Latest Updates:
Normal Topic Some mistakes in ECE II (Read 4402 times)
Poghosyan V
YaBB Newbies
*
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 14
Location: Armenia
Joined: 03/07/14
Gender: Male
Re: Some mistakes in ECE II
Reply #3 - 05/14/14 at 15:41:43
Post Tools
5)
n. 1159
(n. 1012 in the 1. edition) is a line from the classical endgame Spielmann-Rubinstein 1909 analysed by Kasparov (47.Rb7 (instead of 47.Ke3) 47Rxa3 48.Rxg7 Rxh3).

D. 5


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

Kasparov made several mistakes in the analysis of this line in the first edition of ECE. Two of them are now detected in the ECE II. In the line 1.Rg6 Ke6 2.Rg8 Rh4 3.Ke3 Kd5 4.g6 Re4 5.Kf3 g4 6.Kg3 Petronijevic correctly gives 6Kd4 as winning for Black and shows that in the same line after 6f5 7.Rf6 Rd4 8.Rf5 Kc4 the position is not won for Black as supposed by Kasparov.

At the same time the ECE II does not address the mistakes of the line 5Rf4.
After 6.Ke3 Kc4? Black throws away the win which was still possible after backtracking with 6Re4+ 7.Kf3.

In the line 6.Ke3 Kc4? 7.f3 Kc3 8.Rh6 d5

D. 5a


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

White can draw both by 9.Rg6 Rxd4 10.Rxf6 Rd3+ 11.Kf2 Rd2+ 12.Kg3! (not 12.Ke3? as suggested by Kasparov) as well as by 9.Rh1 Rxd4 (9...Rh4 10.Rc1+ Kb4 11.Rc5=) 10.Rc1+ Kb2 11.Kxd4 Kxc1 12.Kxd5 Kd2 (12...f5 13.Ke5=) 13.Ke6=.
  

ChessPub_001.pgn ( 2 KB | Downloads )
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Poghosyan V
YaBB Newbies
*
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 14
Location: Armenia
Joined: 03/07/14
Gender: Male
Re: Some mistakes in ECE II
Reply #2 - 04/20/14 at 10:54:51
Post Tools
3)
n. 839
(n. 737 in the 1. edition) is the endgame Tartakower-Rossolimo 1934 (here with rev. col. and flanks). The new edition of ECE also follows the faulty analysis of Tartakower which contains many result-changing errors.

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

After 1.Kd4 Kc6 2.Ke3 Rf1 White missed the win by transferring the rook to the f-file- 3.Rh4!
After 3.Ke2? Rf5 4.g4 Rf4 5.g5 Black can draw by 5...Kd7 or 5Kd6.

4)
n. 801
(n. 720 in the 1. edition) is the endgame Ree-Langeweg 1972 analysed by Minev.

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

The analysis of Minev is fine except one strange error not corrected also in the 2. edition. In the line 1.Rg7+ Kf8? (1Kh8!=) Minev awards 2.Rg6 with ? mark and continues with 2Kf7 3.h7 Rb1 4.h8N+ Kf8 5.Rxf6+ Kg7=. 2.Rg6 is indeed a weak move but it does not spoil anything. Instead of 3.h7? White can easily rectify his error and backtracking by 3.Rg7+ Kf8 4.Rg4 with transposition to the winning line of Minev - 2.Rg4. If 3...Ke6 (instead of 3Kf8), then 4.h7 Rb1 5.Kh5 Rh1+ 6.Kg6 Rg1 7.h8Q Rxg3+ 8.Kh7 Rh3+ 9.Kg8 Rxh8+ 10.Kxh8 f5 11.Kh7+.

5)
n. 1159
(n. 1012 in the 1. edition) is a line from the classical endgame Spielmann-Rubinstein 1909 analysed by Kasparov (47.Rb7 (instead of 47.Ke3) 47Rxa3 48.Rxg7 Rxh3).

D. 5

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

Kasparov made several mistakes in the analysis of this line. Two of them are now detected in the ECE II. In the line 1.Rg6 Ke6 2.Rg8 Rh4 3.Ke3 Kd5 4.g6 Re4 5.Kf3 g4 6.Kg3 Petronijevic correctly gives 6Kd4 as winning for Black and shows that in the same line after 6f5 7.Rf6 Rd4 8.Rf5 Kc4 the position is not won for Black as supposed by Kasparov.
At the same time the ECE II does not address the mistakes of the line 5Rf4.
After 6.Ke3 Kc4? Black throws away the win which was still possible after backtracking with 6Re4+ 7.Kf3.
In the line 6.Ke3 Kc4? 7.f3 Kc3 8.Rh6 d5

D. 5a

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

White can draw both by 9.Rg6 Rxd4 10.Rxf6 Rd3+ 11.Kf2 Rd2+ 12.Kg3! (not 12.Ke3? as suggested by Kasparov) as well as by 9.Rh1 Rxd4 (9...Rh4 10.Rc1+ Kb4 11.Rc5=) 10.Rc1+ Kb2 11.Kxd4 Kxc1 12.Kxd5 Kd2 (12...f5 13.Ke5=) 13.Ke6=.
  

ChessPub_20_04_2014.pgn ( 6 KB | Downloads )
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Poghosyan V
YaBB Newbies
*
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 14
Location: Armenia
Joined: 03/07/14
Gender: Male
Re: Some mistakes in ECE II
Reply #1 - 04/09/14 at 19:14:30
Post Tools
pgn-files
  

ChessPub_2014.pgn ( 3 KB | Downloads )
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Poghosyan V
YaBB Newbies
*
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 14
Location: Armenia
Joined: 03/07/14
Gender: Male
Some mistakes in ECE II
04/09/14 at 19:04:51
Post Tools
By using 5-6-7-man tablebases and strong analatical enginees the 2. edition of ECE II has corrected a huge number of errors of the first edition. It is especially important that the new edition has nearly perfect analysis of all 7-man rook endgames. There are also many important improvements in the analysis of other endgames with more pawns. Of course the rook endgame theory has not (yet) reached perfection, so many errors in ECE II are quite natural due to extreme difficulties of the endgames. But still some errors shown in this thread could have been avoided with a little more care.

1) n. 940 (n. 820 in the 1. edition) contains elementary errors but only one has been detected in the 2. edition.

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

Both editions claim that Black is lost but in fact the position is easily drawn.

1...Ra3+

Black draws with any move on a-file as well as with 1...Re1+. According to ECE Black loses after 2.Kd4 Re7 3.f6 Rd7+ 4.Kc5 Kg6 5.fxg7 Kxg7 6.Kb6 Rd6+ 7.Kc7 Ra6 8.Kb7+. But instead of 2Re7?? Black reaches an easy draw by 2...Ra1 or 2...Rd1+.

2.Kd4 Ra4+ 3.Kc5 Ra1 4.Kd6

Here the 1. edition claimed a win for White after 4.f6 Kg6 5.Kd6 but Petronijevic rightly points to 5...Kf7!=.

4...Ra2?

This result-changing error has been overlooked in the new edition. Black can draw by using the f-pawn as a shelter for his king after 4...Kf4 5.Ke7 Ke5= (5...Ra6=) or 4...Ra6+ 5.Ke7 Kf4!=.

5.Ke7 Ra5 6.f6 Kg6 7.f7 Re5+ 8.Kd6+.

2) n. 961 (n. 837 in the 1. edition) is an extract from the analysis of R. Kholmov in Shakhmaty v SSSR, n. 2-1965, p. 13.

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

According to Kholmov, Portisch/Sarkzy (Six Hundred Endings, 1981, n. 360, p. 116) and ECE this position is drawn. But after simple 1.Rb7, 1.Rc7, 1.Rd7 (or even 1.Re7) White can transfer his rook to the 1th rank thanks to the mate threat.

In his initial analysis of the game Kholmov-Pogats (1964) in Shakhmaty v SSSR 1965 Kholmov commited one more error in the line 2...h3= 3.Kf4 h2 4.Ra6+ Kg7 5.Ra7+ Kf8 6.Rh7 Rg2 7.Ke5 Kg8 8.Kf6 Ra2 9.Kg5 he missed the move 9...Rf2 which prevents f5-f6+. Black can draw also by 9...Rg2+.

(to be continued)
  

Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Bookmarks: del.icio.us Digg Facebook Google Google+ Linked in reddit StumbleUpon Twitter Yahoo