- Demolition of Pawn Structure: Unusual Sac's
35 games, 1895-2019 - Demolition of Pawns: f6 (f3), e6 (e3), a7 (a2)
These pawn sacrifices are intended to demolish the opponent's King-side pawn structure, setting up possible mating attacks, decisive win of material or won endgame positions.
|
|
125 games, 1860-2016 - end game: End game tactics
169 games, 1870-2010 - Endgame passed a-pawn in R+4:R+3
141 games, 1896-2019 - Endgame: BBvBN -the minor exchange squeeze
Minor exchange - die kleine Qualität
"The minor exchange refers to the capture of the opponent's bishop for the player's knight (or, more recently, the stronger minor piece for the weaker) (Soltis 2004). Bobby Fischer used the term (Benko 2007), but it is rarely used. In most chess positions, a bishop is worth slightly more than a knight because of its longer range of movement. As a chess game progresses, pawns tend to get traded, removing support points from the knight and opening up lines for the bishop. This generally leads to the bishop's advantage increasing over time. Traditional chess theory espoused by masters such as Wilhelm Steinitz and Siegbert Tarrasch puts more value on the bishop than the knight. In contrast, the hypermodern school favored the knight over the bishop. Modern theory is that it depends on the position, but that there are more positions where the bishop is better than where the knight is better (Mayer 1997). There are some occasions when a knight can be worth more than a bishop, so this exchange is not necessarily made at every opportunity to do so. A rook and bishop usually work better together than a rook and knight in the endgame (Mayer 1997), (Beliavsky & Mikhalchishin 2000). José Raúl Capablanca stated that a queen and knight work better together than a queen and bishop in the endgame (Mayer 1997). More recently, John Watson has stated that from his study of this endgame that an unusually large proportion of queen and knight versus queen and bishop endings are drawn, and that most decisive games are characterized by the winning side having one or more obvious advantages (for example, having a knight against a bad bishop in a closed position, or having a bishop in a position with pawns on both sides of the board, particularly if the knight has no natural outpost). Watson states that positions in this endgame in general "are very volatile, and often the winning side is simply the one who starts out being able to win material or launch an attack on the opposing king" (Watson 1998). Glenn Flear agrees with that assessment for endgames. He could not find an endgame by Capablanca that supported his statement. The statistics for queen and bishop versus queen and knight endgames are about even. Most decisive games were won because of a significant advantage from the middlegame and only a limited number of positions show an inherent superiority for one over the other (Flear 2007)." Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_e... Grandmaster Ronen Har-Zvi presented this game in a lecture: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aX4E...
starts at around 29m00s
Position after <28.Nxc1>: 
click for larger view= = =
<Horseman - how do you know this is just a short squeeze, and not the beginning of something much more substantial?> http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Chess_...
|
|
145 games, 1867-2019 - endgame: Promotion Tactics
Unusual tactics that involve pawn promotion
|
|
23 games, 1890-2008 - endgame:The Greatest Ever Chess Endgames
|
A 2012 publication by FM Giddins, presents 50 of the most brilliant endgame examples in the history of the sport. ...and to live up to its title, I've included Rubinstein's two classic rook endgames against Lasker and Alekhine which the author voluntarily omitted in the book.
|
|
52 games, 1883-2007 - endgames: Four bishop endgames
42 games, 1911-2016 - Ending: Other endgames
|
Simply 'other endgames'. Did you expect a long explanation ??? Keep on dreaming! <"Agreeing to draws in the middlegame, equal or otherwise, deprives you of the opportunity to practice playing endgames, and the endgame is probably where you need the most practice."> ~ Pal Benko A knowledge of the endgame is the magic key to the secrets of chess mastery. . . .
Delving into the secrets of the endgame reveals an amazing world of chess harmony.
--Vassily Smyslov
* * *
In order to improve your game, you must study the endgame before everything else. For whereas the endings can be studied and mastered by themselves, the middle game and end game must be studied in relation to the end game. - Jose Capablanca
* * *
Mastering endgame technique is equally important for defense of difficult positions. --Nikolai Minev (incl <Botvinnik's 25 most interesting endgames> collection ) if not put somewhere else... :D
|
|
79 games, 1902-2017 - Ending: R+B -opp.col. (wonderful attacking wea
|
Endings with Bishops of opposite color are of frequent occurence, yet the chess literature offers relatively few examples with a Rook added to each side. <The presence of the Rook often overcomes the drawish tendency that results from the Bishop's inability to command squares of more than one color. <The general strategic principles of endgame play are again to be observed. The player having <- the better centralized King,
- pawns controlling squares of the same color as the enemy Bishop, - and the more mobile Rook
< usually has winning chances.> > >>
-- CJS Purdy "On The Endgame"
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
<<Opposite colored Bishops> are wonderful attacking weapons in the middlegame (or in endgames with many pieces remaining) since one Bishop can attack something that the other can't defend.>
-- Jeremy Silman
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
Müller/Lamprecht say that 15% of all games reach an ending of rook and minor piece vs rook and minor piece, so that you can expect to get such one in every tournament. Their statistics, with relative percentage frequencies, rounded: ♖♗ vs ♖♘ (45%)
♖♗ vs ♖♗ (22%) same coloured ♗
--> ♖♗ vs ♖♗ (13%) opp. coloured ♗
♖♘ vs ♖♘ (20%)
<Bees of Opps and Rooks <>> external: http://www.ajedrezactual.com/fifi12... http://www.chess.com/article/view/c... D.♔ explains Carlsen vs Karjakin, 2013 here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MgT6... = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
<T. Nissl> "Akademisches Monatsheft für Schach", 1910 
click for larger view #6
<1.Bh4 Rd1 2.Bg3 Rc1 3.Bf4 Rc2 4.Bg5 Bf3 5.Bd8+ Rc7 6.Bxc7#>
|
|
398 games, 1881-2019 - Ending: R+B (of same colour)
|
Müller/Lamprecht say that 15% of all games reach an ending of rook and minor piece vs rook and minor piece, so that you can expect to get such one in every tournament. Their statistics, with relative percentage frequencies, rounded: ♖♗ vs ♖♘ (45%)
--> ♖♗ vs ♖♗ (22%) some coloured ♗
♖♗ vs ♖♗ (13%) opp. coloured ♗
♖♘ vs ♖♘ (20%)
< Könnte es sein, daß von hier eher Turmendspiele als Läuferendspiele entstehen?
< Welche (Bauern-)Konstellation läßt so welche Endspiele enstehen?
< Und warum ist das so?>>>
|
|
229 games, 1858-2019 - Ending: R:BB
|
<In the struggle between a rook and two minor pieces, there is generally equality if the side with the rook has 1 or 2 pawns more. Somewhat fewer pawns are required if both minor pieces are knights, and on the other hand 2 pawns are necessary if we are talking about the bishop pair. <The average value of the exchange (rook against a knight or a single bishop) is about 13/8 of a pawn. The advantage for the side with the rook is only 1 and 3/20 of a pawn if the opposing side has the bishop pair. If all the other minor pieces are still on the board, the value of the exchange drops by (1/4) of a pawn. If, on the other hand, the queens and a pair of rooks have been exchanged off, it goes up by somewhat more than (1/4) of a pawn. >> http://www.chessbase.com/newsdetail... Endgame Explorer: RPPP vs BBPPP
|
|
57 games, 1851-2019 - Ending: uneven material
25 games, 1907-2008 - ENEMY KING MAKES A GREAT SECOND TARGET
|
Thank you, notyetagm. I've removed most of the longer game. *) A check should always be considered as a potential tactical target. *) If the king is a tactical target, the tactical base will almost always be occupied with tempo (check). *) The squares next to the king might be turned into tactical targets. >
The enemy king is a great second target <TACTICALLY> and a great second weakness <STRATEGICALLY>. There are 4(!) <TACTICAL> ways to use the enemy king as a second target. You can target 1) the enemy king himself (<DOUBLE ATTACK WITH CHECK>) 2) squares near the enemy king (<DECOY>, <DOULBE ATTACK WITH CHECK>, <DOUBLE ATTACK WITH MATE THREAT>) 3) pieces/pawns that defend enemy king (<REMOVE THE GUARD>, Anand vs Lautier Biel 1997) 4) flight squares of the enemy king (denying <LUFT>, <STALEMATE>, Marache vs Morphy New York 1857)
|
|
17 games, 1857-2015 - Engame: BB + passed pawns = winning equation
7 games, 1960-2008 - Essential sacrifices: Exposing the King
25 games, 1834-2005 - Evaluate this position
Look at as many aspects of this position, then create a plan.
|
|
1 game, 2009 - Exchange sacs - 1
400 games, 1475-2012 - Exchange sacs - 2
399 games, 1903-2012 - Exchange sacs - 3
395 games, 1887-2012
|
Kibitzing
