The wiki page is nice and informative, but doesn't say who invented the second-rank defence. Maybe chess historians are reluctant because the case isn't absolutely clear (see below). Anyway, Robert Byrne obviously made a joke...
Quote:Keith Arkell - who had 17/17 in this ending when the interview was done - says at
http://streathambrixtonchess.blogspot.com/2009/11/arkell-interview-iii.html "...and also beat Robert Byrne with my R+B+ h pawn v his R+g+h pawns. There was a moment in that last ending when he turned down the chance to defend R+B v R, and later remarked that he invented the “2nd rank defence”, and would have drawn easily had he chosen to!"
No, the second-rank defense at least goes back to Berger (1890), if not to Lolli (1763).
In his
Treatise (1822), p. 339, Cochrane mentions the drawn "Lolli position" W: Kg6, Re6, Bg5 - B: Kg8, Rf7), but then he continues to say that Lolli knew more cases where Black defends successfully:
Quote:In addition to this case, I shall give three other positions which were furnished by the French gentleman to whom I have already alluded, and which,- after much examination, are supposed also to make drawn games. I abstain, from the same motives which probably influenced Lolli, from tracing all the variations which arise in the investigation of these positions. The task would be endless; and it is more equitable that those who may be inclined to doubt the conclusion at which I have arrived, should show that the games may be won, than that I should be called upon to prove a negative. Upon the whole, if there be no general method of forcing the defending player into the position originally assigned to him by Philidor; if, in a number of different cases, the king, rook, and bishop, cannot give mate against the king and rook, which we are warranted in concluding, until the contrary be shown, the general proposition advanced by Philidor falls to the ground; his demonstration amounts to nothing more than an example of a mate from a given position, and is rather to be considered as an excepted case than as a general proof that the mate can be effected in all situations.
One of the three "additional" drawing cases is the following:
So Cochrane claims that he has carefully checked the position and that it is drawn. It is one of the cases, he tells us, where Philidor's "win" cannot be demonstrated.
Interestingly, Johan Berger in his
Theorie und Praxis der Endspiele (1890), p. 188, does not mention Lolli. (Edit: He may have been confused, since Cochrane calls Lolli a "French gentleman".) According to Berger, for the position above Cochrane 1822 had claimed that "it were dubious at all whether White can force Black's King to the final rank". The complete quote in German:
Quote:Schwarz hat nun eine Stellung erreicht, welche in Cochrane's Treatise von 1822 als eine solche bezeichnet wird, bei welcher es überhaupt zweifelhaft sei, ob sich eine Randstellung erzwingen ließe(?).
So Berger (a) overlooked Lolli; (b) Cochrane's firm claim that the position is a draw is converted into a hypothesis that Black's king maybe cannot even be forced to the last rank. That may be regarded as an even stronger claim than Cochrane actually made. But by saying "it is dubious at all" and by distancing himself with an additional "(?)" Berger has made a real mess of Cochrane's clear statement.
So it seems probable that Lolli invented the second-rank defence. If you don't trust Cochrane, check Lolli's 1763 book; the ending R+B vs R is covered on pp. 421-426. - On the other side, if you believe that for "inventing" the 2nd-rank defence a single position without analysis is not sufficient, that the "inventor" should give more variations and perhaps claim (whether true or not) that this defence even prevents the Black king from being driven to the last rank, J. Berger may come close enough, in spite of his doubts.
Pages: [1] 
KRBkr: who first described "second rank defense"? (Read 16560 times)
