I think I am getting a bit old.., as I sometimes think back to the old times, when games were ajourned. I learned quite a bit from analysing adjourned positions from team competitions. Quite a lot of valuable endgame analyses was published as a result.
Analyses of an endgame with several players can be quite stimulating, and provides a good learning experience. 
In the absence of adjouned games, creating a training situation like this can be quite valuable. Mix several improving players and an experienced chess coach: succes assured.

One person asked what candidate moves should we consider in analysing the above endgame.  The answer, for all King and Pawn endgames, is EVERY possible move.   

King and Pawn endgames can be "solved", and we can solve them by using a variety of techniques and memorizing as many  simple pawn endings as possible.   

Forget about memorizing the latest variation of the Najdorf to the 25th move, instead save your memory for the endgames!  In this way, you will find deceptive endgames such as this one part of your arsenal for practical games!

I didn't see g4+ after g3. Thats hard to spot.

1. Ke2 Kf5 2. Kf3 g4+ 3. Kf2 where Kf4 is met by g3+, Kg5 is met by Kg3 and where h4 is met Kf1 taking the opposition. If g3 then the white king shuffles around g1 and h1 waiting for stalemate.


1. Ke2 h4 2. Kf2 where Kh5 is met by 3. Kf3 and if g4+ 4. Kf4 h3 5. gxh3 gxh3 6. Kg3. g4 is met with Ke2 where black can make no headway. Kf5 3. Kf3 g4+ 4. Kf2 where once again black makes no headway with Kf4 because of 5. g3+ hxg3 6. kg2 and its simplified to a drawn k+p vs king in front of pawn.


1. Ke2 g4 2. Kf2 where I see nothing for black ( h4  is met by ke2 taking the opposition and its a repeat of my last example). Kg5 is met by 3. Kg3 where h4+ 4. Kf2 is another repeat drawn situation. if Kg5 3. Kg3 Kf5 then Kh4 is a draw (or even Kf2 repeating the first example).  and if Kf5 3. Kf1 taking the distant opposition draws.


edit: Ke2 loses to Kf5 where Kf3 is met by h4. You were right.

up and comer wrote on 11/02/08 at 22:44:17:


No, 1 Ke2 just loses, for reasons I'd thought I'd explained. 

I suggest that it would be instructive for you to analyse the position thoroughly for yourself, writing down what you consider to be the key lines/ideas. Then I think you would learn a lot by checking your conclusions at

http://www.shredderchess.de/online-schach/online-datenbanken/endspiel-datenbank....

or any other source of tablebases.

Sorry if this reply seems a bit curt, but a contribution such as "I'm thinking Ke2, taking the indirect opposition also holds, as black has no way to penetrate into the position" is actually quite fortunate to receive any reply at all.

Bocajaka,
I would suggest the book series "Essential endgames explained move by move" to help you get a grip on endings.  They have many, many diagrams so that a set is not even needed to play through moves.  Simple to understand explanations provided for each move to see the ideas behind drawing/winning techniques.  I have a copy at work for lunchbreaks.  I'm no endgame master but these books helped alot.
Happy Training

bearheart wrote on 09/21/08 at 11:47:42:

Iirc it only works if you put up maximum 5 pieces or pawns. So 2 pawns vs 1 will work, but not 2 vs 2.

Anymore useful endgame puzzles? I like the mental exercise, and the revelation that I am actually terribly weak at endgames...

Paddy wrote on 08/26/08 at 00:43:09:


I don't think you missed any ideas as far as I can see. It is tricky but I think your approach was the correct with your conclusions first and then consider which route to take with the king. And last,  “Thou shalt not trade down to K+P unless you can safely bet your first-born child on the result.” (Soltis). So true!

sssthepro wrote on 08/26/08 at 11:19:47:


just go to:
http://www.shredderchess.de/online-schach/online-datenbanken/endspiel-datenbank....

It is a draw. Black can attack the pawns from the d-file, so he doesnt require the opposition. If white reaches d5 the opposition is also void as black can pendle between c7and d7. The extra tempo is irrelevant.

Are you sure it is white to play and win as far as I can see there is no way he can win?

March the king up the board, force the king to the last rank, exchange the b-pawn with your front c-pawn, and push your extra pawn to become a queen.

I'm back from holiday now, thanks for waiting patiently

Indeed you are correct. I found this example quite beautiful containing many elementary positions.

I saw a similar endgame before. 

W: Kb1, f2, g2, h2
B: Kg8, a3, c3

White to play and...lose!

I took black against a lot of my friends who believed White should win. They started pushing the pawns, and after I successfully blockaded them, they started to thinking of losing a tempo, but found out their their king cannot move.

Terrific analysis and explanation. If you are not a master of some sort (which I bet you are) then at least you are a master in the endgame in my opinion.

I was thinking about

c) If the Black king is allowed to push the white king back, then the white position will rapidly become critical.

For me endgames are still a mystery and I calculate the most stupid things so for me this statement is not obvious. How do you know this?

It might be interesting for you to know where that second position comes from:

White to move and draw =



Just to give anothe illustration of how little endgame intuition I have. In this starting position I had no idea whether 1.Ka2, 1.Kb1 or 1.Kb2 was the right move. I was thinking about "corresponding squares" which I learnt of Williempie. See how stupid I am....

But it's good to know that these are not in the easy category at least. Although in the book it says they are "elementary positions". Perhaps the meaning is different somehow.

Bocajaka wrote on 08/14/08 at 19:46:35:


Pawn endings tend to be either pretty trivial (as long as you know, understand, and have practised till automatic, half a dozen basic positions and are familiar with some methods such as the opposition and triangulation) or quite tricky, sometimes fiendishly difficult. I tell students NOT to simplify into a pawn ending unless it is clear that it is trivially won/drawn, or unless the alternatives are clearly worse.

Soltis (in “Grandmaster Secrets - Endings”) laid down the commandment:

“Thou shalt not trade down to K+P unless you can safely bet your first-born child on the result.”

A bit over-the-top perhaps, but he gets the point across.

I certainly would not categorize this one as “very very easy”; it’s a bit tricky in fact.

I suggest you study an endgame primer before tackling these Polgar puzzles, otherwise you are definitely going find the going tough and become discouraged. It's like trying to solve tricky problems in geometry before you've mastered the basic theorems.

The position first of all requires one to know that if it reduces to a single black pawn on g5 plus kings, with White's king somewhere in front of the pawn it’s a draw unless Black can get his own king a) ahead of the pawn and b) with the opposition.

Pushing the e-pawn does not seem to achieve anything, so it is clear that White must either resign and head for the bar, or try to get counterplay by activating his king. However, 1 Kg3? fails to 1...h5!, suppressing counterplay. 

So 1 Kh3, the first real point of which appears when you see that it allows White to answer 1...h5 with 2 g4+! hxg4+ 3 Kg3 Kxe5 4 Kxg4 reaching one of the basic position-types (a draw in this case) that you need to learn. (So in a practical game 1 Kh3 could almost be chosen by elimination in fact.)

So then we examine some other tries for Black: 
1...g4+ 2 Kh4 seems fine for White.
1...Kxe5 2 Kg4 Kf6 allows 3 Kh5 since if 3...Kg7 4 g4 Kh7 stalemate!
1...Kg6 can be met either by 2 Kg4 h5+ 3 Kf3 Kf5 4 g4+! hxg4 5 Kg3 etc., or even 2 g4 as long as White can gain the opposition after Black eventually captures on e5, and it turns out he can: 2...Kf7 3 Kg3 Ke6 4  Kf3 Kxe5 5 Ke3.

If I've made an error or missed anything important I expect someone will soon tell me.

I have already started to notice some endgame patterns and it's getting easier to solve some of the positions. Thanks to all of you.

However, I shall keep on bothering you with another position:

White to move 



In this position I notice that I am going to lose e5 and thus will have to try to get a draw (if my pawn was passed I would try to win!).

So here I tried first 1.b4! with the idea that if he takes it I win, but ofcourse he does not. But I still seriously thought that perhaps I could draw anyway after 1...Kxe5.

Then I looked at 1.Kg3 emmediately 1...Kxe5 2.Kg4 Kf5 3.Kh5 and I felt I could not reach a draw.

So I got discouraged and gave up and looked at the answer, 1...Kh3. 

As you can see I did not look further than 3 moves (which is very little for being an endgame) but again I can not blame myself. I remember when I was starting out and tried to solve a middlegame position, the same thing happend to me, I got discouraged because I did not have a clue about what was going on. Namely I did not see any "ideas", that is tactical motifs etc. Nowadays, middlegames are not very mystical too me, they are more of an calculation exercise if you understand what I mean.

But the question is whether or not I can learn endgames such as in the same way. How easily do you guys see 1.Kh3. Do you even bother to calculate 1.b4 and 1.Kg3 or is it similar to you like calculating a really passive move when you have a mating attack in the middlegame? I'm very curious.

Btw, in this exercise I did not find any use for "corresponding squares". Should I have been able to use it or is this a completely different type of exercise.Don't get me wrong, I have had great use for this in lots of other excerises and it has helped my tremendously.

Willempie wrote on 08/12/08 at 07:42:36:


I will get to rook endgames in a few hundred problems or so and then you can be sure I will terrorise you some more 

So basically now I know corresponding squares and opposition.  How many important thechniques do you believe there are in pawn endgames? 

I suppose wer are all different but personally I like to do it this way, by "doing and learning", instead of reading an instructional endgame book.

Thx guys for the corrections:

Indeed:
1.Kd5, Kf7 2.g6+, fxg6 3.fxg6 (instead of my error 3.hxg) wins.

1.f6+,xf6+ 2.xf6,Kf7 3.Kf5, And now either Ke8 or Kg8 draws
(iso of 3....h6 which is a clear error).

I'm afraid I already took the fun away three posts back in the mirror-image position.

Yes, you are right; I followed Micawber's line rather uncritically. Moving the h-pawn is a terrible mistake as it allows W to set up the winnign maneuver, but W can accomplish nothing if the h-pawn stays on it's original square.

As an example of corresponding squares, just take my line after 3...h6.

As to your general question about endings, my answer would be that endings are all about building blocks. If you look at some of Micawber's terrific analyses, you will see how fruitfully he makes use of this method. These building blocks serve to orientate you; without them, you are looking at deducing everything from first principles, which is time-consuming and prone to error.

Problem 1:

1 f6 wins, as Black gets zugzwanged.

1 f6 gf; 2 gf Kf7; 3 Kf5 h6; 4 Ke5 Kf8; 5 Kf4 Ke8; 6 Ke4...zugzwang.

6...Kf7; 7 Kf5, or 6...Kf8; 7 Ke5.

This is a simple example of corresponding squares. if White plays to one of the key squares, Black has to play to the corresponding square to hold the position.

the corresponding squares are f5 and f7, e5 and f8, e4/f4 correspond to e8/g8. hence Black's problem, as e8 and g8 are noncontiguous (Black would draw if he could play 6...Ke8-g8, maintaining the correspondence.

1...Kf7 is left as an exrecise for the reader 

Here's one way to approach any pawn ending:  Think of it as extreme tactics training.

It's possible to calculate almost every move in a pawn ending, so do so!  It will help the rest of your game immensely.  For instance, the first position 7 legal moves for white.  Take your time and work out what happens with each of them.  Learn as you go, and you'll find your chess vision improving by leaps and bounds as you learn the basics of pawn endings.

Happy hunting!

At the moment I'm doing puzzles from Laslo Polgars book "Chess endgames" and right now the positions feature pawn endgames. For some reason this is really difficult for me to grasp and I would say I get only about 50% wright.

Take the following position for instance:

White to move



How should one think about this position? Should I instantly see a certain theme somehow (like with a middlegame combination)  or should I simply start calculating the forcing moves f5+, g6, h6? Problem for me is that calculating endgame moves does not come as naturally as calculating middlegame tactics. Some moves do not "pop-out" to me but this may be because I do not know the theme yet.

With middlegame tactics you can in many cases almost smell the solution before you start calculating. For example if the king is stuck in the centre you instantly look for a move that opens some line or whatever. Is it the same with endgames, for example the above position?

Here is another one with white to move:



In this position my thought is as follows: I see that I have to go towards the queenside and then perhaps try to gain the opposition somehow and force myself towards black's a-pawn. Perhaps I can use the f-pawn to decoy or gain a tempo in order to do this.

That's about what I understand about the position. Is this view wright or does a good player simply "see" the winning line instantly?

Please try to solve any of these positions (or both) for white and explain how you came to your answer. What was your thoughts before starting to calculate etc. I will provide the solution in short.


Btw, this position is under "Elementary position" in Polgars book so it should be fairly standard.