8312 Players currently online!
Man vs. Machine - good luck!
Turn-based games at any time!
Vote for the best move to win!
Do you have what it takes?
Sharpen your tactical vision!
Get advice and game insights!
Learn from top players & pros!
View millions of master games!
Your virtual chess coach!
Perfect your opening moves!
Test your skills vs. computer!
Find the right private coach!
Can you solve it each day?
Bring it all together!
Beginners, start here!
Make friends & play team games!
News from the world of chess!
Search all Chess.com members!
Find local clubs & events!
Who's the best of your friends?
Read what members are saying!
The main reason you cannot force a mate with K+2N v K+p is because the Ns cannot gain a tempo. They shift square color every time they move.
But you CAN force mate in many positions of K+2N vs. K+P
But, you CANNOT force mate if the opponent with the K+p knows enough endgame technique to avoid those positions by simply separating the K from the p and just giving it up. Then there is no mate. It is mostly when the opponent with the K+p tries to get more from the position by attempting to queen the pawn that he gets in trouble. If he knows endgame technique he knows that those positions are rare and it is best to just take the draw.
Yes its about the fiftieth time its been said, people still comment how impossible it is. It is VERY UNLIKELY BUT POSSIBLE. TROITZKY LINE.
And Troitzky was famous for "ta da", endgame studies. How many times is a game you are playing going to result in some esoteric endgame study position?
It is too easy to demonstrate that you're wrong.
You can play around with that all you want. It would also do you some good to read the first page of posts. Natalia posts a link to a wikipedia article on the Troitsky line. It's not just some "ta da" endgame study.
Could you please tell the title of the post, article or blog. It will save me alot of searching since you seem to know where it is.
Never mind I found the Wikipedia Article. The article states very clearly that if and when the pawn can be stopped on or before the "Troizsky Line" then checkmate can be forced. But, It text goes on to say: "...If the defender's pawn is blocked on or before the "Troitzky line", the stronger side can force checkmate, although it may require up to 115 moves with optimal play..."
With the 50 move rule in effect for USCF and FIDE rated tournaments, why would a tournament player be concerned with this endgame.
It is similar to the endgame K+2Bs v. K+N. In that one which was thought to be a draw for some 300 years, it has been discovered by computers that it is a forced win for the K+2Bs, but it requires some 200 moves to reach checkmate. Once again the 50 move rule is in effect. Tournament players don't care except as an interesting fact that a position that was thought to be a draw by Troitzky himself turns out is a forced win for the 2Bs.
I wouldn't be surprised considering that Troizky was wrong about the K+2Bs v K+N, that he might be wrong about the K+2Ns v K+p and one of these days a computer will find that it is a dead draw.
For practical purposes tournament players say, "IDGARA."
I believe K+2B vs. K+N requires at most 70-80 moves with optimal play from both sides, but I'd have to check, and it still exceeds the 50 move rule anyway. For K+2N vs. K+P, it depends on the position, but playing around with the tablebases there seem to be plenty of situations where the 50 moves aren't exceeded with optimal play. Both sides wouldn't play optimally in a tournament setting so mate might be achieved faster or slower than the optimal line of play, or maybe not at all. In a tournament game I would try to play for the win with the two knights, because you can hardly lose and it's a very rare endgame to get the opportunity to play.
I doubt this endgame is worth studying given it's rarity. I don't think I'm even going to bother with it. It's still somewhat interesting though.
@browni3141: Well, check out the Second Trompowsky Line to see which positions are less than 50 moves till mate. The endgame has little practical use, but understanding the ideas will help your chess.
The endgame has little practical use, but understanding the ideas will help your chess.
Hm, I sense a contradiction in there somewhere...
What time do you play your best chess?
by blasterdragon 2 minutes ago
by OldChessDog 6 minutes ago
Chess for Oldtimers --- Good Idea !
by motherinlaw 7 minutes ago
by jac1yn 7 minutes ago
Have Lost in middle of the game too many times.
by jac1yn 9 minutes ago
Where did I go wrong here?
by paulgottlieb 13 minutes ago
Number of members in a group. Possible bug?!
by Almost_Master 18 minutes ago
Opt Out of Time Cheating
by ivandh 21 minutes ago
by OldChessDog 21 minutes ago
by diivoone 22 minutes ago
Why Join | Chess Topics |
Help & Support |
© 2013 Chess.com