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


register now - it's free!
Alexander Morozevich vs Dmitry Jakovenko
Ciudad de Pamplona (2006)  ·  Nimzo-Indian Defense: Classical. Berlin Variation Pirc Variation (E39)  ·  1/2-1/2
To move:
Last move:

explore this opening
find similar games 10 more Morozevich/Jakovenko games
PGN: download | view | print Help: general | java-troubleshooting

TIP: You can step through the moves by clicking the and buttons, but it's much easier to simply use the left and right arrow keys on your keyboard.

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

Kibitzer's Corner
< Earlier Kibitzing  · PAGE 3 OF 3 ·  Later Kibitzing>
Dec-31-06  DutchDunce: Amazingly, Moro was on the losing end of a Q vs R in 2003, against Shirov. Also amazingly, that game was also 114 moves: Morozevich vs Shirov, 2003
Dec-31-06  FHBradley: Elementary or not, playing through this endgame with the help of Nalimov is most instructive to a Patzer like me. Around move 80 Morozevich suddenly begins to lose the thread, having played the endgame immaculately before that: 81. Qf6 would have given white an easy and comfortable victory.
Dec-31-06  TylerD: Capanegra: happay new year to you too!
Jan-02-07  FJCF: yes 69.b6! Kb5 70.b7 Kc6 71.Nc5! followed Kf7 is 1-0 easy.Is the time... :-)
Jan-02-07  FJCF: But 71.Nc5 Kc5 72.Kf7 Rb8 73.g8=Q Rb7 and another ending Q+R
Jan-02-07  malthrope: <FJCF: yes 69.b6! Kb5 70.b7 Kc6 71.Nc5! followed Kf7 is 1-0 easy.Is the time... :-)>

Followed by... <FJCF: But 71.Nc5 Kc5 72.Kf7 Rb8 73.g8=Q Rb7 and another ending Q+R>

The idea behind 69. b6! Kb5 70. b7 Kc6 (or Kb6 and if 70... Ka6 then 71. Nc5+ followed by 72. Kf7 wins) is (instead of 71. Nc5) 71. b8=Q Rxb8 72. Nf8! wins. This was all pointed out by <Mameluk:It looks almost impossible that Moro overlooked 69. b6-b7-b8. Something was already wrong.> on the previous page.

We surmised that Jako noticed this and decided it best to play on and try his luck once the 'Q vs. R' ending was achieved on move #71 with Kxb5, etc. Anyway, 'Good Luck' to Sasha in the '1st ACP World Rapid Cup' starting on January 4th, 2007! ;-) - Mal

Jan-08-07
Premium Chessgames Member
  Domdaniel: Q-vs-R looks very easy when you play through it with an engine, and see the wins on move 81, move 111 etc. It's a lot harder in practice, although clearly a super-GM like Moro should have the technique.

I saw the same thing happen in the 1980s, in the deciding game of the Irish championship between two players rated about 2300. The guy with the Queen had to win the game for the title, but it ended in a draw and somebody else won on tie-break.

The really incredible thing about this game is the way Jakovenko defends for so long with a lone Rook -- first against knight and four pawns, then against a queen. It's one of the finest sustained defensive efforts in the history of chess. The psychological factor -- when your opponent is dead but refuses to lie down -- should never be underestimated.

Jan-09-07  soberknight:


click for larger view

White to play at move 72: tablebase says mate in 28 (standard for this distribution of the pieces). Maximum distance to mate for this material is 35 moves in this position:


click for larger view

. Maximum distance to conversion, according to Monty Newborn and David Levy in "How Computers Play Chess," is 30 moves. GM Walter Browne played two queen versus rook games against a computer (maybe BELLE) in the 1980s, with the task for him to reach the conversion within the standard 50-move limit. Browne got stuck the first time, but he came back the next week after intensive practice, and captured the rook on the 50th move with no time to spare.

Jan-09-07  soberknight: Now tablebase comments on the moves of the ending:

72. Qc8 /28 (optimal)
...Rd5 /23 (suboptimal, makes mate 4 moves closer, hereafter -4) 73. Ke6 /26 (Qc3 was /23)
...Rd4 /24
74. Ke5 /24
...Rd3 /23
75. Qc2 /23
...Rd8 /22 (optimal by both players)
76. Qb3+ /22
...Kc5 /21
77. Qc3+ /21
...Kb5 /19
78. Ke6 /19
...Kb6 /18
79. Qc4 /18
...Rg8 /17
80. Qd4+ /17
...Kc6 /16

So far the play on both sides has been superb, almost without mistakes. Now Morozevich gets stuck.

81. Qc3+ /18 (-2, Ke7 or Qf6 were optimal)
...Kb5 /17
82. Kd6? /26 (-9, one of the worst moves that doesn't lose the queen, even though it looks aggressive. Qe5+ was optimal.) ...Rg6+ /26
83. Kc7 /25
...Rg4! /24 (The only move. The next best alternative was Ra6, allowing mate in 13.) 84. Qc6+ /26 (-2)
...Kb4
85. Qd6+ /28 (-2, but a good try)
...Kc3! /27 (other moves lose the rook quickly. Ka5 is mate in 10 after Qd2+!)

So now Morozevich must start all over again.

86. Kc6 /27
...Rd4 /26
87. Qa3+ /27
...Kd2 /26
88. Kc5 /26
...Re4 /24
89. Kd5 /24
...Rg4 /23
90. Qf3 /23
...Rb4 /22
91. Kc5 /22
...Ra4 /21 (Several consecutive optimal moves have just passed.) 92. Qf6 /25 (But not this one! Qf2 was best.)
...Kd3 /20 (Returning the favor, instead of Ke3.)
93. Qd6+ /28 (-8, Qf1! was mate in 20)
...Ke3 /27

I'm too tired to finish this analysis. You can do it yourself by using the Lokasoft tablebase at http://www.lokasoft.nl/uk/tbweb.htm. A couple of critical mistakes by Moro, and some beautiful defensive moves by his opponent, did the trick.

Jan-10-07  positionalgenius: Poor Morozevich...I've done this more than once.
Jan-10-07  malthrope: <soberknight: [...] GM Walter Browne played two queen versus rook games against a computer (maybe BELLE) in the 1980s, with the task for him to reach the conversion within the standard 50-move limit. Browne got stuck the first time, but he came back the next week after intensive practice, and captured the rook on the 50th move with no time to spare.>

I can verify that story... :-)

Shawn - Walter Shawn Browne - is an old friend (today is his birthday, btw, born January 10, 1949). It was all based on a bet (could he or couldn't he?). So, that's exactly what happened he drew the first 'Q vs. R' game (failed to win in 50 moves). Then he studied the 'clever computer defenses' and in the next game won the rook on move 50 (just in the nick of time)... ;-) Regards, - Mal

PS: Thanks for posting the 'Q vs. R' endgame Nalimov tablebase analysis highlights. Note: <Mameluk> did a very nice job previously (I also added some stuff here in the 'Moro vs. Jako' game in the past few kibitz pages), and also posted a recap over at Mig's ChessNinja Forums - International Events / "XVI Torneo Internacional - 'Cuidad De Pamplona' - Dec. '06" // http://www.chessninja.com/cgi-bin/u...

Jul-23-07  Ashram64: good learning game
Jul-24-07  argishti: WAT A BLOW!! wowww
Nov-01-08
Premium Chessgames Member
  Eggman: <<soberknight>> Those tablebase figures are misleading (though thanks for the effort), because they give the number of moves to reach checkmate when in fact, for intents and purposes, winning the Rook is good enough.
Jan-12-09  Lucid Faia: 114. Kxd2

...Whoops. >_>

Jul-09-09
Premium Chessgames Member
  YouRang: Yes, K+Q vs. K+R is not easy, but on the other hand, Moro had already done the hard part, and then let it get away at the end by allowing a crazy-rook stalemate.

In positions like the one Moro had after 110 moves, white must use zugzwang tactics to force black into tighter positions until the king can't defend the rook any longer, and eventually the rook falls to a queen fork, skewer or pin.

In this case, 111.Qe5! maintains the grip on a square next to the king (h2) while setting up checks at e1 or a1. This is typicaly of what to look for in such situations.

Jul-09-09  aragorn69: Was this rapid??
Jul-09-09
Premium Chessgames Member
  plang: <Was this rapid??>

No

Jul-10-09  popski: Oh man, that's a great ending to learn from!
Aug-17-12  geniokov: Is there any useful golden rule to drawn the game of K+Q vs K+R ending in favor who handles the K+R?
Aug-17-12  kasputine: 63. Kf4 would have easily won,
63. ... Rxa4+
64. Kf5
Aug-17-12  Black Vampire: <geniokov> Unfortunately, given the fact the ending K+Q vs K+R is a mathematical win for the strong side, there´s no useful golden rule for the weak side, except at certain stalemate positions, such as the one which happened in the game.
Jul-08-15
Premium Chessgames Member
  David2009: You can try your luck at winning the ending against Crafty End Game Trainer: http://www.chessvideos.tv/endgame-t...
Jul-10-16  Smothered Mate: Inspired by <Eggman>'s comment, here's analysis from a _DTC_ tablebase (http://chess.jaet.org/endings/), rather than a DTM tablebase:



1 move ​ = ​ 2 ply

PTC ​ = ​ ply to conversion , _not_ counting ​
the capturing or checkmating move

So, just after a capture,
​PTC = 99 ​ would be a win and ​ PTC = 100 ​ would be a draw. ​


71. ... Kxb5 ​ entered the KQKR ending.

PTC = 44

72. Qc8 ​ slows down conversion by 1 move.
Kf6 and Ke6 were the PTC-optimal moves.

PTC = 45

72. ... Rd5 ​ speeds up conversion by 5 moves.
Kb4 was uniquely PTC-optimal.

PTC = 34

73. Ke6 ​ slows down conversion by 4 moves.
Qc3 was the only other move that does not slow it even more.

PTC = 41

73. ... Rd4 ​ speeds up conversion by 2 moves.
Rc5 was uniquely PTC-optimal.

PTC = 36

74. Ke5 Rd3 ​ was PTC-optimal, but not uniquely so.

PTC = 34

75. Qc2 Rd8 ​ 76. Qb3+ Kc5 ​ 77. Qc3+ ​ ​ ​ was uniquely PTC-optimal.

PTC = 29

77. ... Kb5 ​ speeds up conversion by 2 moves.
(There's only one other legal move.)

PTC = 24

78. Ke6 Kb6 ​ 79. Qc4 Rg8 ​ ​ ​ was uniquely PTC-optimal.

PTC = 20

80. Qd4+ ​ was PTC-optimal.
Qb4+ was the only other PTC-optimal move.

PTC = 19

80. ... Kc6 ​ was uniquely PTC-optimal.

PTC = 18

81. Qc3+ ​ slows down conversion by 2 moves.
The only moves to convert faster were Qe4+,Qf6,Ke7.
​Those 3 moves all give the same PTC.

PTC = 21

81. ... Kb5 ​ was uniquely PTC-optimal.

PTC = 20

82. Kd6 ​ slows down conversion by 10 moves.
Qe5+ was uniquely PTC-optimal.

PTC = 39

82. ... Rg6+ ​ was uniquely PTC-optimal.
Rg4 was the unique _next_-best, and
​would've sped up conversion by 9 moves.

PTC = 38

83. Kc7 ​ was PTC-optimal.
Kd7 was the only other PTC-optimal move.

PTC = 37

83. ... Rg4 ​ was uniquely PTC-optimal.
Ra6 was unique _next_-best, and
​would've sped up conversion by 13 moves.

PTC = 36

84. Qc6+ ​ slows down conversion by 2 moves.
Qe3 was uniquely PTC-optimal.

PTC = 39

84. ... Kb4 ​ was uniquely PTC-optimal.

PTC = 38

85. Qd6+ ​ slows down conversion by 3 moves.
Qb6+ was uniquely PTC-optimal.

PTC = 43

85. ... Kc3 ​ 86. Kc6 ​ ​ ​ was uniquely PTC-optimal. Ka5 was black's unique _next_-best, and only lasts 4 ply before the rook is taken.

PTC = 41

86. ... Rd4 ​ was PTC-optimal.
Rc4+ was the only other PTC-optimal move.

PTC = 40

87. Qa3+ ​ slows down conversion by 1 move.
Qg3+ was the only move that converts faster.

PTC = 41

87. ... Kd2 ​ was uniquely PTC-optimal.

PTC = 40

88. Kc5 ​ slows down conversion by 1 move, _and_ reaches ​
a rotation of the position from just after ​ ​ ​ 73. Ke6 ​ . ​
Qf3 was the only other move that does not slow it even more.

88. ... Re4 ​ 89. Kd5 ​ ​ ​ are the corresponding rotations ​
of the corresponding moves from that position.

89. ... Rg4 ​ speeds up conversion by 1 move.
Rf4 was PTC-optimal (but not uniquely so)
​_and_ would've kept the rotation.

PTC = 32

90. Qf3 Rb4 ​ 91. Kc5 Ra4 ​ ​ ​ was uniquely PTC-optimal.

PTC = 28

92. Qf6 ​ slows down conversion by 6 moves.
Qf2+ was uniquely PTC-optimal.

PTC = 39

92. ... Kd3 ​ speeds up conversion by 6 moves.
Ke3 was uniquely PTC-optimal.

PTC = 26

93. Qd6+ ​ slows down conversion by 9 moves.
Qf1+ was uniquely PTC-optimal.

PTC = 43

93. ... Ke3 ​ was uniquely PTC-optimal.
Kc3 was unique _next_-best, and
​would've sped up conversion by 8 moves.

PTC = 42

94. Qg3+ ​ was PTC-optimal.
Qd1 and Qh6+ were the other PTC-optimal moves.

PTC = 41

94. ... Ke2 ​ was uniquely PTC-optimal.

PTC = 40

95. Qc3 Rf4 ​ were PTC-optimal, but not uniquely so.

PTC = 38

96. Kd5 ​ was uniquely PTC-optimal.

PTC = 37

96. ... Rg4 ​ speeds up conversion by 4 moves.
Rh4 was uniquely PTC-optimal.

PTC = 28

97. Ke5 ​ was uniquely PTC-optimal.

PTC = 27



continued below

Jul-10-16  Smothered Mate: continued from above



PTC = 27

97. ... Rh4 ​ reaches a reflection of the
​position from just after ​ ​ ​ 77. Kb5 ​ .

98. Kf5 Kf2 ​ 99. Qd3 Rh7 ​ 100. Qd4+ Kf3 ​ ​ ​ are the corresponding reflections of the corresponding moves from that position.

101. Kg5 ​ was PTC-optimal.
Qd5+ and Qf6 ​ were the other PTC-optimal moves.

PTC = 17

101. ... Rh2 ​ was uniquely PTC-optimal.

PTC = 16

102. Qf4+ ​ was PTC-optimal.
Qf6+ was the only other PTC-optimal move.

PTC = 15

102. ... Kg2 ​ was obviously uniquely PTC-optimal.

PTC = 14

103. Kg4 ​ was PTC-optimal.
Qe5 was the only other PTC-optimal move.

PTC = 13

103. ... Kg1 ​ 104. Qd4+ Kg2 ​ ​ ​ was uniquely PTC-optimal.

PTC = 10

105. Qd3 ​ slows down conversion by 2 moves.
Qe5+ was uniquely PTC-optimal.

PTC = 13

105. ... Kg1 ​ was uniquely PTC-optimal.

PTC = 12

106. Qe3+ ​ slows down conversion by 1 move.
Qd4+ was uniquely PTC-optimal, but
​repeats the position from 2 moves ago.

PTC = 13

106. ... Kf1 ​ was uniquely PTC-optimal.

PTC = 12

107. Qc1+ ​ slows down conversion by 2 moves.
Qd4 was uniquely PTC-optimal, but
​lets black repeat the position from 3 ply ago.

PTC = 15

107. ... Kf2 ​ was uniquely PTC-optimal.

PTC = 14

108. Qd2+ ​ was PTC-optimal, though not uniquely so.

PTC = 13

108. ... Kg1 ​ was obviously uniquely PTC-optimal.

PTC = 12

109. Qe1+ ​ was PTC-optimal.
Qd4+ was the only other PTC-optimal move, but
​that one repeats the position from 5 moves ago.

PTC = 11

109. ... Kg2 ​ was the only legal move.

PTC = 10

110. Qg3+ ​ slows down conversion by 1 move.
Qe5 was the only other move that does not slow it even more.

PTC = 11

110. ... Kh1 ​ was obviously uniquely PTC-optimal.

PTC = 10

111. Kf3 ​ throws away the win.
Qe5 was uniquely PTC-optimal.

111. ... Rf2+ ​ was the only drawing move.

Black's subsequent moves _would be_
​only-drawing-moves if not for the 50-move rule.

(Playing ​ 112. ... Rb2 ​ would _just barely_ reach the 50-move rule, but none of the other alternatives for that move draw. ​
Black had 5 alternatives for it's 113 that reach the 50-move rule.)

Jump to page #    (enter # from 1 to 3)
< Earlier Kibitzing  · PAGE 3 OF 3 ·  Later Kibitzing>
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 members.
  4. Nothing in violation of United States law.
  5. No posting personal information of members.
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?]
Interesting endgames
by gazzawhite
Jakovenko!
by Whitehat1963
Rambling Rooks
by SwitchingQuylthulg
White's 111th
from Annotated by Tablebase by Judah
Badly Played!
from iccsumant's favorite games by iccsumant
Dmitry Jakovenko
by randzo
Book of Samurai's favorite games 6
by Book of Samurai


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 2001-2016, Chessgames Services LLC
Web design & database development by 20/20 Technologies