an ordinary chessplayer wrote on 11/15/22 at 02:43:42:

Thanks for your reply.

That's exactly what I mean.

I believe that every author or chess intructor who refers to the so-called 'Troitsky line' should be aware of and should mention the fact that it is only a guideline for the player and that it is not the whole picture of Troitsky's analysis.

an ordinary chessplayer wrote on 11/15/22 at 02:43:42:

I wasn't aware of those two lines given by Fine.
In the 2003 edition revised by Benko NO line appears on No.109 (numbered No.197, p.99). Only No.110(198) has a line (in fact there is no actual line drawn either but besides Pd4 there is a black dot on a4,a5,b6,c5,e4,f5,g6,h4,h5. On No.109(197) there are no dots nor line, just the 5 pieces).
You probably have an older edition; in this case older means better (it seems this endgame has been left behind in the revised edition).

Hi,

I have a question about the so-called ‘Troitsky line’ in the KNN vs. KP endgame.

As you know, in this endgame when the Pawn can be safely blockaded by a Knight on, or behind, a so-called ‘Troitsky line’ then the side with the 2 Knights is sure to win the game (if he plays correctly, of course) by using his King and his free Knight to push the opponent’s King to a corner, then by checkmating with the help of the blockading Knight freed at the last moment (which may take more than 50 moves in some positions).

Here is my question:

► Did Troitsky REALLY define that line?

___________________

Everybody, from authors of chess books to players, including GMs, seems to repeat those same ‘Troitsky line’ words over and over without questioning and to take for granted that Troitsky shall be deemed to be its author.

BUT (and that’s a big but!) I think NOT!

I have read Troitsky’s analysis in the ‘Supplement on the Theory of the End-game of Two Knights against Pawns’, p. 197 to 257 of the ‘Collection of Chess Studies’ book (not the easiest task, but a fascinating read).
NOWHERE in that book have I seen the slightest mention of that so-called ‘Troitsky line’!

His analysis includes 3 parts: 1. How to checkmate once the King has been pushed towards a corner; 2. How to drive the King to the edge of the board and then to a corner (general principles and tactics); 3. Monographs of the separate Pawns (winning conditions and specific strategies according to the field on which the Pawn is blockaded).

There’s more to it than what everyone refers to as ‘Troitsky line’, which is mentioned NOWHERE in his analysis (unless I have missed something).

Example: about the Knight Pawn, Troitsky shows that White wins unconditionally when the black Pawn is blockaded on g6 (K Kt 3) or on g4 (K Kt 5) but NOT when the black Pawn is blockaded on g5 (K Kt 4) (in which case White can win only under certain conditions).

I made this picture from what I understand from the ‘Monographs’ chapter of Troitsky’s book:

<< PICTURE >>
it seems I'm not allowed to post messages containing active links to websites or images
Could a mod please edit this post (I can send the url of the pic by PM)?

- when the black Pawn is blockaded on a green field then White wins unconditionally
- when the black Pawn is blockaded on a yellow field then White wins only when certain conditions are met (those conditions are explained by Troitsky)
- when the black Pawn is blockaded on a red field then White wins IF the King has been pushed to a ‘good’ corner (i.e. a corner in which the King can be checkmated with the help of the reserve Knight before Black queens the Pawn) during the game BEFORE entering the KNN/KP endgame
- when the black Pawn is less advanced than any of those fields then White wins unconditionally
_______

So, I believe that what has been called the ‘Troitsky line’ for decades appears to be but a simplified view of the conclusions of Troitsky’s actual analysis.

Or am I wrong?