< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 4 OF 4 ·
|Sep-09-12|| ||FSR: <Abdel Irada> Very impressive that you managed to pull off the mate in your second tournament game. GM Epishin would be green with envy. I can only recall seeing (in person) the ending thrice. The first time, I witnessed Alberto A Artidiello (now the co-owner of this site, then my high school classmate) win it in a tournament game. Albert's opponent, like yours, defended poorly, running to the wrong corner. The second time, the next round of a big tournament I was playing in was delayed an hour or so while an expert unsuccessfully tried to execute the mate. The third time, I had the bad side of the ending in a game on FICS. My opponent, down to his five-second increment, tried to mate me before the 50-move rule kicked in. After 30-something moves he had gotten nowhere and offered a draw.|
Incidentally, IM Jeremy Silman in his books recommends that one not bother studying the ending. He argues that it occurs so rarely that if you devote the time you would have spent on it to, say, studying rook endings, you'll get a better return on your time investment. If you do study it, there's a good chance that you'll never have a chance to use the fruits of your labor.
|Sep-09-12|| ||Abdel Irada: <FSR>: I respectfully differ. My own experience as well as yours suggests that knowing the ending (on both attack and defense) *could* have made a difference in some of our own games — even if not necessarily an advantageous one for ourselves. And a certain GM Epishin would certainly have profited by knowing how to execute it.|
As I later discovered, winning the ending isn't as complicated as it appears. There is a recurring pattern of moves of knight and bishop that effects the crucial objective of forcing the king out of the wrong corner. Granted, in a real game there's the proverbial "many a slip," particularly since merely by defending *incorrectly*, a defender can throw one off one's pattern, but I am still glad to have learned the essentials. If nothing else, opponents who know I know them tend to resign rather than play out the position and make me prove it. :-)
|Sep-09-12|| ||FSR: <Abdel Irada> I know the ending cold once either (a) the king is trapped in the wrong corner, (b) he's boxed in (for example, king on d7, shut in by my Nd5 and Bb5) or (c) the king is in the other corner, and I have to rope him over to the other corner. Frankly, I'm not sure how easy a time I would have starting out from a random position if the other guy defended tenaciously, especially if I only had five seconds a move or some such. Is there someplace online where one can play it out against Crafty or some such?|
|Sep-09-12|| ||perfidious: In 1983, I made John A Curdo play it out and was subjected to scorn by a well-known New Hampshire player and director (also master level), which I laughed off, because I didn't care what he thought.|
|Sep-09-12|| ||Abdel Irada: <FSR>: I haven't really looked at the ending in some time, since long before there was a Crafty. Nor have I been particularly systematic. My method, such as it is, has simply been to set up "random," difficult positions (pieces uncoordinated, defender's king near center of board) and then try to win them as efficiently as possible.|
<perfidious>: You're not wrong to make even a master-strength opponent prove he can win this ending. As GM Epishin's debacle shows, even very strong players sometimes have gaps in their knowledge. And what's the worst that can happen? You can lose after a long struggle rather than resign immediately. More work may be required, but is the result any different?
|Sep-09-12|| ||FSR: <perfidious> Like you, I would play it out. In the game that decided the 1997 World Junior Championship, Morozevich made Shaked prove that he knew how to win it. Shaked vs Morozevich, 1997 I'm guessing that Epishin's opponent didn't think that the GM would fail to win it - but you never know. (Epishin proved shockingly ignorant, even trying to mate the king in the wrong corner!!) The ending has occurred 136 times in CG.com's database (about 1 out of every 5,000 games). Endgame Explorer: BN vs K Fifteen players (11%) have failed to win it. Endgame Explorer: BN vs K Epishin is not even the only GM to do so: E Inarkiev vs F Peralta, 2007; I Zakharevich vs A Bratchenko, 2001. And here's an IM screwing it up: W Wittmann vs T Meszaros, 2006. And a 2390, a 2385, and a 2333: S Shoker vs J Elbilia, 2011; Ding Yixin vs A Kashlinskaya, 2010; S Djuraev vs T Vandenbussche, 2010.|
It would be kind of cool if FIDE enacted the "Botvinnik rule" and stripped any GM who gave up a draw in this ending of his title - at least for a month or so.
|Sep-10-12|| ||Abdel Irada: <FSR>: I think such a rule would be terribly hard to make fair. The trouble is that it fails to account for variables such as extreme time pressure. As many a chastened world-class player can tell you, when your flag is teetering, anything can and probably will happen.|
Of course, one could enact it with provisions to account for such mitigating circumstances, but this would tend to invoke the curse of the arbitrary and all the challenges that must inevitably arise therefrom.
|Sep-10-12|| ||FSR: <Abdel Irada> I'm not sure I would <really> support such a rule if push came to shove, but it's amusing to contemplate.|
|Sep-10-12|| ||perfidious: <Abdel Irada> It was indeed a long struggle-the game lasted 130 moves, the latter of two hundred-move games Curdo and I played of the 35-40 times we met from 1978-2001.|
|Sep-12-12|| ||sushijunkie: I'm too lazy (great attribute for a chess "player"!) to read all of the posts: Has anyone ever underpromoted simply and purely for tempo like this before? I'm too lazy to research, too. Thankfully, some of you folks are OCD and can leave no question unanswered.|
|Sep-12-12|| ||Jacob Arnold: <Thankfully, some of you folks are OCD and can leave no question unanswered.>
But to answer the question, I'm sure of it. If the tempo you gain from this under promotion gives you a winning position, then why not do it?
|Sep-13-12|| ||sushijunkie: <<Jacob Arnold>:But to answer the question, I'm sure of it. If the tempo you gain from this under promotion gives you a winning position, then why not do it?>|
Thanks for answering, but I didn't say "winning position"; we've all seen these either in games or puzzles. Naka underpromoted here to a Knight for the sole reason that it gave check where no other piece could, therefore keeping tempo and maintaining the attack. I guess I'm just not used to seeing an underpromotion to a Knight when the King has no shield. Sorry if I wasn't clearer.
C'mon, kibs, surely someone knows...
I have never seen this before. I was just wondering if anyone has.
|Sep-13-12|| ||FSR: To answer my own question, yes you can play out bishop and knight against lone king against Crafty: http://www.chessvideos.tv/endgame-t... The site also has an instructional video on how to win that ending, and lets you play out many other endings against Crafty (for example, K+Q v. K+R). Great stuff!|
btw, it turns out I have mad skillz with B+N. I mated in 31 from the bad starting position it gives you. (In the worst-case scenario - well, apart from the positions where the defender has an immediate draw - B+N+K v. K can take 33 moves to win. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bishop... )
|Sep-14-12|| ||Naniwazu: Amazing.. an underpromotion by Nakamura! Never seen one of those in an actual grandmaster game.|
|Sep-14-12|| ||pawn to QB4: Karpov vs Timman, 1986 was another example we looked at a few months back, but they are very rare.|
|Sep-14-12|| ||micartouse: This game is awesome, I hope it bubbles up higher on his top 10 games list; right now his number 1 is a game against Krasenkow.|
The endgame makes me think of all those games he played against Rybka, tormenting it with minor pieces. That skill actually came in handy here - he was in his element.
|Sep-14-12|| ||sushijunkie: <<pawn to QB4>: Karpov vs Timman, 1986 was another example we looked at a few months back, but they are very rare.>|
That answers my question. I like Naka's game better, but I guess I shouldn't be surprised this has been done before (a naked or nearly naked King being checked by an underpromoted Knight to preserve tempo).
|Sep-16-12|| ||Eduardo Bermudez: Kramnik lost his unbeaten record of 64 games in Olympics, Congrats for Naka !!|
|Sep-16-12|| ||Olavi: Szabo vs Ivkov, 1964|
|Sep-16-12|| ||Eduardo Bermudez: Most longer series of chess games unbeaten at Chess Olympiads|
1) Tigran Petrosian: 94
2) Boris Spassky: 86
3) Vasily Ivanchuk: 84
4) Paul Keres: 76
5) Vladimir Kramnik: 64
6) Mikhail Tal: 62
7) Borislav Ivkov: 51
8) Julio Bolbochán: 50
9) Svetosar Gligoric: 46
10) Aleksandar Matanovic: 46
|Sep-17-12|| ||Abulherar: 62.c8=N is AWESOME!!!|
|Sep-17-12|| ||eric the Baptist: what a game! must be one the most complicated, high-level games of the year.|
|Sep-17-12|| ||RookFile: Great game.|
|Apr-12-13|| ||SuperPatzer77: |
click for larger view
Instead of Kramnik's 78th move - 78...Kh2, 78...Ba7, 79. Ng5+! Kh2, 80. Bg4! Bb6, 81. Ne4 Bd8, 82. Nd4 Bb6, 83. Nf3+ Kh1 - See diagram below:
click for larger view
Now Black has defense against 84. Nf2# or Ng3# but White finds a winning move - 84. Bh3! (Black has no defense against 85. Bg2#)
|May-14-13|| ||samsloan: Why did Kramnik sacrifice the exchange with 27. ... Rxc5 ? The game seems dead drawn without that but Kramnik has a high percentage of draws.|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 4 OF 4 ·