Part 2D. 2Dreev-Moskalenko 1985
M. Dvoretsky analyses extensively this ending his Secrets of Endgame Technique and shows many analytical mistakes of Dreev who annotated it for the endgame section of Informator 39. According to Dvoretsky this position is won but Black has a remarkable saving idea which was overlooked by the analysts. 1.Re6+
Black easily draws after 1.Re1 a2 2.Ra1 Kd7= or 1.Re3 Rb4+ 2.Kf5 Ra4 3.h5 a2 4.Re1 a1Q 5.Rxa1 Rxa1 6.h6 Kd6 7.Kg6 Ke7 8.h7 Rh1 9.Kg7 Rg1 (Dreev). I. 1...Kd7? D. 2. 1
This weak move was played in the game. 2.Ra6 a2 3.g5 Ke7 4.Kg4 Kf7 5.Kh5 Rh2 6.Ra7+ Ke6 7.Kg6 Rb2
7...Rxh4 8.Rxa2 (Dreev).8.h5 Rb8 9.h6 Rg8+ 10.Kh5 Kf5 11.Ra5+
1–0. II. 1...Kb5? D. 2.2
Dreev and Dvoretsky consider in their analysis only this natural move but it loses. A) 2.Re5+?
Dvoretsky criticises this move but believes that it still wins. In fact 2.Re5+ is a result-changing mistake. White wins by 2.Re1 (B) suggested by Dvoretsky. 1) 2...Kb4 D. 2.3a) 3.Re8
Suggested by Dreev but Dvorestsky`s move 3.Re1 (b) also fails to win. 3...a2
This move of Dvoretsky secures the draw. Dreev considered only 3...Kb5? 4.Rb8+ followed by 5.Ra8. 4.Rb8+
If 4.Ra8 then 4…Rc2 with the threat of 5…Rc4+, 6…Rc5(c3)+ and 7…Ra5(a3) =. 4…Kc4
This position arises also in the line 1…Kc5! 2.Ra6 a2 3.Ra8 Kb5 4.Rb8+ Kc4. 5.Ra8 Rb4 6.Rxa2 Kb3+ 7.Kf5 Kxa2 8.h5 Rb5+! 9.Kg6 Rb6+ 10.Kg5 Rb5+ 11.Kh4 Rb1 12.h6
12.g5 Kb3 13.g6 Rg1. 12...Rh1+ 13.Kg5 Kb3 14.Kg6 Kc4 15.g5 Kd5 16.Kh7 Ke6 17.g6 Rg1
= (Dvoretsky). b) 3.Re1 a2 4.Ra1 D. 2.4 4...Ka3!
The only move to draw. Dvoretsky considers only 4…Kb3 which loses to 5.h5 Rb1 6.Rxa2 Kxa2 7.g5 Rh1 (7...Rf1+ 8.Kg4 Kb3 9.g6) 8.g6. 5.g5 Rb4+ 6.Kf5 Rxh4 7.g6 Rh2
=. 2) 2...Kb6?D. 2.5
The line of Dreev. 3.Re3?
3.Re1 wins easily analogous to the line II. B (1.Re6+ Kb5 2.Re1). 3...Rb4+?
Dvoretsky does not comment on this move which throws away the draw. 3...a2! was correct - 4.Ra3 Kb5 5.h5 Rb4+ 6.Kf5 Ra4 7.Rxa2 Rxa2=) D. 2.64.Kf5?
Another result-changing error missed both by Dreev and Dvoretsky.
White wins by 4.Kg3+- Ra4 (4...a2 5.Ra3 Rb2 6.g5 Kc5 7.Kg4 Kb4 8.Ra8+-) 5.Re1 a2 6.Ra1 Kc5 7.h5 Kd6 8.h6+-. 4...Ra4?
Another error of Dreev. Dvoretsky points rightly out that Black could have drawn by 4...a2 5.Ra3 Rb5+ 6.Kg6 Ra5 7.Rxa2 Rxa2 8.h5 Kc6=. 5.h5?
Instead of 5.h5? White wins by 5.Re1! a2 6.Ra1 Kc7 7.h5 Kd7 8.h6+-(Dvoretsky). 5...a2 6.Re1 a1Q 7.Rxa1 Rxa1 8.h6 Kc7 9.g5 Rh1
The main line of Dreev was 9…Kd7? 10.h7 Rh1 11.g6+-. 10.g6
10.Kg6 Kd7 11.Kh7 Ke6 12.g6 Rg1= (Dvoretsky ). D. 2.7
10...Rh5+! with an easy draw (Dvoretsky).
Instead of 10…Rh5+ Dreev considered only 10...Rxh6? 11.g7 Rh5+ 12.Kf4 Rh4+ 13.Kf3 Rh3+ 14.Kg2+-. B) 2.Re1!
After this move of Dvoretsky Black is lost. D. 2.82…a2 3.Ra1 Kc6 4.h5 Kd6 5.h6 Rh2
5...Ke6 6.h7 Rb8 7.Rxa2 Kf6 8.Rh2 Rh8 9.Rh6+ Kg7 10.Kg5+-. 6.Kg5
Or 6.h7 Rxh7 7.Rxa2 Rh8 8.Ra4 (or 8.Ra6+ Ke7 9.Kg5, but not 8.g5? Ke6 or 8.Re2? Rf8+ 9.Kg3 Rg8). 6...Ke7 7.Kg6 Kf8 8.h7
+- (Dvoretsky). III. 1...Kc5!
This move was missed by the analysts. Later on, when I had found the way to draw, I learned that Moskalenko had already shown in his book “Finales” (Barcelona 2010, p. 134) that Black could have saved the game by 1…Kc5. Black’s king keeps both the option to march to the White pawns as well as to support his passed pawn. D. 2.91) 2.Re1
This move does not win as in the line 1…Kb5? because Black heads his king to the kingside. 2...a2 3.Ra1 Kd6!
=. 2) 2.Ra6 a2 D. 2.103.Ra8
3.h5 fails to 3…Kb5 and White has to give up his rook because of the threat of interposition (4…Rb4+ and 5…Ra4) - 4.Rxa2 Rxa2=.
Moskalenko considers 3.Kf5 and 3.g5.
a) 3.Kf5 Kb5 4.Ra3 Kb4 5.Ra8 Rc2=.
b) 3.g5 Kb5 4.Ra3 Rb4+ 5.Kf5 Ra4 6.Rxa2 Rxa2=. 3...Kb5 4.Kf5
4.Rb8+ Kc4 transposes into the line II. A1a) 1.Re6+ Kb5? 2.Re5+? Kb4 3.Re8 a2 4.Rb8+ Kc4. 4...Kb6 5.Kg6 Kb7 6.Rxa2 Rxa2 7.h5 Kc7
After this analysis it should be clear that White does not obtain anything when in the initial position he plays 1.Re8. 1.Re8 a2 2.Ra8 Kb5!