Upgrade to Chess.com Premium!

Pawn majority on the Queen side

In the following diagram you can see a very typical pawn structure. White has on the  queen side a pawn majority and can create an outside passer, but will this be enough for a win in a pawn endgame? Tal believed and proved it!



So we have seen that in pawn endgames with this pawn structure are good winning chances for the one with the pawn majority on queen side. This means, that there should be also an advantage in endgames with pieces. The one who is playing against the pawn majority can`t easily agree exchanging pieces, because of the "bad" pawn endgame. Here an example:


 

Colle-Koltanowski is an opening which often creates "our"" pawn structure. Here an example White went directly from opening into an favorable endgame with the pawn majority on queen side




Comments


  • 4 weeks ago

    Roofslovepizza

    I'm having trouble understanding something.

    Suppose in the last diagram it was said that white had a favourable endgame because of his queenside majority, but isn't the same thing true for black's kingside majority?  Is white better because the black f6 knight is blocking his f pawn, therefore it is harder for black to use his majority, or is it something else?

    EDIT: Thanks to ElvinWilliams I understand it now, thanks.

    For anyone wondering it's the distance from the king's AS WELL AS the side of the pawn majorities.  For example, if white had a 2 to 1 majority on the queenside and black had a 4 to 3 majority on the kingside, white would be better because he can create a passed pawn much faster.

  • 2 years ago

    Reshevskys_Revenge

    Enlightening.

  • 2 years ago

    Heinrich_24

    Yes, this is a positional theme. Of, course the 3:2 pawn majority creates an outside passer. In Endgames this often is an decisive advantage.

    Mentioning the Colle-Koltanowski opening (besides others) was a demonstration that this pawn structure doesn`t happen by chance. Knowing about the endgame advantage one can steering the game into this direction.

    May be the long discussion (comments) has distracted from my main intention. By the way, have you seen my chess homepage http://wallflower.npage.de/

    Here I try to coordinate my chess.com articles

  • 2 years ago

    ElvinWilliams

    Just a comment/ was wondering your thoughts on this subject.  

    Isnt this article more about the principles of outside passed pawns in K+P endgames? This being represented as a Qside P majority vs a K side pawn majority issue. The more important issue seems to be the respective sizes of the majorities. As in the Tal example. Tal had a 3v2 on the Qside and was facing a 4v3 on the Kside. In reality the fact that Tal has a smaller majority meant he won the game. This was just represented in this game as a Qside majority. If Tal had a 3v2 on the Kside vs a 4v3 on the Qside he would still prevail. Its the respective sizes that determine the winner along with distance from King and mobility and health of the majorities.  

    In the second example GM A sacrificed a pawn to aquire a faster pawn majority which was even better then before (2v1 vs 3v2)

    And in both of the games both sides rushed to be the first to create an outside passed pawn. This is of course a winning aspect  of K+P endgames. 

    Thanks for the instructive, informative article. I am a fan of your work and it makes me think about these subjects more in depth. 

  • 2 years ago

    chessolite

    beautiful forum and good discussion

  • 2 years ago

    Marcus-101

    Okay... I guess so :)

  • 2 years ago

    Heinrich_24

    Well, your starting position looks better for White and 32. Bb5 should have lead to a better rook endgame, I think. So it looks more as a contribution to my "chess as game of mistakes" :-)

     



  • 2 years ago

    Marcus-101

    Haha I don't play that line anymore anyway :) btw I managed to find a game that Black won with a similar pawn structure with no serious blunder of whites :D



  • 2 years ago

    Heinrich_24

    Seriously, there is no necessity to change your opening system!

  • 2 years ago

    Marcus-101

    Haha :)

  • 2 years ago

    Heinrich_24

    Chess is a game of mistakes. So, there may always come up winning chances :-)

  • 2 years ago

    Marcus-101

    No winning chances for Black then?!

  • 2 years ago

    Heinrich_24

    Here a book recommandation (Valeri Bronzki: Das Colle-Koltanowski-System, Schachverlag Kania) . Black managed a draw with 11. ... Qc7!?

     



  • 2 years ago

    Marcus-101

    Okay. Could Black have played better after 11.Rd1 in the Colle-Koltanowski variation? I have played that position many times before but it started off as a French Defence.

  • 2 years ago

    Heinrich_24

    Yes, it isn`t lost for Black, especially not in middle game( the extra pawn in center can help). But one should avoid the endgame without a clear compensation

  • 2 years ago

    Marcus-101

    In the French Defence Rubinstein variation Black chooses to go into that pawn structure willingly!

Back to Top

Post your reply: