KPP failed!

Jump to forum:
 
30th June 2008, 06:00am
#1
by Hydrocannon
New Dehli India
Member Since: Apr 2008
Member Points: 137

Black manages to draw at white when white was using K.P.P

30th June 2008, 06:07am
#2
by Amnesiac
Devon United Kingdom
Member Since: Oct 2007
Member Points: 648
The starting position is drawn, black has the distant opposition. But then you lose it and white could have won! Instead of 2...Kf5??????? you should play Kd4 with the opposition and a draw. Instead of 4 e4 white can play 4 Ke4! winning the opposition and winning easily, I suggest you pick up a good endgame book and study opposition.
30th June 2008, 06:08am
#3
by Monicker
Phoenix United States
Member Since: May 2008
Member Points: 390

Why 9.e7+ ???   It seems to me that 9.Kd7 would have won the game for White.


30th June 2008, 06:14am
#4
by 789159
United States
Member Since: Oct 2007
Member Points: 176

He's right 9.Kd7 wins, but if black played correctly it's a draw


30th June 2008, 06:16am
#5
by Hydrocannon
New Dehli India
Member Since: Apr 2008
Member Points: 137
This isnt about White winning, its about KPP failing
30th June 2008, 06:18am
#6
by Marshal_Dillon
New Jersey United States
Member Since: Apr 2008
Member Points: 407
I think the first move is a mistake right off. The king has to remain in front of the pawn in these end games in order to keep the other king from controlling the queening square.  The first, and maybe even second moves for white should be the king getting out in front of the pawn. The pawn march should come later.
30th June 2008, 06:24am
#7
by El_Piton
Greensboro, NC United States
Member Since: Jul 2007
Member Points: 117

"Never push [the] pawn unless it is immediately decisive!"

-Jeremy Silman


30th June 2008, 06:26am
#8
by Amnesiac
Devon United Kingdom
Member Since: Oct 2007
Member Points: 648
The origional position is definately drawn. Black just has to keep the opposition. For example 1 Kd3 then Kd5! keeps the opposition and draws. The same for 1 Ke3 Ke5!. Black goes haywire in the rest of that game so I'd ignore the rest as white wins easily in so many lines. If black plays correctly, which he dos'nt at all in the game, then he should draw easily.
30th June 2008, 06:31am
#9
by Hydrocannon
New Dehli India
Member Since: Apr 2008
Member Points: 137
Amnesiac wrote: The origional position is definately drawn. Black just has to keep the opposition. For example 1 Kd3 then Kd5! keeps the opposition and draws. The same for 1 Ke3 Ke5!. Black goes haywire in the rest of that game so I'd ignore the rest as white wins easily in so many lines. If black plays correctly, which he dos'nt at all in the game, then he should draw easily.

He played DECENTFrown How did he draw then?


30th June 2008, 06:37am
#10
by Amnesiac
Devon United Kingdom
Member Since: Oct 2007
Member Points: 648
Hydrocannon wrote: Amnesiac wrote: The origional position is definately drawn. Black just has to keep the opposition. For example 1 Kd3 then Kd5! keeps the opposition and draws. The same for 1 Ke3 Ke5!. Black goes haywire in the rest of that game so I'd ignore the rest as white wins easily in so many lines. If black plays correctly, which he dos'nt at all in the game, then he should draw easily.

He played DECENT How did he draw then?


Because White played equally badly!


30th June 2008, 06:44am
#11
by Phil_from_Blayney
Blayney, NSW Australia
Member Since: Apr 2008
Member Points: 151

Amnesiac and others are right. This would have to rate as an extremely poorly played endgame.


30th June 2008, 08:40am
#12
by jtd200
Dallas, TX United States
Member Since: Feb 2008
Member Points: 13
That final position is what you're looking for, as black, as long as it's white's turn to move.  Note that if white achieves that position, with black to move, then black loses!  This is a case of mutual-zugzwang.
30th June 2008, 10:43am
#13
by Fromper
Boynton Beach, FL United States
Member Since: Aug 2007
Member Points: 357

Black drew because his final move was just about the only non-blunder by either player in the entire sequence. This is just a poorly played endgame by both sides. If white had played Kd7 on move 8 or move 9, then he would have won. But if black had correctly stayed in front of the pawn and white king the whole time, then white wouldn't have had those opportunities.

By the way, what does K.P.P. stand for?

--Fromper 


30th June 2008, 11:47am
#14
by NM tonydal
United States
Member Since: Oct 2007
Member Points: 1120
Yep, I'd say Draw master oughta be renamed Loss master.  Hydrocannon, hie thee to an endgame book.  (I like that Silman quote, El Piton!)
30th June 2008, 11:56am
#15
by likesforests
United States
Member Since: May 2007
Member Points: 3181

Both players blundered, and if either player had studied this ending they would've obtained the better resut. Don't let the same fate befall you! Study K+P vs K endgames now before it's too late.  ;)

http://www.chesskids.com/level2/cl6l7.htm

http://www.chesskids.com/level3/cl7l3.htm

http://www.chesskids.com/level3/cl7l7.htm


30th June 2008, 12:03pm
#16
by likesforests
United States
Member Since: May 2007
Member Points: 3181

Fromper> By the way, what does K.P.P. stand for?

Normally KPP means one side has a King and 2 Pawns. Since that doesn't apply here, I'm also wondering what the original poster means by the abbreviation.


30th June 2008, 12:18pm
#17
by Zerrogi
Indiana United States
Member Since: May 2008
Member Points: 72
Hydrocannon wrote: This isnt about White winning, its about KPP failing

 Actually, they're right.  White's King was not in front of his pawn, which would've created a win for White if played correctly.  Unfortunately, White's King is passively next to his pawn, and therefore does not have the oppositon against Black.  Eventually, it would end up a draw if played properly. 

Black seriously played poorly here, racing his King to one end and then returning to stop promotion.  better was to remain in front of the pawn, moving back squares and keeping opposition with White.  Not giving White any line here, because e7+ was the killer that sealed the draw.  With Kd7, as previously mentioned, the game would've easily been a 1-0. 


 

Add your comment:

Join Chess.com for free to add your comment! Already a member? Then login now to comment.