g5xf4 61.g3xh4 followed by 62.f3. And if 60…f5 61.f4xg5 h4xg3 62.xg3 xg5 and in this case the opposition is useless for black. |
 |
| Feb-07-04 | | capanegra: Conclusion: black’s maneuver wasn’t correct. Nevertheless, according to Bonch-Osmolovski and Ter-Pogosov there still would be a winning continuation. To them, the triangulation of the black king over f5-f6-g6 was unnecessary, and should have played directly 57…h4!! 58.h3 e5!! 59.f4+ (main variation) g5xf4 60.g3xh4 e4 61.g2 d3 62.f3 xc3 63.h5 b3 64.h6 c3 65.h7 c2 66.h8= c1= and wins.Humidly, I have to disagree with this line. After 57…h4, how in the hell could black win if, instead of h3 white plays 58.g2??…e5 would be meet by 59.f4+, but with a crucial extra tempo that changes his entire existence! |
|
Feb-07-04
 | | tamar: Black has an extra tempo move ...c6-c5, but it doesn't seem to help him in any lines.
That is as much as I can understand tonight. Are you saying, capanegra, that the ending should be drawn? |
|
| Feb-08-04 | | capanegra: Yes tamar, I beleive this is a draw. What worries me is that books say win for black, but I don't see it. |
|
| Mar-07-04 | | capanegra: I think I’ve found it!! After a long study, I noticed that Black’s ideal position is after 56.g2, but with White’s turn to move. So, Black must triangulate in order to reach that position: 56…e6! 57.h3 (if 57.h2 h4 58.h3 h4xg3 59.xg3 f5 60.g2 f4 61.f2 c5) f6 58.g2 (if 58.g4 h4 59.f4 g5xf4 60.xh4 e5 and wins) e5 and now it is White’s turn and loses in any variation. If there is any expert in pawns endings out there, I would appreciate if he checked the correction of this analysis. This is so complicated that another opinion would me feel safer. I hate when books make mistakes! |
|
May-26-06
 | | Gypsy: If <59.Kh3>, how does Black win? I must be wrong about this, but I see it as a draw all the way till <59.Kh2>, even though E. Richter quotes Dedrle as praising both sides for playing the best moves through this section... |
|
May-27-06
 | | pawn to QB4: Hi Gypsy. After much thought, tentative suggestion: if there's still a win after 59.Kh3! it lies in 59...Kf5 60.Kg2 h4 61.Kh3 Ke5.
a)62.Kg2/g4 hxg3 63.Kxg3 Kf5 = the game.
b)62.f4+ gxf4 63.gxh4 Ke4 64.Kg2 Kd3 65.Kf2 Kxc3 66. h5 Kb3 etc.
c)62.gxh4 gxh4 63.Kg4 h3 64.Kxh3 Kf4 65.Kg2 Ke3 66.Kg3 Kd3 67.f4 Kxc3 68.f5 Kb2 69.f6 c3 70.f7 c2 71.f8=Q c1=Q e.g. 72.Qb4+ Ka2 winning the a pawn. |
|
May-29-06
| | Gypsy: <pawn to QB4> Thnx for being a sounding board; a most impressive analysis! <...if there's still a win after 59.Kh3! it lies in 59...Kf5 60.Kg2 h4 61.Kh3 Ke5 ..> In this variation though, if White plays 60.Kh2 (instead of your 60.Kg2), we are back in the position that already occured after White move 57. In the game Black started the triangulation maneuver Kf5-f6-g6, whereas Bonch-Osmolovski and Ter-Pogosov suggest immediate h5-h4 as winning <57...h4!! 58.Kh3 Ke5!!...>. The Bonch-Osmolovski and Ter-Pogosov line seems to be busted by <capanegra>'s 58.Kg2, however; he writes <... I have to disagree with this line. After 57…Ph4, how in the hell could black win if, instead of Kh3 white plays 58.Kg2??…Ke5 would be meet by 59.Pf4+, but with a crucial extra tempo that changes his entire existence!> |
|
May-29-06
| | pawn to QB4: Ouch. I think you and capanegra have proved the draw. At least I'm going down in the good company of Messrs. B-O & T-P. |
|
May-29-06
| | Gypsy: <pawn to QB4> Of course, if Fine, Berger, Dedrle, E. Richter, and Bonch-Osmolovsky disagree about the particulars of this endgame, it is bound to be extraordinarily complex. It is practically given that usual theoretical tools, like corresponding squares, will likely be strethed beyond their range of usefulness, because of the dynamic variations in which the breaks, counterbreaks and liquidations can happen on the K-side. |
|
May-29-06
| | Gypsy: Incidentally, <Frantisek Dedrle> was an endgame theoretician and study composer of first magnitute. For instance, his "Dedrle line of attack" theory gives the winning procedure for Black in this game even against the best defense of White after <61...Kf5>: The winning line goes 62.Kg2! Kf4 63.Kf2 c5! 64.Ke2 Kg3 65.Ke3 Kh3! 66.Kd2 Kh2! 67.Ke3 Kg1 68.Ke2 Kg2 69.Ke3 Kf1 70.Ke4 Ke2 71.f4 gxf4 72.Kxf4 Kd3 ... 0-1. The key ingrediences of the winning king maneuvers are the critical squares d3e3f3 of the c-pawn, and the three sensitive squares f1f2f3 of the f-pawn. |
|
Oct-01-08
 | | penguin496: Max Euwe analyzes this end game.
He gives 56...Ke6 as the winning move. The idea being that black wins in this position if he does not have the move. 56...h4 fails to 57.f4+ kf5 58.fxg5 hxg3 59.Kxg3 Kxg5 |
|
|
 |
|
