chessgames.com
Members · Prefs · Laboratory · Collections · Openings · Endgames · Sacrifices · History · Search Kibitzing · Kibitzer's Café · Chessforums · Tournament Index · Players · Kibitzing
 
Lonely Two Bishops Mate Examples
Compiled by plerranov
--*--

If you have an interest in the endgame for the King and two Bishops against a King, then this game collection is meant for you. Here is grist for the mill-- actual games, rather than mere theoretical positions. Now you can use these games as practical cases to compare and contrast methods of effecting mate. Now you have evidence of blunders, inefficient schemes and outright failures in the various processes of bringing this mate, as well as sterling performances.

The details for those processes may be found elsewhere. Only general points underlying the Lonely Two-Bishops Mate will be covered here, as the first stage for those who are motivated enough to undertake its study. I do contend that it is worthwhile to seek out the means of conducting this endgame, although some of the foremost writers (and YouTube presenters) will omit its coverage-- they consider it too simple to prepare relevant and helpful material.

Some experts and masters suggest that there is some ambiguity about when the endgame starts. However, I maintain that the Lone King position is definitive as the beginning of the endgames of King and Two Bishops and the King with Bishop and Knight.

The "Lone King position" (LK) refers to that situation in the game where the defending King has no team members and no Pawns are on left on the board at all. The players just have the four chessmen-- two Kings and two (oppositely-colored) Bishops. The counting for the 50-Move Rule starts there as well.

It is not trivial to specify that the Bishops must be of opposite colors. Chess databases will have games where Promotion to a second Bishop would only generate one of the same color. A King with two Bishops of the same color against a King is a known Draw by Insufficient Material, indeed. Do not blunder into such a draw by arrogantly and prematurely choosing Under-Promotion to a Bishop, then!

It is of practical interest to note that any Lone King position can only be reached by a capture, whether made by the attacking chessmen or the other King. One of the attackers may even make a capture with check that brings about the Lone King position. Even though the Lonely Two-Bishops Mate is rare, a special case of one by a Capture Checkmate, the most powerful form of capture, is available in this game collection-- E Smirnova vs R Obregon Garcia, 2021. At any rate, once the mate is known, this factoid makes it easy to peruse the game score backwards and locate the Lone King position, as it will be the last capture for the given game.

Further, the phrase "Lonely ... Mate" is an emphatic means of referring to the mating nets and concluding patterns that result from Lone King positions--- only the defending King is left on the board for that "team."

The process of the mate with two Bishops and King alone against a Lone King is rare, but it is still among the fundamental endgames. Tarrasch does not cover it at all in his classical and worthwhile work, The Game of Chess. Other masters do, with GM Nakamura on YouTube even depicting the Bishops as two wizards using brilliantly bright blasts of power from their hands to corral the opposed King! Such a dramatic visualization serves well to illustrate the initial idea of the reducing the range and space of the King. After that, one must send the King to the last rank. Next, one must send that King into a corner (or next door to it, but not on the diagonal). Lastly, use one's chessmen as a team to cause the mate.

My position is in agreement with those experts and masters who posit that the Lonely Two Bishops Mate and the Lonely Knight and Bishop Mate should be taught by chess coaches and tutors. Not for beginners, of course, but everyone else should at least be exposed to these mating processes. Intermediate chess players and above should become acquainted with the process behind this mate. There are cases where experts and even masters have flubbed this process, dropping into various kinds of draws, instead. High-caliber players have even brought a stalemate or, worse yet, lost a Bishop. However, Chess Coach Clark has seen U14 players successfully win from the Lone King positions and even a few U8 players have done so as well.

Do note that the Lonely Two-Bishops Mate is quite different from the Boden's Mate (the "criss-cross mate"). The board may have several chessmen emplaced for any Boden's Mate and the Bishops would be attacking from different angles, whereas the Lonely Two-Bishops Mate has the Bishops attacking from the same angle.

The Lonely Two Bishops Mate is also different from the Raking Bishops Mate in most cases. There may be many chessmen on the board and the King may not be an essential supporter for the final position of the Raking Bishops Mate. In both patterns the Bishops are proceeding in the same angle, however.

Important points to remember about the Lonely Two Bishops Mate:

....... One must bring the defending King to the corner or an edge square adjacent to the corner.

....... The color of the square for the "last stand" of the King does not matter.

....... The Kings will be in close Opposition-- the Bishops must have the help of the King. In fact, in some cases, the King must be a defender for one or both of the Bishops as well as cutting off escape squares.

....... The famous chess authors Müller and Lamprecht declared that maximum length of the solution of an L2B Mate is M19 and they specified this position as one of the worst cases:


click for larger view

See FUNDAMENTAL CHESS ENDINGS, page 400.

The best factor we can draw from this limit is that you can do it before the 50-Move Rule applies, if you handle the processing properly.

There are cases when this mate can be made on an edge square near the middle of a side of the board, yet it will be due to a blunder by the defender-- it cannot be forced.

IM Reuben Fine described this position as being one of those cases:


click for larger view

See BASIC CHESS ENDINGS (1941, p. 3).

Here is an unusual mate position with similarities from the position IM Fine gave:


click for larger view

See Smirnova vs Obregon, Internet 2021, 74 moves

E Smirnova vs R Obregon Garcia, 2021.

This game ends with a Capture Mate, which is why it does not have one of the two common mate pattern types.

Here are the more common classes of Lonely Two-Bishops Mates, being described with the type of Opposition illustrated at the end-- remember that Opposition is a continuing important tactic to employ throughout the process of gaining this mate.

An example of a mate with Direct Opposition on a rank with the King in the corner:


click for larger view

See the continuation to mate of Hoang vs Hjelm, Budapest 1993, 57 moves

T T Hoang vs N Hjelm, 1993.

An example of a mate with Direct Opposition on a file with the King in the corner:


click for larger view

See Oosterman vs Hetey, Maastricht 2009, 78 moves.

An example of a mate with Rectangular Opposition on ranks with the King in the corner:


click for larger view

See Solleveld vs Sutovsky, Amsterdam 2001, 107 moves

M Solleveld vs Sutovsky, 2001

This is a demonstration of Direct Opposition on a rank while the King is next to the corner:


click for larger view

See Gukesh vs. Timoleev, Internet 2020, 74 moves

D Gukesh vs A Timofeev, 2020.

Now for a case of Direct Opposition in a file with the King next to the corner:


click for larger view

See Garcia Sanchez vs Basto Auzmendi, Erandio 2004, 79 moves.

Consider a position with Rectangular Opposition on ranks with the King next to the corner.


click for larger view

Note that this position appears to be theoretical. It may never be found in any actual game.

This position has Rectangular Opposition on files with the King next to the corner.


click for larger view

Again, this position seems only theoretical. It may never be found in any actual game.

The Lonely Two Bishops Mate is a demonstration of the teamwork with the Bishops. It also helps with visualization skills for the zones or fences made by the overlapping paths of the Bishops. Looking ahead-- planning-- for how to respond to one's opponent, when to use the Waiting Move and to avoid any chance of a stalemate is another vital skill, not just for this endgame but in general play as well. There's a certain beauty to the sequence of moves and their areas of coverage that is appealing, also.

Chess Coach Clark originated this game collection in October 2023 and he updates it on occasion. This project is a work in progress, culling games from various sources, including several chess training books and personal research. It would be great if the Endgame Explorer were updated-- there are NO draws/failures in it for now. So, this collection does include the limited number of games from that resource.

Sadly, there are several games collected where a top-notch player has brought a draw. Incredibly, some STALEMATES have also been done by high-level players! An even higher number of high-level games have inefficient lines. This game collection will also examine its member games for their efficiency, noting with Mgg <==> Mqq as the actual length then the expected length of the "solution." Every performance evaluation is made using results from Stockfish 16 analysis or the Nalimov EGTBs from the LK position. The theoretical maximum is M19 (noted later, with a diagram as well). Thus, no game should have a solution with M20 or higher. Here is the specific grading criteria:

Solid ("perfect") ._._._._._._._. Actual equals or is less than Expected

Good ._._._._._._._._._._._._._. Actual = Expected +1 or +2

Poor ._._._._._._._._._._._._._. Actual = Expected +3 or +4

Very Poor ._._._._._._._._._._. Actual = Expected +5 or more

Failed ._._._._._._._._._._._._. Draw (of any type)

The resolution of most performance evaluations-- for now-- is by simple observation only. That is, it may not include analysis of the actual quality of play on both sides. So, if the winner and/or defender are making making miss-steps, it will not be reflected in the performance evaluation, as it is a simple comparison of (overall) play against the empirical/Stockfish or theoretical/Nalimov expectations-- raw, not refined. However, the ranges are set for better resolution. To wit, the Solid grade is expressed with the Actual less than or equal to Expected specification, which accommodates for miss-steps with its less-than condition.

The games are ordered by date (oldest first), not by importance.

L2B is the abbreviation for the Lonely Two Bishops Mate.

=B= indicates that the Black pieces won the game. ----- Always practice on BOTH sides of the board!

=M= indicates the game concluded with the mate.

=K= indicates that a King Hunt was done.

=U= indicates one player was U14 or even much younger.

=W= indicates both players were women.

=H= indicates that a King Hunt happened.

=S= indicates that the game ended with a Stalemate!

=50= indicates that the 50-Move Rule was exceeded.

Be well.
Be safe.

=B= Continuation is L2B
Botvinnik vs Tal, 1961 
(E80) King's Indian, Samisch Variation, 83 moves, 0-1

=B= Solid performance-- M9 <==> M10
T T Hoang vs N Hjelm, 1993
(D82) Grunfeld, 4.Bf4, 56 moves, 0-1

=U==W=
N Azarova vs E Decka, 1994
(D30) Queen's Gambit Declined, 94 moves, 1-0

=B=
V Simek vs J Krejcik, 1994
(D94) Grunfeld, 68 moves, 0-1

=M= Shorter solution than usual
A Bruehl vs D Puth, 1995
(B92) Sicilian, Najdorf, Opocensky Variation, 91 moves, 1-0

=B= Poor performance-- M17 <==> M13
A Pihlajasalo vs J Salonen, 1995
(A10) English, 75 moves, 0-1

=K= quite poor performance-- M25 <==> M16
A Jedinger vs M Gerhold, 1995
(B45) Sicilian, Taimanov, 79 moves, 1-0

=U= Good performance-- M17 <==> M6
S Dorenkamp vs M Kroepsch, 1995
(B58) Sicilian, 57 moves, 1-0

Solid performance!
A Lytchak vs A Naumann, 1996
(A49) King's Indian, Fianchetto without c4, 82 moves, 1-0

T Hoang Le vs A Breier, 1997
(B22) Sicilian, Alapin, 87 moves, 0-1

=B=
L Knazovcik vs D Gross, 1997
(C68) Ruy Lopez, Exchange, 91 moves, 0-1

=M==B= M16 <==> M8-- can you improve it?
N Lukas vs C Schlueter, 1997
(B28) Sicilian, O'Kelly Variation, 101 moves, 0-1

=U= M1 from EOG; good performance
A Schupaleev vs A Iljin, 1997
(B21) Sicilian, 2.f4 and 2.d4, 72 moves, 1-0

=B= quite poor performance-- M21 <==> M15
Zalim Rakhaev vs M Rogovoi, 1997
(A04) Reti Opening, 69 moves, 0-1

=B= DRAW! Can you improve it?
D Ippolito vs E Dearing, 1998
(D49) Queen's Gambit Declined Semi-Slav, Meran, 126 moves, 1/2-1/2

Short solution here-- only M12. Check it out!
Orlinkov Maxim L vs Lokchin Anatoli, 1998
(E61) King's Indian, 58 moves, 1-0

=U==W= Solid play! Girl gave it a whirl, a twirl as best job!
M Mihajlovic vs S Cherednichenko, 1998 
(B07) Pirc, 68 moves, 0-1

=M==B==U==K= TWO Under-Promotions to Bishop!
Johannes Hedwig vs Jan Hendrik Schigiol, 1998
(B02) Alekhine's Defense, 104 moves, 0-1

=W= Good demo even tho incomplete; Monica Bobrowska also seen
J Dworakowska vs M Socko, 1999
(C18) French, Winawer, 81 moves, 1-0

=M==U==B=
V Li vs A Badmatsyrenov, 1999
(B23) Sicilian, Closed, 88 moves, 0-1

DRAW! Can you improve it?
P Garrett vs A Karklins, 2000
(A46) Queen's Pawn Game, 86 moves, 1/2-1/2

=K= Performance is moot as LK then EOG
H Erdogan vs W Elliott, 2000
(A57) Benko Gambit, 73 moves, 1-0

E Liu vs A Vospernik, 2001 
(B14) Caro-Kann, Panov-Botvinnik Attack, 87 moves, 1-0

=B= At EOG there is an M1
Gustavo Medina vs S Mareco, 2001
(E61) King's Indian, 86 moves, 0-1

=M=
Navratil Erik vs V Hejl, 2001
(A07) King's Indian Attack, 60 moves, 1-0

=M==B= Actually M17 <==> M14; can you improve it?
M Solleveld vs Sutovsky, 2001 
(B93) Sicilian, Najdorf, 6.f4, 107 moves, 0-1

LK = EOG
B Sunjaikin vs Taras Okunev, 2001
(C43) Petrov, Modern Attack, 61 moves, 1-0

=B= EOG is the Lone King position! You solve it, then.
Y Xu vs F Chen, 2001
(A07) King's Indian Attack, 94 moves, 0-1

=B==U= LK = EOG, so performance is moot.
K Bolsunowskij vs V Onyshchuk, 2001
(D00) Queen's Pawn Game, 57 moves, 0-1

=W=; LK = EOG; only M12 in four paths
M Socko vs J Shahade, 2002 
(E46) Nimzo-Indian, 97 moves, 1-0

=M==U==K= Good performance-- M19 <==> M17
C Schaetz vs F Kordts, 2003
(A30) English, Symmetrical, 63 moves, 1-0

=B==W= EOG is the Lone King position! You solve it, then.
E Djingarova vs N Khurtsidze, 2004
(B80) Sicilian, Scheveningen, 88 moves, 0-1

Very poor performance M17 <==> M10
J Garcia Sanchez vs M Basto Auzmendi, 2004
(B32) Sicilian, 77 moves, 1-0

=B==K= Deaf players; solid performance
Vujcic Toni vs A Anarkulov, 2004
(B33) Sicilian, 73 moves, 0-1

Black has a Lone King at EOG; use this for practice
Dreev vs A Cabrera, 2005 
(E84) King's Indian, Samisch, Panno Main line, 71 moves, 1-0

EOG = LK by a Capture Check
D Kosarev vs V Korchagina, 2005
(D85) Grunfeld, 73 moves, 1-0

=B= Continuation: 78. Kg1 Bd4+ 79. Kh1 Bf3#
N Ronchetti vs Brunello, 2006 
(A18) English, Mikenas-Carls, 77 moves, 0-1

=M= M16 <==> M11, so see where Black erred
S Prathamesh vs S Sagar, 2007
(B07) Pirc, 91 moves, 1-0

=B= Good job! M14 <==> M13
M Scherer vs T Fogarasi, 2007
(A20) English, 74 moves, 0-1

=B==W= Solid performance-- M10 <==> M10
L Ordaz Valdes vs L Llaudy Pupo, 2007
(A28) English, 76 moves, 0-1

=B=
T Gavriel vs R Pert, 2008
(A15) English, 101 moves, 0-1

DRAW if capture is done, otherwise White wins easily.
L'Ami vs V Laznicka, 2008 
(D15) Queen's Gambit Declined Slav, 77 moves, 1/2-1/2

=M= M15 <==> M14, so good demo
N Marklund vs S Kosmo, 2008
(A67) Benoni, Taimanov Variation, 81 moves, 1-0

DRAW! 50-Move Rule applied. Should have been M13!
F Bednarz vs A Rezasade, 2008
(D34) Queen's Gambit Declined, Tarrasch, 111 moves, 1/2-1/2

=M==K= Performance is very poor (+6).
D Pilarski vs L Karski, 2008
(C01) French, Exchange, 85 moves, 1-0

=U==K= Poor performance
M Sanchez Ibern vs M Llamazares Lopez, 2008
(B07) Pirc, 94 moves, 1-0

Quite poor performance-- M22 <==> M14
A Gulbis vs Martin Mydlarik, 2008
(D85) Grunfeld, 107 moves, 1-0

=B=
T Malhotra vs M Webb, 2009 
(A50) Queen's Pawn Game, 111 moves, 0-1

V Pajkovic vs C Braun, 2009
(B06) Robatsch, 84 moves, 1-0

=B= Solid performance
M Oosterman vs L Hetey, 2009
(C45) Scotch Game, 78 moves, 0-1

I Henderson vs L Messam-Sparks, 2010 
(E24) Nimzo-Indian, Samisch, 56 moves, 1-0

=U==B= Excellent play-- M17 <==> M18
J Lampert vs R Svane, 2010
(C11) French, 77 moves, 0-1

=M==W=
Y H Liu vs I Lacau-Rodean, 2010 
(E91) King's Indian, 80 moves, 1-0

=M==B= M12 <==> M8 (error by White)
H Simonian vs Nakamura, 2010
(A05) Reti Opening, 83 moves, 0-1

=U= DRAW! M8 should have been done!
M Neef vs Bluebaum, 2010
(D12) Queen's Gambit Declined Slav, 111 moves, 1/2-1/2

Good performance-- M11 <==> M10
A Pavlidis vs J Radulski, 2010
(C45) Scotch Game, 80 moves, 1-0

=M=
S Puroila vs B Sigurdsson, 2011
(E15) Queen's Indian, 74 moves, 1-0

=W= Solid performance
A Enkhtuul vs Dolgorsuren Yanjindulam, 2011
(A06) Reti Opening, 83 moves, 1-0

=B= Poor performance-- M20 <==> M15
F Amonatov vs Grischuk, 2012
(B08) Pirc, Classical, 58 moves, 0-1

=B=
K Labeckas vs P Kostenko, 2012
(E20) Nimzo-Indian, 61 moves, 0-1

=B=
A Moreto Quintana vs Z Mamedjarova, 2012 
(A30) English, Symmetrical, 109 moves, 0-1

=M==B==U= Solid performance-- M10 <==> M13 (blunders)
S Grigorian vs S Fieberg, 2012
(D44) Queen's Gambit Declined Semi-Slav, 62 moves, 0-1

DRAW! See how to do better, yourself
Z Tan vs S Bjornsson, 2013
(D44) Queen's Gambit Declined Semi-Slav, 85 moves, 1/2-1/2

=M==U= M20 <==> M13
M Wadsworth vs Martirosyan, 2013 
(A15) English, 83 moves, 1-0

=B==U= Solid performance
M S Savic vs O Serra Canals, 2013
(C69) Ruy Lopez, Exchange, Gligoric Variation, 76 moves, 0-1

=B==M=
A Hojjatova vs T Babayev, 2014
(B15) Caro-Kann, 109 moves, 0-1

=M=
J Burnett vs J McPhillips, 2015
(D07) Queen's Gambit Declined, Chigorin Defense, 68 moves, 1-0

M1 at EOG; M7 <==> M8, so good demo game
V Dragnev vs D Eggleston, 2015
(A19) English, Mikenas-Carls, Sicilian Variation, 73 moves, 1-0

Very short solution-- M2
A Pourramezanali vs M Gevorgyan, 2015
(D04) Queen's Pawn Game, 84 moves, 1-0

=M= Waiting move was used; win in continuation
M A Tabatabaei vs Z Agmanov, 2015
(D80) Grunfeld, 75 moves, 1-0

=B= Top five continuations are all M15
A Sidorov vs B Lajthajm, 2015
(A11) English, Caro-Kann Defensive System, 68 moves, 0-1

=M==B= Quite poor performance-- M17 <==> M12
I Maris vs R Hoffman, 2015
(B06) Robatsch, 67 moves, 0-1

=W= M13 <==> M8
L Mkrtchian vs A Chigaeva, 2016 
(A90) Dutch, 81 moves, 1-0

==B==K= Short solution, solid performance-- M9 <==> M9
M Nubairshah Shaikh vs V Antonio, 2016
(A20) English, 105 moves, 0-1

=K= Solid performance-- M10 <==> M11 (defender blundered)
Yusuf Donmez vs A Tuna, 2016
(A43) Old Benoni, 75 moves, 1-0

=B= M21 <==> M15; try it for yourself, then
I Akhvlediani vs G Quparadze, 2017
(E00) Queen's Pawn Game, 95 moves, 0-1

M21 <==> M15-- will you try it?
O Dimakiling vs A Sivakumar, 2017
(A04) Reti Opening, 94 moves, 1-0

=M==B= Solid performance as M15 <==> M16
I Ortin Blanco vs S Trigo Urquijo, 2017
(A42) Modern Defense, Averbakh System, 80 moves, 0-1

=B= Defender falters-- M6 <==> M7; King not in corner
R M Perez vs Smirin, 2017
(D70) Neo-Grunfeld Defense, 65 moves, 0-1

=B= Solid performance.
S P Rahul vs J Vokoun, 2017
(A40) Queen's Pawn Game, 55 moves, 0-1

=M= M19 <==> M15, so you can improve on that
E Alquist vs A Tenold, 2018
(B39) Sicilian, Accelerated Fianchetto, Breyer Variation, 93 moves, 1-0

=B=
D Brinovec vs J Barle, 2018
(B01) Scandinavian, 81 moves, 0-1

=B==W=
N Buksa vs A Ushenina, 2018
(C70) Ruy Lopez, 110 moves, 0-1

=B= Solid performance, M11 <==> M11, so study this one
D Dardha vs T Gungl, 2018
(B53) Sicilian, 84 moves, 0-1

=M=
D Latham vs L Head, 2018 
(D02) Queen's Pawn Game, 98 moves, 1-0

M6 <==> M5; make a better defense, then.
M J Turner vs C Daly, 2018
(A14) English, 63 moves, 1-0

+B==W=
C Leite vs A Sliwicka, 2018
(C84) Ruy Lopez, Closed, 98 moves, 0-1

=B= Solid performance M8 <==> M8
Alexander Pokhvalit vs Karthik Thrish, 2018
(A01) Nimzovich-Larsen Attack, 79 moves, 0-1

DRAW! Work this out on your own
M Finszter vs A Dankhazi, 2019
(A09) Reti Opening, 160 moves, 1/2-1/2

=B=
V Nebolsina vs A Krastev, 2019
(C91) Ruy Lopez, Closed, 106 moves, 0-1

Pooly done-- M19 <==> M12
Z Tekeyev vs A Timofeev, 2019
(C10) French, 155 moves, 1-0

A Ushenina vs G Loew, 2019
(A41) Queen's Pawn Game (with ...d6), 67 moves, 1-0

=B=
C H Zhang vs M Nicula, 2019
(B06) Robatsch, 63 moves, 0-1

=W= DRAW! Improve the process on your own
Z Abdumalik vs D E Cori Tello, 2020
(B01) Scandinavian, 79 moves, 0-1

=S==B= You can avoid the STALEMATE, can't you?
C Albornoz Cabrera vs B Niedbala, 2020
(B90) Sicilian, Najdorf, 76 moves, 1/2-1/2

DRAW! Poor procedure-- you try it!
P Cagara vs M Villalba, 2020
(C44) King's Pawn Game, 93 moves, 1/2-1/2

=M= No LK position and tightest possible mate configuration
Caruana vs V S Gujrathi, 2020 
(C65) Ruy Lopez, Berlin Defense, 119 moves, 1-0

DRAW! You can try to do better from the LK position
I Charkhalashvili vs R Al Naseri, 2020
(D31) Queen's Gambit Declined, 76 moves, 1/2-1/2

=B= Continuation: 87. Ka8 Bd5#
I Efimov vs S Sumant, 2020
(A45) Queen's Pawn Game, 86 moves, 0-1

=M= Only an M3 from the Lone King position
A Espinosa Aranda vs D Wagner, 2020
(B50) Sicilian, 71 moves, 1-0

=M= Poor GM play at M22 <==> M15
A Fier vs P I Acosta, 2020
(C07) French, Tarrasch, 87 moves, 1-0

=M= M12 <==> M9
D Gukesh vs A Timofeev, 2020
(A07) King's Indian Attack, 74 moves, 1-0

C Hidalgo Duque vs A Vazquez Torres, 2020
(A35) English, Symmetrical, 78 moves, 1-0

Poor performance-- M17 <==> M13
D Lavrik vs O Kobo, 2020
(A46) Queen's Pawn Game, 92 moves, 1-0

=B= Performance evaluation is very poor (+15).
R J Magallanes vs H A Gretarsson, 2020
(B06) Robatsch, 85 moves, 0-1

GM floundered-- M20 <==> M14
D Maghalashvili vs B Grachev, 2020
(A06) Reti Opening, 83 moves, 1-0

Good performance
R Praggnanandhaa vs A Pridorozhni, 2020
(B40) Sicilian, 81 moves, 0-1

=B=
E Stromboli vs I Lysyj, 2020
(C68) Ruy Lopez, Exchange, 143 moves, 0-1

=M= Very poor performance evaluation (+11)!
G Shahade vs G de Borba, 2020
(B10) Caro-Kann, 75 moves, 1-0

=M==B==W==K= M9 <==> M5
S Ivanytska vs A Nurman, 2020
(B90) Sicilian, Najdorf, 82 moves, 0-1

=M= Short solution-- M7; quite poor performance-- M21 <==> M7
P Shkapenko vs D Zong Jr, 2020
(A07) King's Indian Attack, 83 moves, 1-0

DRAW! Goofs by Super GM-- M13 should have happened!
D Andreikin vs N Matinian, 2021
(B08) Pirc, Classical, 85 moves, 1/2-1/2

=B= Very poor performance (+8). Unusual mate position!
F Godart vs N Maisuradze, 2021
(B31) Sicilian, Rossolimo Variation, 74 moves, 0-1

=M==K= Solid performance.
E Mirzoev vs O Yurovskykh, 2021
(D26) Queen's Gambit Accepted, 86 moves, 1-0

=M= Solid performance: M9 <==> M11
N Navalgund vs I Kalajzic, 2021
(B00) Uncommon King's Pawn Opening, 77 moves, 1-0

=K= DRAW!-- M14 expected!
N Saraci vs E Sapunov, 2021
(D03) Torre Attack (Tartakower Variation), 91 moves, 1/2-1/2

=M==W= LK = EOG = Mate! Unusual mate-- near middle of edge.
E Smirnova vs R Obregon Garcia, 2021
(D45) Queen's Gambit Declined Semi-Slav, 74 moves, 1-0

=B==M= Quite poor performance-- M35 <==> M12
O Yurovskykh vs R Preotu, 2021
(A48) King's Indian, 91 moves, 0-1

=M==B= Performance evaluation is very poor (+5)
K Chatterjee vs S A Manukyan, 2021
(D37) Queen's Gambit Declined, 103 moves, 0-1

=K= M2 at EOG; very poor performance (+6)
S Schweizer vs G Kantor, 2021
(A07) King's Indian Attack, 91 moves, 1-0

=S= M12 expected!
E Wilson vs M Starosta, 2021
(A20) English, 69 moves, 1/2-1/2

=S= Should have been M9
A Crut vs T Fantinel, 2021
(B31) Sicilian, Rossolimo Variation, 87 moves, 1/2-1/2

=M= Quite poor performance-- M30 <==> M10!
I Aldokhin vs S Payyappat, 2021
(B10) Caro-Kann, 98 moves, 1-0

=M==B==K= Quite poor performance-- M40 <==> M12
O Prokhorov vs L E Valle Maytin, 2021
(E94) King's Indian, Orthodox, 120 moves, 0-1

=M==W= Quite poor performance then-- M12 <==> M6
V Tarasova vs A Kubicka, 2021
(A60) Benoni Defense, 90 moves, 1-0

M13 or better is possible.
D Frolyanov vs P Palachev, 2023
(C18) French, Winawer, 57 moves, 1-0

126 games

 » View all game collections by plerranov PGN Download
 » Search entire game collection library
 » Clone this game collection (copy it to your account)
 » FAQ: Help with Game Collections
Home | About | Login | Logout | F.A.Q. | Profile | Preferences | Premium Membership | Kibitzer's Café | Biographer's Bistro | New Kibitzing | Chessforums | Tournament Index | Player Directory | Notable Games | World Chess Championships | Opening Explorer | Guess the Move | Game Collections | ChessBookie Game | Chessgames Challenge | Store | Privacy Notice | Contact Us

Copyright 2001-2025, Chessgames Services LLC