If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.
Policy / Politique
The fee for tournament organizers advertising on ChessTalk is $20/event or $100/yearly unlimited for the year.
Les frais d'inscription des organisateurs de tournoi sur ChessTalk sont de 20 $/événement ou de 100 $/année illimitée.
You can etransfer to Henry Lam at chesstalkforum at gmail dot com
Transfér à Henry Lam à chesstalkforum@gmail.com
Dark Knight / Le Chevalier Noir
General Guidelines
---- Nous avons besoin d'un traduction français!
Some Basics
1. Under Board "Frequently Asked Questions" (FAQs) there are 3 sections dealing with General Forum Usage, User Profile Features, and Reading and Posting Messages. These deal with everything from Avatars to Your Notifications. Most general technical questions are covered there. Here is a link to the FAQs. https://forum.chesstalk.com/help
2. Consider using the SEARCH button if you are looking for information. You may find your question has already been answered in a previous thread.
3. If you've looked for an answer to a question, and not found one, then you should consider asking your question in a new thread. For example, there have already been questions and discussion regarding: how to do chess diagrams (FENs); crosstables that line up properly; and the numerous little “glitches” that every new site will have.
4. Read pinned or sticky threads, like this one, if they look important. This applies especially to newcomers.
5. Read the thread you're posting in before you post. There are a variety of ways to look at a thread. These are covered under “Display Modes”.
6. Thread titles: please provide some details in your thread title. This is useful for a number of reasons. It helps ChessTalk members to quickly skim the threads. It prevents duplication of threads. And so on.
7. Unnecessary thread proliferation (e.g., deliberately creating a new thread that duplicates existing discussion) is discouraged. Look to see if a thread on your topic may have already been started and, if so, consider adding your contribution to the pre-existing thread. However, starting new threads to explore side-issues that are not relevant to the original subject is strongly encouraged. A single thread on the Canadian Open, with hundreds of posts on multiple sub-topics, is no better than a dozen threads on the Open covering only a few topics. Use your good judgment when starting a new thread.
8. If and/or when sub-forums are created, please make sure to create threads in the proper place.
Debate
9. Give an opinion and back it up with a reason. Throwaway comments such as "Game X pwnz because my friend and I think so!" could be considered pointless at best, and inflammatory at worst.
10. Try to give your own opinions, not simply those copied and pasted from reviews or opinions of your friends.
Unacceptable behavior and warnings
11. In registering here at ChessTalk please note that the same or similar rules apply here as applied at the previous Boardhost message board. In particular, the following content is not permitted to appear in any messages:
* Racism
* Hatred
* Harassment
* Adult content
* Obscene material
* Nudity or pornography
* Material that infringes intellectual property or other proprietary rights of any party
* Material the posting of which is tortious or violates a contractual or fiduciary obligation you or we owe to another party
* Piracy, hacking, viruses, worms, or warez
* Spam
* Any illegal content
* unapproved Commercial banner advertisements or revenue-generating links
* Any link to or any images from a site containing any material outlined in these restrictions
* Any material deemed offensive or inappropriate by the Board staff
12. Users are welcome to challenge other points of view and opinions, but should do so respectfully. Personal attacks on others will not be tolerated. Posts and threads with unacceptable content can be closed or deleted altogether. Furthermore, a range of sanctions are possible - from a simple warning to a temporary or even a permanent banning from ChessTalk.
Helping to Moderate
13. 'Report' links (an exclamation mark inside a triangle) can be found in many places throughout the board. These links allow users to alert the board staff to anything which is offensive, objectionable or illegal. Please consider using this feature if the need arises.
Advice for free
14. You should exercise the same caution with Private Messages as you would with any public posting.
First, I would like to know if there is an "easy" technique against third rank defense, or I have to calculate possible variations 7-10 moves ahead?
Second, how important in practice to know QvsR endgame? Does it happens often.
I know how to mate with Bishop and Knight because technique is relatively easy to learn but I never used it actual game. On the other hand QvsR endgame happened in my games twice over last 12 month and I could do much against a human opponent in a blitz game over Internet.
A computer beat me in chess, but it was no match when it came to kickboxing
First, I would like to know if there is an "easy" technique against third rank defense, or I have to calculate possible variations 7-10 moves ahead?
Second, how important in practice to know QvsR endgame? Does it happens often.
I know how to mate with Bishop and Knight because technique is relatively easy to learn but I never used it actual game. On the other hand QvsR endgame happened in my games twice over last 12 month and I could do much against a human opponent in a blitz game over Internet.
According to Reuben Fine "this is a win, but from the general position the win is rather complicated."
The ending comes up occasionally in R+Ps vs R+Ps endings, where one side has promoted, perhaps after sacking their own R.
There are a few stalemate traps, because the weaker side's K must be driven to the corner of the board.
Fine, in his "Basic Chess Endings" gives the "fundamental zugzwang position" where White has a K on c6 and Q on d8, and Black a K on a7 and a R on b7.
If White, the stronger side, can reach this position with Black to move then Black will lose.
For more guidance, you may have to consult an endgame manual!
Last edited by Peter Bokhout; Monday, 23rd November, 2009, 02:55 PM.
Fine's endgame manual is completely out of date regarding this particular ending as computer analysis has proven most of the old ideas wrong. The ending is so rare that my plan would simply be to offer a draw and have extra time to rest up for the next round. I believe the theoretical cost of half a point would be repaid many times over by the extra points gained from being well rested.
Not if you wanna be a GM, on the other hand, I suppose you have to learn it.
First, I would like to know if there is an "easy" technique against third rank defense, or I have to calculate possible variations 7-10 moves ahead?
Second, how important in practice to know QvsR endgame? Does it happens often.
I know how to mate with Bishop and Knight because technique is relatively easy to learn but I never used it actual game. On the other hand QvsR endgame happened in my games twice over last 12 month and I could do much against a human opponent in a blitz game over Internet.
I once had lone K vs KBN in a tournament game, but it was a special case, because when my opponent took my last piece (a rook), the position was stalemate. I smiled and shook his hand. He thought I was resigning!
I've never had (a non-trivial) KQ vs KR.
In general, the Q wins "easily" because the opposing side makes a mistake. A few decades ago, the tablebase was programmed into a computer, which was thus able to play the defending side perfectly. It competed a short match against six-time US Champion, GM Walter Browne. Browne had the Q in both games. In the first game he was unable to win before the 50-move rule. Then he deeply studied the ending and won the second game, but just barely.
By contrast, a human is able to learn in seconds the correct defence with K vs KBN. The W or M winning manoeuvre is not obvious. I saw this ending at the 2004 Women's Olympiad. The stronger player was about 2100. But she finished off her opponent in just a few minutes. Piece of cake, if you know what you are doing. Bruce Harper's brother Gary, not known to the public as a chess player, could win KBN vs K with 5 minutes on the clock.
The pawnless ending I'd recommend everybody learn is the 2nd-rank defence with KR vs KRB. I could do with a bit of learning of it myself. Didn't Leko fail to defend it against Carlsen in the World Blitz? KR vs KRB happens more often than the other two combined.
Fine's endgame manual is completely out of date regarding this particular ending as computer analysis has proven most of the old ideas wrong. The ending is so rare that my plan would simply be to offer a draw and have extra time to rest up for the next round. I believe the theoretical cost of half a point would be repaid many times over by the extra points gained from being well rested.
Not if you wanna be a GM, on the other hand, I suppose you have to learn it.
Sure its a tough win against perfect play, but I would never do this because its entirely possible for the Rook side to make a mistake that would allow an easier win. If I have this ending against someone, nobody is getting any extra time until the next round unless someone resigns =]
It is not a question of calculating 7-10 moves ahead as Ernest put it, but, you have to know a slightly anti intuitive combination.
Here is how to break the 3rd rank defense according to Karsten Muller's "Fundamental Chess Endings", on page 333. Analysis I am assuming is by Karsten Muller, Frank Lamprecht and John Nunn (who they cite).
Starting with the following chess position (in fen format)
3k4/5Q2/1r6/3K4/8/8/8/8 w - - 0 1
1. Qf4!
Black's rook now has no safe square on the 3rd rank, so king moves.
Fine's endgame manual is completely out of date regarding this particular ending as computer analysis has proven most of the old ideas wrong. The ending is so rare that my plan would simply be to offer a draw and have extra time to rest up for the next round. I believe the theoretical cost of half a point would be repaid many times over by the extra points gained from being well rested.
Not if you wanna be a GM, on the other hand, I suppose you have to learn it.
I think you've got it backwards. The desire to learn such things comes first. The title comes later, almost as a formality.
I had queen vs rook once, against Tyler Johnson. I knew the basic algorithm: approach his king and rook with my king and queen, find some zugzwang ideas, force his rook away from his king, and then win the rook with a series of ladder checks. As the game went, the check that won his rook was also checkmate. While we were playing it out, someone asked Harry Moore, "Is that a win?" He said, "If it isn't, then why bother trying to win his queen for your rook?"
I don't think anyone coming upon the ending of Q vs R for the first time would tune into the so-called third rank defence. It's more likely they will go wrong and lose the rook quickly.
By contrast, a human is able to learn in seconds the correct defence with K vs KBN. The W or M winning manoeuvre is not obvious. I saw this ending at the 2004 Women's Olympiad. The stronger player was about 2100. But she finished off her opponent in just a few minutes. Piece of cake, if you know what you are doing. Bruce Harper's brother Gary, not known to the public as a chess player, could win KBN vs K with 5 minutes on the clock.
I've told this story before, but I still find it amusing, so here it is again.
Many years ago I was staying in resort hotel in Whistler, BC. There was another chessplayer in the hotel, and one evening we met up in the lobby. We didn't have a chess set, so we drew a board on a place mat, tore up little pieces of paper, and labeled them with letters corresponding to the names of the pieces. After half an hour or so, my opponent gave up his last piece for my last pawn, leaving me with B+N vs lone K. I had never studied this ending, and had never encountered it in a tournament game. I had no trouble driving his king to the edge of the board, but I soon realized that I couldn't deliver checkmate by force unless I got him to the corner that was the same colour as my bishop. After some further reflection I found an algorithm to accomplish this task. I delivered checkmate just as the gong sounded for dinner!
It is not a question of calculating 7-10 moves ahead as Ernest put it, but, you have to know a slightly anti intuitive combination.
First you claim that there is no need to calculate 7-10 moves ahead and then proceed with a proof of 12(!) move what you call combination which is not forcing. And then you reach Philidor position that takes another 10 moves to make the mate and you assume that I know what a Philidor position is all about.
By the way........... for people who can't read fen language the position in question is as follows. White: Kd5, Qf7 Black: Kd8, Rb6
Well, first of all, I didn't have this position in my game. Second, even if I did have this position in my game and played 1. Qf4! then black can play instead of weak 1... Kd7? simply reply 1... Kc8 and then what?
To all people claiming that humans can't defend with a rook against a queen is wrong because (surprise, surprise) technique of defence is simple while there no easy "combination" for stronger side. Here the proof from Wikipedia article on Pawnless endings: "
Example from game
Gelfand-Svidler, 2001
White Kg7, Rh7 Black: Kg5, Qe8 (Philidor position)!!!
Black to move should win
In this 2001 game[1] between Boris Gelfand and Peter Svidler,[2] Black should win but the game was a draw because of the fifty-move rule. Black can win in several ways, for instance:
1... Qc8
2. Kf7 Qd8
3. Rg7+ Kf5
4. Rh7 Qd7+
5. Kg8 Qe8+
6. Kg7 Kg5, and wins.
The same position but with colors reversed occurred in a 2006 game between Alexander Morozevich and Dmitry Jakovenko – it was also drawn (Makarov 2007:170).[3] At the end of that game the rook became a desperado and the game ended in stalemate after the rook was captured.
Last edited by Ernest Klubis; Wednesday, 25th November, 2009, 10:36 AM.
A computer beat me in chess, but it was no match when it came to kickboxing
Tweet
Comment