(UTC)
  ChessPub Forum › Other › Endgames › Rook Endings › e- anf f-pawns vers f-pawn rook endings
(Moderator: trw)
‹ Previous Topic | Next Topic ›
Page Index Toggle Pages: 1
Topic Tools
Hot Topic (More than 10 Replies) e- anf f-pawns vers f-pawn rook endings (Read 9527 times)
proustiskeen
God Member
*****
Offline


Hello from Omaha!

Posts: 682
Joined: 08/11/08
Re: e- anf f-pawns vers f-pawn rook endings
Reply #11 - 12/02/12 at 16:44:43
Post Tools
Poghosyan, I sincerely hope that you will turn all of this into a book when you're done.  It's really quite brilliant work.  My deepest thanks for sharing it with us.
  
Back to top
WWW  
IP Logged
 
Poghosyan
Full Member
***
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 143
Joined: 10/15/11
Re: e- anf f-pawns vers f-pawn rook endings
Reply #10 - 12/02/12 at 08:47:33
Post Tools
D. 9


* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
*

Hamitevici - Sysolyatin
Novaya Ladoga 2008

60…Rg1+

60…f6+ is much easier. 

61.Kf4 Rf1+ 62.Ke4 Re1+ 63.Kd5 Rf1 64.f6+ Kg6 65.Kd6 Rd1+ 66.Rd5 Ra1 67.Ke7 Ra7+ 68.Rd7

D. 9.1


* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
*

68…Ra5?

After 68...Ra6 or 68...Ra8 Black has an easy draw.  

69.e6! Re5 70.Rd6! Ra5 

D. 9.2


* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
*

1) 71.Rd1 

Or 71.Rd2 or 71.Rd3. 
67.Rd7 loses time because after 67…Re5 White has to backtrack by 68.Rd6 Ra5.  

71…fxe6 72.Rg1+! Kf5 73.Rf1+ Ke5 74.f7 Ra7+ 75.Ke8 Ra8+ 76.Kd7 Kd5 77.Rd1+ Ke5 78.Ke7 Rh8 79.Re1+ Kf5 80.Rxe6 1–0

2) 67.Ke8?

This move played in Neumann - Lenk (2002) throws away the win. 

D. 9.3


* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
*

67...Ra8+?

Black could have drawn by 67...fxe6! 68.Rxe6 Ra8+!

68.Rd8! Ra7 69.Rd7 

The only move to win was 69.e7! – 69…Kxf6 70.Rd6+ Kg7 71.Rc6 f5 72.Kd8 Ra8+ 73.Rc8+-

69...Ra8+ 70.Ke7?

Only backtracking by 70.Rd8 would have won the game. 

70...fxe6 71.f7 Kg7 72.Kxe6 Ra2 Draw. 

The analysis of D. 6.2, 6.3, 7 and 8 has shown that with the kings on g5 and g7 and the pawns on the fifth rank Black has to avoid a passive position of his rook when the White rook is on the seventh rank. In all other cases Black to play can achieve a draw.
  
Hamitevici-Sysolyatin.pgn ( 0 KB | Downloads )
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Poghosyan
Full Member
***
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 143
Joined: 10/15/11
Re: e- anf f-pawns vers f-pawn rook endings
Reply #9 - 11/30/12 at 17:20:04
Post Tools
D. 8 - NG 958.pgn
  
NG_958.pgn ( 1 KB | Downloads )
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Poghosyan
Full Member
***
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 143
Joined: 10/15/11
Re: e- anf f-pawns vers f-pawn rook endings
Reply #8 - 11/30/12 at 17:16:49
Post Tools
D. 7

* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
*

Teumer-Dischinger (rev. col.)

Compared to D. 6.3 the Black rook is optimally placed and Black to move the position is drawn. Black draws also with his rook on h2 (D. 7a). 

1...Rg1+! 2.Kf4 Rf1+ 3.Ke4 Re1+ 4.Kd5 Rd1+

4...Rf1 was simpler - 5.f6+ Kg6=. 

5.Kc6 Kg8 

As Grivas commented in Grivas-Naumann (D. 12) (with the White rook on c7) „Black is no longer in danger, although White can be bothersome for several more moves“. 
5…Rf1? loses to 6.e6 Rxf5 65.e7 Re5 66.Kd7 Rd5+ 67.Kc8 Re5 68.Kd8 (Mikhalevsky). 

6.f6

Or 6.Rd7 Rf1(or immediately 6…Ra1) 7.f6 Ra1! Grivas-Naumann (1999). 

D. 7.1


* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
*

6…Rd2?

6...Ra1! was the only drawing move preventing the standard  7.Rb8+! Kh7! 8.e6! because of 8…Ra6+! In Grivas-Naumann (1999) Black rook was on a1 and, instead of staying on a-file, Naumann played 66…Rd1? (D. 12). 

7.Rd7?

White misses his chance - 7.Rb8+! Kh7! 8.e6!+-. In Grivas-Naumann (1999) White also failed to use this standard tactical resource and played 67.Rb5? (D. 12).

7...Ra2!

Black corrects the mistake of the previous move.

8.Kc7 Ra5 9.Kd6 Ra6+ 10.Kd5 Ra5+ 11.Ke4 Ra1 12.Rc7 Rd1 13.Rc4 Kh7 14.Kf5 Rf1+ 15.Rf4 Re1 16.Rg4 Rf1+ 17.Ke4 Kh8!= (see D. 8.2). 

D. 7a


* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
*

1...Rg2+ 2.Kf4 Kg8!

Not 2...Rf2+?  here because the distance between the rook and the king is to short -  3.Kg4! Kf8 4.Kg5! Rh2 5.Ra8+ with transposition to the D. 1.6.  

3.Ra8+ Kh7!=. 

Not 3...Kg7? (see D. 2.3, the line12...Kg7?). 

D. 8


* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
*

We saw in D. 6.3 that with the White rook on the seventh rank and passive position of Black rook White wins whoever is to move. But here (as well as with the White rook elsewhere on a-file) Black to move the position is drawn because White does not have the threat e5-e6. Note that this position shifted one file to the left is lost even Black to move.  

I. 1...Rb1

Or 1…Rb2.  

2.f6+ Kh7 3.Ra4

White intends to transfer his rook to g7 and play e5-e6 at appropriate moment. 

3…Re1 4.Kf5 Rf1+ 5.Rf4 Ra1 6.Rg4 

D. 8.1


* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
*

1) 6…Kh8

Playing for stalemate is the simplest draw.

7.Rg7 Rf1+ 8.Ke4 Rxf6=. 

2) 6...Rf1+ 7.Ke4

D. 8.2


* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
*

A) 7…Kh8!

This is the only move to draw played in Teumer-Dischinger (rev. col.).   

8.Kd5

D. 8.3


* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
*

a) 8…Ra1! 9.e6

9.Kd6 Ra7! 

9...fxe6+ 10.Kxe6 Kh7=. 

Or 10...Ra6+ or 10...Ra8=. 

b) 8...Rd1+?

This move was played in Teumer-Dischinger (rev. col.). 

9.Kc6?

Returning the favour. 9.Rd4! was the only move to win. After  9...Re1 10.Kd6! Kg8 11.Rc4 we have a transposition to Etchegaray-Gallagher (rev. col.) after 11...Re2? (D. 14.5). 

9...Rd2? 

9...Rd8! was necessary which transposes to the analysis of Mark Bourzutschky in Stefansson-Vera Gonzalez. 10.Kc7 Re8! 11.Rg5 Re6 (or 11...Kh7 12.Rg7+ Kh8! 13.Kd6 Re6+ 14.Kd5 Rxe5+=) 12.Kd7 Kh7 13.Rg7+ Kh6 14.Rxf7 Rxe5 15.Re7 Ra5=. 

10.e6?

Last error. 10.Kc7 was necessary - 10...Rd1 21.e6+-. After 10.Rb4 Kh7 White can still win by backtracking with 11.Rg4! Kh8 12.Kc7+-.  

10...fxe6 11.f7 Rd8 12.Rf4 Kg7 Draw agreed. 

c) 8...Rb1?

This move loses because of the short distance between the rook and the king. 

c1) 9.Kc6 Rd1 10.Kc7 Rd2 11.e6+-.

c2) 9.Kd6 Rb7 

D. 8.4


* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
*

10.Rc4! 

The only move to win. 

10…Kg8 11.Rc8+!

11.Rc7? Rb6+! 12.Rc6 Rb8! 

11...Kh7 12.Rc7! Rb6+ 13.Kc5!+-. 

B) 7...Re1+? 8.Kd5 Rd1+ 9.Kc6 Kh8

D. 8.5


* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
*

10.Kc7!

10.Rb4 maintains the win but loses time because after 10…Kh7 only backtracking by 11.Rg4! wins.  

Not 10.Ra4? Rd8! 11.Kc7 Re8! 12.Rh4+ Kg8 13.Rg4+ Kh8 (or 13...Kh7 14.Rg7+ Kh8=).  

10...Rd2 11.e6+-.  

II.1...Rb5 2.f6+ Kh7 3.Kf5 Kg8 4.Ke4 Rb4+ 5.Kd5 Rb5+ 6.Kd6 Rb1=. 

III. 1...Rb7 2.f6+ Kh7 3.Ra4 Rc7

Or 3...Rb1 4.Kf5 Rf1+ with transposition to the main line I. after 4…Rf1+.  

4.Kf5 Rc1=.  

Or 4...Rc5 but not 4...Rb7? 5.Rg4! Ra7 6.Rg7+ Kh8 7.Kg5! Rb7 8.e6+-. 

  
Teumer-Dischinger.pgn ( 0 KB | Downloads )
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Poghosyan
Full Member
***
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 143
Joined: 10/15/11
Re: e- anf f-pawns vers f-pawn rook endings
Reply #7 - 09/29/12 at 16:54:06
Post Tools

Mark provides again for a nice example which suits very well in the discussion of the pawn structure e5, f6 vers. f7. I attached here only the analysis of the position without verbal comments and will come back to it in D. 10. 
Thank you Mark!
  
Hebden-Arkell.pgn ( 1 KB | Downloads )
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
mbourzut
YaBB Newbies
*
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 13
Joined: 08/20/12
Re: e- anf f-pawns vers f-pawn rook endings
Reply #6 - 09/24/12 at 01:23:08
Post Tools
Vardan offers a very insightful analysis of this structure, which is often misplayed in practice.  In particular, players often don't spot the defence of putting the rook on the 5th rank to prevent f5 or e5 (Vardan's D. 1.1), the subtle waiting move to win by forcing the defending rook to the 2nd rank (Vardan's D. 1.5), the strength of the defending king on g7 rather than e7 (Vardan's D. 2), and allowing a trade into a lost RP vs R ending (Vardan's D. 1.5)

Vardan mentions the game Stefansson-Vera Gonzalez Quevedo (1997) as one example of trading into a lost RP vs R ending, his D. 1.5.  It turns that quite a few subtleties arose in that game even before that point, which may be worth sharing.

A critical position arose after White's 61st move:

Stefannson-Vera Gonzalez Quevedo, Winnipeg 1997

* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
*

Where should the king go?

It turns out that 61...Kh8! is the only move to draw. One simple point is that if then 62.Rg7 the black king is in a stalemate position and Black can draw immediately with 62...Rd6+.  A more subtle point is that if White swings his rook to the queen side with 62.Rb4, Black can quickly get off the back rank with 62...Kh7, so as to answer 63.Rb7 with 63...Kg6.

In the game, Black made an instructive error:

61...Kf8?

White now found the only move to win

62.Rb4!

* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
*

The threat is simply 63.Kc7 followed by 64.Rb8.  Black played the toughest defence:

62...Ra8

62...Rc8+? 63.Kd7 Ra8 64.Rc4+-; 62...Kg8 63.Kc7 Rd1 64.Rb8+ Kh7 65.e6!+- 

63.Kc7 Ke8 64.Rb7 Rd8

* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
*

Now 65.Rb8?? clearly does not work, but White still has at his disposal a subtle win by maneuvering his rook back and forth between the king and queen side: 

65.Rb1! Ra8 66.Rh1! Ra7+ 67.Kd6 Ra6+ 68.Kd5

* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
*

A. 68...Ra5+ 69.Ke4
A1. 69...Ra2 70.Rh8+! Kd7 71.Rf8 Re2+ 72.Kf4! Ke6 73.Re8+ Kd5 74.Rd8+ Kc6 (74...Ke6 Rd6#) 75.Rf8+-
A2. 69...Kd7 70.Kf5 Ra2 71.e6+! fxe6+ 72.Kg6 e5 73.Kf7!+-

B. 68...Kd7 69.Rb1!
B1. 69...Kc7 70.Rb3! (the point of this move is to be able to interpose the rook when black attacks with his rook from the first or second rank) 70...Ra5+ (70...Ra1 71.e6! Rd1+ 72.Ke4!+-) 71.Ke4 Ra4+ 72.Kf5 Ra1 73.e6! Rf1+ 74.Kg5 Rg1+ (74...fxe6 75.Kg6+-) 75.Kf4+-
B2. 69...Ra5+ 70.Ke4 Ra2 (70...Ra7 71.Kf5) 71.Rb7+! Ke8 72.Rb8+! Kd7 73.Rf8+- as after White's 71st move in variation A1 above.

Not too surprisingly, neither player saw this during the game:

65.Kc6? Ra8? 

Black could have forced a drawn position by denying the white king the c7 square with 65...Rc8+! 66.Rc7 and only then 66...Ra8!

66.Re7+?

White could have returned to the winning variation given above with 66.Kc7.

66...Kf8

The position is now drawn again.

67.Rc7

If instead 67.Rb7, only 67...Kg8! draws.

67...Ke8!

Of course not 67...Kg8? 68.Kb7!+-

Black has now reached the drawn position he could have achieved by force on his 65th move.

To his credit, White kept pressing and succeeded in getting Black to commit the final error:

68.Kb6 Rb8+ 69.Kc6 Ra8 70.Kd5 Rd8+ 71.Ke4 Rd1 72.Rc8+ Kd7 73.Rf8 Re1+ 74.Kf5 Rf1+ 75.Kg5 Rg1+ 76.Kh6 Ke6 77.Re8+ Kf5 78.Kh7 Rg2 79. Rg8

* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
*

This is the same position as in Vadan's D. 1.5

79...Re2?

As Vardan points out, 79...Ra2! draws

80.Kg7+- Rxe5 81.Kxf7 Ra5 82.Kg7 Ra1 83.f7 Rg1+ 84.Kf8 Ra1 85.Rg2 1-0


Given this analysis, it should be straightforward to analyze the following game:

Hebden-Arkell, Milton Keynes 2008

* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
*

Play continued:

66...Kf8 67.Rd2 Kg8 68.Ke4 Kf8 69.Rd7 Ke8 70.Rc7 Kf8 71.Kf5 Re8 72.Rd7 Kg8 73.Rd5 Kf8 74.Kg5 Ra8 75.Rb5 Ke8 76.e6 Kf8 77.e7 Kg8 78.Kh6 1-0

How many result-changing errors were committed?

« Last Edit: 09/24/12 at 03:11:35 by mbourzut »  
Stefansson_VeraGonzalezQuevedo.pgn ( 3 KB | Downloads )
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Poghosyan
Full Member
***
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 143
Joined: 10/15/11
Re: e- anf f-pawns vers f-pawn rook endings
Reply #5 - 09/22/12 at 06:30:41
Post Tools
Przybielska-Kowara.pgn
  
Przybielska-Kowara.pgn ( 1 KB | Downloads )
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Poghosyan
Full Member
***
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 143
Joined: 10/15/11
Re: e- anf f-pawns vers f-pawn rook endings
Reply #4 - 09/22/12 at 06:30:06
Post Tools
Hofrichter-Malzacher.pgn
  
Vanek-Smistik.pgn ( 0 KB | Downloads )
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Poghosyan
Full Member
***
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 143
Joined: 10/15/11
Re: e- anf f-pawns vers f-pawn rook endings
Reply #3 - 09/22/12 at 06:28:12
Post Tools
In the analysis of D. 1 we have seen the effectiveness of the transfer of the rook to the fifth rank with the aim to prevent f4-f5. We shall consider now positions where the Black rook is deprived of this possibility.     

D. 4

* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
*

Hofrichter – Malzacher 
Verbandsliga Sued Baden Germany 1998

The fifth rank is under White’s control but a draw is still possible. 

1) 82...Kf8!

The only move to draw. Black has immediately to transfer his king to g7 which prevents the penetration of the white king.  

83.f5

Or 83.Rb6 Kg7!=. 
 
83...Kg7! 

Black threatens now 83…f6+. 

84.Rb6 Rc1=.  

84…Rc2 also draws. Or 84…Rc5 or 84…Ra7. See the analysis of D. 1.

2) In the game Hofrichter – Malzacher Black played 82…Rc1? which transposes to the D. 1, line III.1…Rc1?  

83.Rb7+ Kf8 84.f5 Rc6 85.Rb8+ Kg7 86.f6+ Kh7 87.Rf8? 

White makes the same mistake as in Levenfish-Johner (D. 1). 

87…Rc7 88.Kf5 Ra7 89.Re8. 

This position is drawn but in the Megabase the result is gives as 1–0. 

D. 5

* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
*

We know that after 1.Rb7+ and 2.f5 White wins irrespective of the position of Black pieces. Therefore the only means to meet this threat is 1…Rg6+!

1...Rg6+! 2.Kf5

1) 2…Kf8 3.Rb8+ Kg7=.

2) 2...Ra6 3.Kg5 Rg6+!=. 

3) 2...Rg1 3.Rb7+ Kf8 4.Kf6 Rg6+ 5.Kf5 Rg1=. 

4) 2...Rh6 3.Ra5 Rh5+

3...Rb6 is simpler. 

4.Kg4 

* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
*

a) 4...Rh1 

Or 4...Rh2. 

5.f5 Re1 6.Kg5 Rg1+ 

Or 6...f6+ 7.exf6+ Kf7=.  

7.Kf4

7.Kh6 Rh1+=.  

7...Rf1+ 8.Ke4 Re1+ 9.Kd3 Rd1+ 10.Ke2 Rh1=. 
 
b) 4...Rh8

Or 4...Rh7. 

5.f5 Rg8+! 6.Kf4 Rg1!=.  

c) 4…Rh6? 5.Ra7+ 

Or 5.f5 Rh1 6.Ra7+ Kf8 7.Kg5+-. 

5...Ke8 6.f5 Rh1 7.Kg5 Kf8 8.Rb7+- (Vanek-Smistik (rev. col.) CZE-ch U14 1995) (see D. 1.6).  

In several lines of D. 4 and 5 we have seen how favourable is the Black’s king position on g7. Here is another example. 

D. 6

* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
*

Przybielska – Kowara
POL-ch U18 Girls 2009

We have analysed a similar position in D. 1. Here the defence is easier because of the better position of the black king on g7. 

56…Re7

In D. 1 the only way to draw was preventing f4-f5. Here Black has also other moves albeit 1...Rb5 is the safest move.  

57.Ra5

White protects his pawn with rook in order to play f4-f5 but this idea does not work against the best defence. 

a) 57…Re8

Or 57...Re6. Both moves make sense only in the case when Black is going to counter f5 by Re5. 

58.f5

D. 6.1


* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
*

58…Rb8?

Black misses the only saving move - 58...Rxe5!  

D. 6.2

* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
*

1) 59.f6+

The simplest. 

59...Kg8 60.e6 fxe6 61.Kg6+-.

2) 59.e6 f6+ 

59...fxe6 60.f6+! Kg8 61.Kg6+-. 

60.Kg4 Rb1 

60...Kh6 61.Kf4 Rb4+ 62.Ke3 Rb1 63.Kd4 Re1 64.Kc5 Re5+ 65.Kb6+-. 

61.Ra7+ Kh6 62.Rf7 Rg1+ 63.Kf4 Rf1+ 64.Ke4 Re1+ 65.Kd5 Kg5 66.Kd6 Kxf5 67.e7 Rd1+ 68.Kc7 Rc1+ 69.Kd8 Rd1+ 70.Ke8 Rh1 71.Kf8+-.  

3) 59.Ra7 

D. 6.3

* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
*

59...Kg8

59...Rb1 60.e6 or 60.f6+ Kg8 61.Ra8+ Kh7 62.e6!+-. 

60.Rd7

Or 60.e6+-. 
Or 60.Kh6 Rc8 61.f6 Re8 62.e6 Rf8 63.Re7 Kh8 64.exf7 Rxf7 65.Re8++-. 
Or 60.Kf6 Rb6+ 61.e6 fxe6 62.fxe6+-. 
Or 60.f6 Rb1 61.Ra8+! Kh7 62.e6!+-.

60...Rb6 61.Rd6 Rb8 62.Kf6 Rf8 63.Ke7 1–0

b) 57...Rb7 58.f5 f6+ 59.exf6+ Kf7=. 

Back to D. 6.2 with Black to move. 

Black draws as in D. 7 with 1…Rb1 (Rb2) or 1…Rb7.
  
Hofrichter-Malzacher.pgn ( 0 KB | Downloads )
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Poghosyan
Full Member
***
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 143
Joined: 10/15/11
Re: e- anf f-pawns vers f-pawn rook endings
Reply #2 - 06/11/12 at 14:02:07
Post Tools
Fokin-Kalegin.pgn
  
Fokin-Kalegin.pgn ( 1 KB | Downloads )
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Poghosyan
Full Member
***
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 143
Joined: 10/15/11
Re: e- anf f-pawns vers f-pawn rook endings
Reply #1 - 06/11/12 at 14:01:20
Post Tools
Part 2

D. 2

* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
*

Schlechter-Nimzowitsch 1912 - (with col. rev.) 

The position of the Black king is more comfortable on g7 than on e7. 

1...Re2 2.Re7 Ra2!

Not 2...Re1? 3.e6! Rxe6 4.Rxe6 fxe6+ 5.Kxe6 and not 2...Kf8? 3.Kf6 (Emms). 

3.Rd7 

3.e6 Ra5+ 4.Kg4 Kf6 (Emms).

3...Re2 4.Rd1

D. 2.1

* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
*

I. 4…Ra2

This is most logical move here but contrary to the view of Emms 4…Re3 (II.) also draws. 

5.Ke4

Now after  5.Rg1+ Kf8 6.Kf6 White has the saving move  6...Ra6+ (Emms).  

5...Kf8 6.f5 Re2+ 7.Kd5 Ke7 8.Ra1

8.f6+ Kd7 (Emms).  

8...Rd2+ 9.Ke4 Re2+ 10.Kd4 f6 11.e6

„It's true that Black can win a pawn with  11.Ra7+ Ke8 12.exf6 but this position with doubled f-pawns is totally drawn; for example, 12...Kf8 13.Kd5 (13.f7 Re7) 13...Rd2+ 14.Ke6 Re2+ and the black king has no cover from the checks“. (Emms).  

11...Re5 12.Rf1 Ke8 13.Rf4 Ke7 Draw agreed.  

II. 4...Re3?!

Emms considers this as losing.   

D. 2.2

* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
*

5.Rg1+ Kf8 6.Kf6

Emms stops his analysis here. 

D. 2.3

* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
*

1) 6...Rh3! 7.f5 Rh6+! 8.Kg5 Rh2!

8...Rh3? 9.f6 (9.Ra1+-) 9...Ke8 10.Ra1 Re3 11.Kf4 Re2 12.Ra8+ Kd7 13.Rf8 Ke6 14.Re8+ Kd5 15.Rd8+ Kc6 16.Rf8 Kd5 17.Rxf7 Re4+ 18.Kf5 Rxe5+ 19.Kg6+-. 

9.Ra1 Kg7! 10.Ra7 Rg2+! 11.Kf4 Kg8!

11...Rf2+? 12.Kg4! Kf8 13.Kg5! Rh2 14.Ra8++- . 

12.Ra8+ Kh7!

12...Kg7? 13.f6+ Kh7 14.Rf8 Rf2+ 15.Ke3+-.

Back to D. 2.1

2) 6...Rf3? 7.f5 Rh3 8.Ra1 Rh6+ 9.Kg5 Rh2 10.Ra8+ Transposition 10...Ke7 

10...Kg7 11.f6+ Kh7 12.e6+- (12.Rf8+-).

11.f6+ Kd7 12.Rf8+- Transposition to Levenfish/Smyslov n. 222; 

3) 6...Ra3? 7.Rd1!

7.Rb1? Ra6+=. 

7...Ke8

7...Ra6+ 8.Rd6 Ra8 9.f5 Ke8 10.Rb6 Ra5 (10...Rc8 11.Ra6 Rb8 12.Ra7+-) 11.Rb8+ Kd7 12.Rb7+ Ke8 13.Re7++-. 

8.f5 Ra6+ 9.Kg7

9.Rd6 Ra8+- Transposition.

9...Ra5 10.Rb1 Ke7

10...Rxe5 11.Rb8+ Kd7 12.f6+-. 

11.Rb7++-. 

In D. 3 we have a 3 vs. 2 pawns ending which Emms judges as won for stronger side. I think however that the position is drawn and the judgments of Emms are based on the wrong evoluation of resulting positions with 2 vs. 1 structure. 

D. 3

* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
*

Fokin-Kalegin 1987 (col. rev.)

„In this position Black's pawns are well advanced and his king and rook occupy good positions. This all adds up to a winning advantage for Black“ (Emms). 

1.Kd5

I. 1…Kg8

1...Rxf4? loses in view of 2.e6 Kf8 3.Rxf7+ Rxf7 4.exf7 Kxf7 5.g5 (Emms).  

D. 3.1

* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
*

2.f5 gxf5 3.gxf5

D. 3.2

* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
*

According to Emms this position is won. As a main line he considers here 3…Rb8 played in the game (1). But in fact Black can draw with 3…Rf4 (2). 

1) 3...Rb8? 4.Kd6 Kf8 5.f6 Ke8

5...Kg8 6.Ke7 Rc8 7.Rd7 -- 8.Rd8+ (Emms). 

6.Kc7 Rd8 7.Ra1 Rd7+ 8.Kc6 Rd8

8...Rd2 9.Ra8+ Rd8 10.Rxd8+ Kxd8 11.Kd6+- (Emms).

9.Rh1 Rc8+ 10.Kd6

Fokin resigned here. After 10...Rd8+ 11.Kc7 Rd7+ 12.Kc6 Black cannot avoid checkmate (Emms). 

2) 3...Rf4

According to Emms this active defence also fails after 4.f6. 

D. 3.3

* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
*

a) 4...Rf1? 5.Kd6 Re1 6.Ra8+ Kh7 7.Ke7 Kg6 8.Rg8+ Kf5 9.Kxf7 Rxe5 10.Rg1 (Emms). 

b) 4...Rb4!

The only move to draw which was missed by Emms.   

5.Kc5 Rb8!

The only move to draw. It is interesting to note that Emms has found this defence in an analogous position in his game against Rahman (see D. 4). 

Not 5...Re4? 6.Kd6 Re1 7.Ra8+ Kh7 8.Ke7 Rxe5+ 9.Kxf7+-. 
Not 5...Rb1? 6.Ra8+ Kh7 7.e6!+-. This simple tactical idea has been many times missed in practical play also on grandmaster level (see D. 4 and D. 5).

6.Kc6 Re8 7.Kd6 Re6+ 8.Kd5 Re8

Or 8...Rb6=.  

9.Ke4 Rb8 10.Kf5 Rb1 11.Ra8+ Kh7 12.Rf8 Rb7=

II. 1...Kf8

D. 3.4

* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
*

Emms dismisses this move in view of 2.f5. After 2.f5 2… Rxg4 loses indeed to 3.f6 Kg8 4.Ra8+ Kh7 5.e6+-, but the position after 2...gxf5 3.gxf5 is drawn. 

D. 3.5

* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
*

Emms considers only 3...f6? which fails to 4.e6. But instead of 3…f6? Black has sufficient defensive ressources. 

1) 3...Rb8 4.Kd6

4.e6 fxe6+ 5.fxe6 Rb1=. 

4...Rd8+

Not 4...Rb6+? 5.Kd7! 

5.Rd7 Ra8=.  

2) 3...Rb1 4.Ra8+ Ke7

Not 4...Kg7? 5.Kd6! 

5.f6+ Kd7 6.Ra7+ Ke8=. 

3) 3...Ke8 4.f6 Rb1!

a) 4...Rb2? 5.Ra8+ Kd7 6.Rf8 Rd2+ 7.Ke4 Re2+ 8.Kf4 Ke6 (8...Rf2+ 9.Ke3+-) 9.Re8+ Kd5 10.Rd8+ Kc6 11.Rf8 see analysis Schlechter-Nimzowitsch.
b) Not 4...Rb8? 5.Ra1! Kd7 6.Ke4! Rb2 7.Ra7+ Ke8 8.Ra8+ Kd7 9.Rf8+-.  

5.Ra8+ Kd7 6.Rf8 Rd1+ 7.Ke4 Re1+ 8.Kf4 Rf1+=.
  
Schlechter-Nimzowitsch.pgn ( 2 KB | Downloads )
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Poghosyan
Full Member
***
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 143
Joined: 10/15/11
e- anf f-pawns vers f-pawn rook endings
06/09/12 at 12:53:11
Post Tools
Part 1

This pawn structure is very important and, as J. Emms points out, is often reached via 4 vs. 3 and 3 vs 2 structures. Generally, as in other 2 vs 1 rook endings without a passed pawn, this structure is drawn but it requires a very careful defence, especially when the Black pawn is on its initial position. 

I do not have any discoveries in the D. 1 basic position but before going into the analysis of some positions which were misanalysed in the endgame literature I think it is useful to begin with this position. It has been also wrongly portrayed in some well known manuals. 

D. 1

* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
*

Levenfish – Johner Karlsbad 1911
Levenfisch/Smyslov n. 222

This position arose in a game from the Alekhine mass memorial tournament (1956). The game was broken off in the diagram position and adjudicated a win for White. But as Levenfish proved the position is drawn if after 1.Kg5 Black immediately prevents the advancing of the f-pawn. It is interesting to note taht Levenfish played nearly the same position in 1911 against Johner and did not manage to win against the weak defence. In Levenfish-Johner (col. rev.) the Black rook was on b7 and White rook on a6 which does not make any difference.   

1.Kg5

I. 1…Rc5!

The only move to draw. Johner played 1...Rc1? but Levenfish failed to to find the winning idea (III). 

D. 1.1

* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
*

2.Rb7+ Kf8!

This was the improvement of Levenfish. The judges based their verdict of the game of 1956 on the line 2...Ke6? 3.f5+ Kxe5 4.Re7+ Kd6 5.Rxf7.  
2…Ke8? loses to 3.f5 Rxe5 4.Kf6 Ra5 5.Rb8+ Kd7 6.Rf8+-. 

3.f5

3.Kh6 Rc6+ 4.Kh7 f6 (Speelman). 

3…Rxe5 4.Kf6 Re1

Compared to the previous line 2…Ke8? 3.f5 Rxe5 4.Kf6 Black draws here because he manages to bring his king to the short side. 

5.Rxf7+ Kg8 6.Ra7

6.Rg7+ Kh8 7.Rb7 Rf1= (Levenfisch/Smyslov).  

6...Rf1 7.Ke6 Rf2= . 

2) 2.Kh6 

White tries to penetrate with his King.

2…Rc1 3.Rb7+ Kf8 4.f5

D. 1.2

* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
*

4…Rg1!

Cutting off the king is the only possibility for draw.  

5.Rb8+ Ke7 6.f6+ Ke6 7.Re8+ Kf5 8.Kh7 Rg2 9.Re7 Rg5!

Not 9…Rg1? 10. Rxf7 Kxe5 11.Rg7 (Kopayev).     

10.Rxf7 Kxe5 11.Rg7 Kxf6=. 
Seirawan attributes this analysis wrongly to Levenfish but it is in fact Kopayev`s analysis.   

II. 1...Ra7? 2.f5 Rc7 3.f6+ Kd7 4.Kh6+- (Levenfisch/Smyslov). 

Instead of 4.Kh6 White can also strike a deadly blow by 4.e6+ . 

III. 1...Rc1?

In his comments on Levenfish-Johner K. Müller recommends this move as first best option for Black. In fact this move loses. 

2.Rb7+

D. 1.3

* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
*

A) 2…Ke8 

Given an exclamation mark by K. Müller, but this move is not better than 2…Kf8 (B). 

3.f5 Rh1

3…Rc6 4.Rb8+ Ke7 5.f6+ Ke6 6.Re8+ Kd5 7.Kh6+- (K. Müller). 

4.Rb8+?!

White plays directly for grabbing the f-pawn but with Black rook on h1 this is a wrong plan.   

4…Ke7

D. 1.4

* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
*

1) 5.f6+?

Neither Levenfisch/Smyslov nor K. Müller and J. Silman did remark on this move which throws away the win.

5...Kd7 6.Rf8

Levenfisch/Smyslov considered here only 6…Rh7? which loses to 7.Kg4 Kc7 8.Re8. Silman sees also no alternative to 6…Rh7? (“This is one ugly Rook, but how else can Black defend the f7-pawn?”). But the defence is not that difficult.  

6…Rg1+! 

a) 7.Kh6 Ke6 8.Re8+ Kf5 9.Kh7

9.Re7 Rg2=.

9...Rg2 10.Rg8

D. 1.5

* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
*

10…Ra2! 

It's not too late to go wrong. As Speelman reports this position arose in a clock simultaneous game Karpov-King. Black played 10…Rh2+ and lost quickly. In both Stefansson-Vera Gonzalez Quevedo (1997) and Iordachescu-Ibrahimov (2000) Black played 10…Re2? and lost after 11.Kg7 Rxe5 12.Kxf7 Ra5 13.Kg7. 

11.Kg7 Kxe5 12.Kxf7

12.Re8+ Kf5 13.Re1 Ra7 14.Re7 Ra6; 12.Rf8 Kf5 13.Rxf7 Rg2+. 

12...Kf5 13.Rf8

In Tisdall- Ostenstad (1995) draw was agreed after 13.Re8.  

13…Ra7+ 14.Kg8 Kg6 15.f7 Rb7 (Speelman). 

b) 7.Kf4 Rf1+ 8.Kf4 Rf1+ 9.Ke4 Re1+ 10.Kf5 Rf1+ 11.Kg5 Rg1+ 12.Kf4 Rf1+ 13.Kg4 Rg1+ 14.Kf3 Ke6 15.Re8+ Kf5 16.Re7 Re1 17.Rxf7 Rxe5 18.Rf8 Kg6 19.Kg4 Rg5+ 20.Kh4 Rh5+ 21.Kg4 Rg5+ 22.Kf4 Rf5+ 23.Ke4 Rxf6 24.Rxf6+ Kxf6 Draw agreed in Pedersen-Nielsen (2003). 

Back to D. 1.4

2) 5.Rb7+!

White has to come back to the position after 3…Rh1 and find the right plan. 

5…Ke8

5...Kf8 transposes to D. 1.6. 

6.Kf6

After this simple move Black is defenceless. 

6…Rh6+ 

6...Rh7 fails to 7.e6 or 7.Rb8+ Kd7 8.e6++-. 

7.Kg7 Rh1 8.Rb8++-.

B) 2...Kf8 3.f5

1) 3…Rh1

D. 1.6

* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
*

4.Ra7!

As Kopayev has demonstrated in 1958 White has to make a waiting move and force the Black rook to go the 2. rank. Black loses as he does not have enough checking distance. This idea of Kopayev of 1958 was missed by K. Müller and J. Silman in their manuals. 

4…Rh2 5.Ra8+ Ke7 6.f6+ Kd7 7.Rf8 Rh7

7...Rg2+ 8.Kf4. 
7…Ke6 91.Re8+ Kd5 92.e6 Rg2+ 93.Kh4 fxe6 94.f7 Rf2 95.f8Q Rxf8 96.Rxf8 Ke4 97.Kg3 1–0 Grachev-Demchenko (2010).

8.Kg4 Kc7 9.Re8 -- 10.Re7+ Kc6 11.e6 (Kopayev). 

2) 3…Rc6  

The move played by Johner against Levenfish. 

D. 1.7

* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
*

4.Rb8+ Kg7 5.f6+ 

5.e6 also wins – 5…f6+ 6.Kh5 Rc7 7.Rd8 Re7 8.Rd7+-.

5…Kh7 6.Rb7! 

Played by Vitiugov against Kotov in 2002. Levnfish played against Johner 6.Rf8? which is a fatale mistake. After 6...Rb7 7.Kf5 Ra7 8.Re8 Ra1 9.Ke4 Re1+ 10.Kd5 Rd1+ 11.Kc6 Kg6 12.Re7 Kf5 13.Re8 Rd2 14.Re7 Rd1 15.Re8 draw was agreed. 

6…Kg8 7.Kh6

Kotov resigned here. 

7…Rc8 8.e6 fxe6 9.Kg6 Rd8 10.Rh7 e5 11.f7++-.  

To be continued
  
Levenfish_Smyslov_n__222.pgn ( 1 KB | Downloads )
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Page Index Toggle Pages: 1
Topic Tools
‹ Previous Topic | Next Topic ›
Bookmarks: del.icio.us Digg Facebook Google Google+ Linked in reddit StumbleUpon Twitter Yahoo
 
  « Board Index ‹ Board Top  

ChessPub Forum » Powered by YaBB 2.6.12!
YaBB Forum Software © 2000-2026. All Rights Reserved.

Valid RSS Valid XHTML Valid CSS Powered by Perl Source Forge