chessgames.com
Members · Prefs · Collections · Openings · Endgames · Sacrifices · History · Search Kibitzing · Kibitzer's Café · Chessforums · Tournament Index · Players · Kibitzing


register now - it's free!
Mikhail Botvinnik vs Nikolay N Minev
Netherlands (1954)  ·  Semi-Slav Defense: Meran. Lundin Variation (D47)  ·  1-0
To move:
Last move:

explore this opening
find similar games 1,188 more games of Botvinnik
PGN: download | view | print Help: general | java-troubleshooting

TIP: If we are missing an important game, you can submit it (in PGN format) at our PGN Upload Utility.

PGN Viewer:  What is this?
For help with the default chess viewer, please see the Pgn4web Quickstart Guide.

Kibitzer's Corner
< Earlier Kibitzing  · PAGE 2 OF 2 ·  Later Kibitzing>
Oct-30-03  drukenknight: you know, I pulled out Capablanca's book which I had never really looked at and he has a section on Q v Rook (no pawns) end game.

He does not have anything on Q vs Q w/ one pawn ending, too bad.

There is a game Honza is looking at w/ Q vs Rook motiff, would you be interested in looking at his examples?

Also you know, I am thinking about this position in general and I am wondering if black could sack his Q for a stalemate. After the pawn queens of course.

With two queens on the board, it is pretty difficult to not to be giving check at any one time. So you have to work out where to put your K so he is trapped by 2 queens. Does not sound insurmountable if you had practiced this at home.

Or at the adjournment, now that I think about it. I know Minev was a real doctor so maybe he had no time.

But the exchange part may not be hard at all. YOu have to give check AND threaten to take a Queen, yes.?

Nov-02-03  rndapology: The idea is to block a check from the defender and give check at the same time or give check and attack the defender's queen(with your own queen defended) at the same time. Also, you want to support your pawn with the queen. Putting all this together, it seems the strategy involves keeping your king and queen together and moving them slowly towards the enemy king who should be on the edge. After all the closer the queen is to the defending king, the easier it is to have two moves that can both check the defending king and block a check. Also, the defending king's presence blocks a line of check in from the defending queen. Which is what benzol said...anyone know of a game where the defending king doesn't obligingly go to the edge? I'd be interested in seeing a game like this where the defending king is in the center and tries to stay on squares of the opposite color of the other king, while the defending queen only attempts checks on the diagonals.
Nov-02-03  drukenknight: interesting analysis from rnd. There is a Seirewan game w/ Q/P vs Q I think. I know we had another one like this. I have no idea if the K went to the edge or not.

ALso you have to watch if you put your K/Q together sometimes that prevents the K from escaping a check.

Nov-02-03  drukenknight: rnd: Here is the other game with 2 queens and a pawn. Interestingly enuf there is an e pawn involved, which someone said leads to victory. At the end of the game, the stronger side is left with the pawn, but his K is not on a rank ahead of the pawn so it draws

Seirawan vs Xu Jun, 1988

Nov-02-03
Premium Chessgames Member
  Eggman: In Seirawan vs Xu Jun, 1988 the defending King is in front of the pawn - a hopeless draw. They only played this 191-move game out to get into the record books, I think.
Nov-02-03
Premium Chessgames Member
  Benzol: <rndapology> Thanks mate, I'm sorry if what I posted didn't make sense but at least you managed to get it. Hopefully it's clear now.
Oct-23-05
Premium Chessgames Member
  wwall: After 91.Kc5, then 91...Qc2+ 92.Qc4+ Ka3 93.g8=Q (93.Qxc2?? stalemate) 93...Qf2+ 94.Kd6 Qd4+ 95.Q8d5 (but not 95.Qxd4 stalmate) and White wins.
Sep-15-08  gambitfan: Again a very complicated winning endgame Q + P // Q
Sep-15-08  tsvanerp: If I was been black, I would go for a last trick: 91 .., Qc2+ 92 Qc4+ and now ... black reaches for his queen but "accidentally" touches the king, with a face expression "well, it doesn´t matter anyway, he moves 92 ..Ka3. White happy it is finally finished hastedly takes the queen 93 Qc2 stalemate .... ooops
Jan-19-09  WhiteRook48: Wow, I thought White couldn't stop all those checks! But he did!!
Aug-12-10
Premium Chessgames Member
  GrahamClayton: <rndapology>The idea is to block a check from the defender and give check at the same time or give check and attack the defender's queen(with your own queen defended) at the same time.

<rndapology>,
This game is a great example of the power of a "cross-check". Black resigned because all of his checks would be met by a cross-check, exchanging queens, eg:

91...Qc7+ 92.Qc6+
91...Qg1+ 92.Qd4+
91...Qf2+ 92.Qd4+
91...Qc2+ 92.Qc4+

Oct-29-12  vinidivici: what Botvinnik has done in this particular endgame is remarkable. The black king is remote from the hostile pawn and thats a big factor for Botvinnik to win. And also the white pawn is far advance on the board.

But a little bit notes that 77...Ka5 is an error the correct defense is 77...Ka3. When in this particular endgame the pawn is the rook or knight pawn, better place the king in the opposite corner, preventing counter check when the the stronger queen defense his own king.

But the defense complex and difficult. Even if you do 77... Ka3, your chance to lose still big, because its hard to defense meanwhile much easier to be the aggressive side.

Oct-30-12  SimonWebbsTiger: Looking back at the kibitzes from 2003, first raised by <aulero>, the computer tablebases have solved the Botvinnik-Minev endgame. An analysis of this is provided in "Dvoretsky's Endgame Manual". (pp.250-251; Russell Enterprises, 2nd Edition, 2008.)

Some general rules:
1) the stronger side should keep his king on the same file or rank as the opposing king, or on an adjacent rank or file (also true with more pawns on the board).

2) the stronger side should not place his king in front of the pawn.

3) the weaker side should place his king as far away in the diametrically opposite corner to the pawn's promotion square to avoid counter-checks.

But as Dvoretsky remarks, many of the tablebases reveal wins in 50+ moves with perfect play and that these types of endgames arise so rarely it isn't terribly practical to learn all the minutae of this Q+ (Knight) pawn versus Queen. Central and bishop pawns give the greatest winning chances compared to knight and rook pawns.

Oct-30-12  SimonWebbsTiger: ps. A recent practical example was

Marjanovic vs Beliavsky, 1987

Marjanovic annotated the game in Informator 44/109.

Oct-30-12  vinidivici: <Some general rules:
1) the stronger side should keep his king on the same file or rank as the opposing king, or on an adjacent rank or file (also true with more pawns on the board). 2) the stronger side should not place his king in front of the pawn.

3) the weaker side should place his king as far away in the diametrically opposite corner to the pawn's promotion square to avoid counter-checks.>

All's true.
Maybe theres an addition that
4) When the weaker side king's remote from the pawn and the pawn is rook/knight pawn then to win the stronger side king sooner or later has to try to get near the opponent king to create a position where all checks can be met with the counter check.

Just like the last position above.

91...Qf2+/Qc2+/Qc7+ are useless.

But if the pawn is the bishop pawn or the central pawn and the king is remote, then the draw chance is ZERO %, if one playing correctly.

Oct-31-12  SimonWebbsTiger: @<vinidivici>

yes, when white's knight pawn is at g7 and the queen d4 with the black king in the vicinity of the a1 corner, Averbakh in his famous endgame series gives several positions demonstrating the winning procedure with the white king close by, instead of at eg. f6

BTW, absolutely correct too that Minev's Ka5 was the wrong way. Which immediately shows Botvinnik gave a useless check which should have forced the king to go where it has to go anyway! As noted, Dvoretsky points out the correct winning method in his manual, as found by the silicon.

If interested, check out the Endgame Corner by Karsten Mueller on chesscafe.com. The April 2003 column (in the archive section) has a bit on Q+RP v. Q, with practical examples.

Oct-31-12  vinidivici: <Simon>
Yes, i have read all Dvo's Endgame Manual contents.
Good book.

Q vs Q + pawn doesnt so often appear in the practical matches, you need to practice sometimes, but maybe knowing the basic principles for queen endgames is enough. I rarely found in my own games, and the winning line could be up to more than 60 moves.

Oct-31-12
Premium Chessgames Member
  perfidious: < vinidivici: Yes, i have read all Dvo's Endgame Manual contents. Good book....>

As is the whole series.

<....Q vs Q + pawn doesnt so often appear in the practical matches....>

Never had either side of Q+P vs Q in thirty years of play, in a serious game or even rapid play.

Oct-31-12  vinidivici: <As is the whole series. > Is it have a series? Perhaps you meant by that is the different editions or revision. I learnt from Manual Endgame about 5 years ago. I kind of delve deeper my analytical part now. So im reading a different expert book now.

<Never had either side of Q+P vs Q in thirty years> I mean, in the blitz or rapid or standard (15 minutes game), in the online games, sometimes it appears, say 1 from 50 games. But Not exactly Q P v Q but also Q +pawns v Q+ pawns. But in the competitive plays it really really rare.

<thirty years of play> Wow, 30 years, thats a long time. I might be would never reach your kind of experiences. Won't reveal my name though. I even dont have a quarter of your experiences.

Oct-31-12
Premium Chessgames Member
  perfidious: Dvoretsky published five books and they're all worth owning-if you can find them.
Nov-01-12  vinidivici: <perf>

Dont need to tell me though.

I said <Yes, i have read all Dvo's ENDGAME MANUAL contents. Good book.>

You <as is the whole series>

I dont think Endgame Manual has the series.

I tell you that Endgame Manual has no series just revisions.

By the way, dont worry about getting his books.
And you are WRONG about 5 books. Its MORE than that. far more.

Nov-01-12
Premium Chessgames Member
  perfidious: Maybe I'm not wrong-he wrote a five-volume series dealing with various aspects of the game-not just endings.
Nov-01-12  vinidivici: But still you are wrong about 5 books.
Nov-01-12
Premium Chessgames Member
  perfidious: <vini> Had hopes I was wrong about you, but they were not to be. Your misbehaviour has reasserted itself.
Mar-13-14  Marmot PFL: <According to Fine's Basic Chess Endings (published, I believe, before the Minev game but after the Ravinsky game) this should be a draw. Hmmm ... >

Both sides made mistakes according to the computer analysis, but Fine was probably right. I believe his conclusion was based on an analysis by Keres.

This game was adjourned twice but even the best human analysis can only do so much and even if the game follows those lines they have to be remembered at the board. The stronger player had an advantage and won, as usually happens.

< Earlier Kibitzing  · PAGE 2 OF 2 ·  Later Kibitzing>

from the Chessgames Store
NOTE: You need to pick a username and password to post a reply. Getting your account takes less than a minute, totally anonymous, and 100% free--plus, it entitles you to features otherwise unavailable. Pick your username now and join the chessgames community!
If you already have an account, you should login now.
Please observe our posting guidelines:
  1. No obscene, racist, sexist, or profane language.
  2. No spamming, advertising, or duplicating posts.
  3. No personal attacks against other users.
  4. Nothing in violation of United States law.
Blow the Whistle See something that violates our rules? Blow the whistle and inform an administrator.


NOTE: Keep all discussion on the topic of this page. This forum is for this specific game and nothing else. If you want to discuss chess in general, or this site, you might try the Kibitzer's Café.
Messages posted by Chessgames members do not necessarily represent the views of Chessgames.com, its employees, or sponsors.
Spot an error? Please submit a correction slip and help us eliminate database mistakes!
This game is type: CLASSICAL (Disagree? Please submit a correction slip.)

Featured in the Following Game Collections [what is this?]
Queen and Pawn endings
by bengalcat47
6) Queen Endings
from The Greatest Ever Chess Endgames by K9Empress
KQPvKQ
from 64idi0t's_misc by 64idi0t
Endgame
by Morphischer
Queen versus Queen and Pawn
from armarosis' favorite endgames by armarosis
W:kh5,qf5,g6 B:ka4,qe8 77.?
from The ending by gourav27
Botvinnik's best games
by HOTDOG
48a_Queen
by whiteshark
K+Q+P vs K+Q
from Endgames I Need To Study by JDPK37
Botvinnik's Best Games 1947-1970
by uglybird
Mikhail Botvinnik's Best Games
by KingG
Checks ended!
from The Best Chess Games (part 1) by Dr Esenville
R --> Q
from 23_Rook endings with pawn races on opposite wing by whiteshark
endgame mastery
by JustAnotherPatzer
Game #12
from The most beautiful games in chess by keywiz84
Hit the cross check, dont you come back no more no more...
from DeepBlade's favorite games by DeepBlade
queen + pawn vs. queen
from Instructive chess endgames by wwall
botvinnik best games
by brager
Q+1p vs. Q
from Endgame technique by zorro
Endgame
from Mammoth Book of Chess by relue
plus 6 more collections (not shown)


home | about | login | logout | F.A.Q. | your profile | preferences | Premium Membership | Kibitzer's Café | Biographer's Bistro | new kibitzing | chessforums | Tournament Index | Player Directory | World Chess Championships | Opening Explorer | Guess the Move | Game Collections | ChessBookie Game | Chessgames Challenge | Store | privacy notice | advertising | contact us
Copyright 2001-2014, Chessgames Services LLC
Web design & database development by 20/20 Technologies