8276 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!
So i got a friend who has been pleading with me to study endgame study endgame study endgame its so fun and will shoot your rating up. My opinion is probably wrong but please try to see my point of view. To me the endgame obviously arrises from the middlegame. To me the middlegame determines how the endgame will be because it sets a certain advantage for the endgame. So why study endgame if oyu can just set yourself an advantage from the middlegame. i mean any 1300+ could beat any grandmaster with 2 passed pawns at the endgame. so why is it important to study endgame if middlegame is what controls the endgame? and isnt the endgame just common sense? does it really need to be studied to the point that Jeremy Silamn wrote a fat 4 inch book on it?
Ok, let me set you straight. Any 1300+ is NOT going to beat any grandmaster with 2 passed pawns, unless he knows how to use them. That's where the study of endgames comes in. The endgame is not just "common sense" - you need to know what you are doing, or you will screw it up. This puzzle uses king opposition. (Click on move list for comments.)
Here's another simple example, where you have to know that a pawn on the f file draws against a queen.
Here, the queen can never take on f7 or it is stalemate. She must constantly keep checking the king, or white will queen the pawn and draw. Black cannot win this position.
There are many, many examples I could show you that mean the difference between winning, losing, and drawing. But the best way is to start checking it out for yourself! Best of luck.
Common sense? Endgames? Have you ever looked at an endgame puzzle book?
So do you guys think if an 1100 completely mastered endgame completely and was good enough to maintain material equality in a match he could probably boost his rating a whole jump. Are there palyers who just dominate with endgame skills?
Yes. I have won many games by knowing more endgame theory than my opponent.
Well actually what im trying to say is could you make some kind of amateur hybrid player who is spectacular at endgames and OKAY at middlegame and has a simple opening. Like play a simple italian game, keep material balance and dominate the endgames? is that possible
But doesnt it 98% depend on the position left by the middlegame into the endgame.
Take my second example. If you have the choice in the middle game between ending up with a g pawn or an f pawn against the queen, you want the f pawn. But you don't KNOW that unless you understand the endgame.
So to answer your question, I use my knowledge of the endgame to make decisions in the middle game.
If you're good enough to consistently maintain material equality, you will be rated above 1100.
here is a fantastic endgame puzzle it really shows the importance of endgame study http://www.chess.com/forum/view/more-puzzles/win-with-white2 i dont know how to copy it here so thats the link you should really check it out
Thanks for the helpful thread!
Someone can win or lose a drawn endgame position such as the phillidor depending on their knowledge of the endgame.
The hardest thing in chess is to win a won game...Really, without good endgame knowledge, it is difficult to formulate a plan in the middlegame because you don't know what you're shooting for. Tactical combinations may be cool, but they don't arise that often, and chess games are won by subtler fashions(endgame maneuvering） more often than not.
Even GM's can't always beat GM's with two passed pawns: example
This position is a theoretical draw (or at least similar ones - I don't have an endgame tablebase).
the endgames are important BUT only in the context that you can actually reach them. I have for a long time thought that an unnecessary amount of time is spent on endgames at the early stages of chess development. We parrot the Russian school and capablanca idea to study endgames first to learn chess forgetting that the players that are saying that because thats what is important to them.
To learn something you have to play it and practice it not just study a book. Study endgames as they arise in your games. For most plays Under say 1500 some basics are all thats needed. Simple mates with rook and queen. basic understanding of opposition and how to promote a pawn. Square of the pawn. outside passed pawn, protected passed pawn. Other than that you are probably just doing some over kill. If an endgame arises in YOUR game then start to study it. around 1600-1800 expand that knowledge a bit more too. Expose yourself to endgames if you want but dont over do it. (Silman's book on endgames lays out what endgames you should know based on rating, another book if you really want to dig more is by Rosen called Chess endgame Training that breaks down endgames in a nice way to learn but its basically a supplement to a more teaching book. )if you have 4 hours i would study 3 hours of tactics at your level and 30 min endgames and 30 min openings.
You can't evaluate an opening position without being familiar with the middlegame advantages you're aiming for. Likewise you can't evaluate a middlegame position without understand what types of endgames may possibly arise.
For example, near an endgame you may be able to trade a knight for a bishop or a knight for a knight. Lets say one of them is a clear win and one is a draw or a loss. If you know this then tactics and whole plans can be set up around the idea of certain trades not being possible for your opponent. These plans can even be set up early in the middlegame.
Not that I don't understand your logic. Where you're going is limited by where you've been (you drive 10 miles east you're not going to end up at a westward location). But unless you're just randomly setting out on a drive, it's your destination (the endgame) that makes certain roads and turns (moves and plans) good or bad.
It's hard to pull out of your driveway if you don't know where you're headed.
Heidrich, you seem to be putting too much emphasis on the middlegame (imo). Consider this: If your opponent and you both make what seem to be equally decent moves throughout, you will probably end up in an endgame. Now, it's certainly true that moves in the middlegame will determine where you are in the endgame, but, where you want to be at that time must be determined before you're there. Zirtoc's posts (# 9 & #10) state it well.
I would say that one must see the goal, and think (time or move-wise) backwards from there.
Here is a good parallel. Pro golfers don't always hit driver off the tee on par 4's or 5's. They play the hole backwards in their head like this: Where do I want to be to have the easiest birdie (or eagle) putt? Then, where do I want to be in the fairway that will give me the best chance to get to that easiest of putts? Now, on the tee, what club should I use that will give me the best chance to get to that part of the fairway?
Here is another loose parallel: When would I like to retire? What do I have to do, now, to get to that point?
Now, things change. The golf analogy: Crap, I'm down 2 strokes! I have to go for it! Retirement: Children, laid off, or, I have a great idea for a business. The same holds true with chess. No one can predict the others move. But, if you are prepared for any consequences as a result of your moves, you will be better off.
Pro golfers, pro chess players ect... all have specific problems based on their needs but these are not the same problems that amateurs have. Someone can be a great putter but if you cannt drive the ball and get it to where you want it to be then world class putting skill is meaningless. The ability a golfer to drive the ball accurately is just as important if not more so at the amatuer level.
In chess it is the same, if you end up in an endgame a rook down the knowledge of some complex rook endgame wont help. yes studying endgames will help if you practice them with calculation in mind but it is MUCH harder to solve endgames by pure calculation. Even GMs have a problem with it as in the recent case with GM Short's game where his opponent didnt know the right defense (funny to me was the right move is what popped into my head because I have recently studied these endgames. I am sure the GM knew it too but think it didnt mattered or convienced himself differently but now he will study this and i am sure wont make the same mistake again)
Starting out learning any skill you have BASICS that need to be mastered before working on refining higher level skills. If your missing simple 2 move threats then you need to work on that. Understanding BASIC middlegames, BASIC endgames, BASIC tactical themes is critical before moving on to more advanced ideas and concepts.
The videos here at chess.com are actually very good to assess this. Watch ALL the basic videos if you are suggested for under 1500 and see which ones you really do HONESTLY know. If you "ya but" on ANY of the videos then work on that area. Study material that is applicable in YOUR games if it comes up then you will have a chance to apply it and you have something to compare it to. Look at a series of say 50 games and see what most commonly occurs, study common tactics and middlegames that arise. compile 100 games of less than 20 moves in your selected openings and see how players lost or won. Compile another 100 games that lasted 50 or 60 + moves and see the most frequent types of endgames that occurred and then focus your study on those at a basic level. I know some stuff but resently I noticed that my grasp of space and how to fight against it and use it is ,... vague.
6/18/2013 - Tal-Starodub, Petrozavodsk 1984
by huhabu 2 minutes ago
Really Bad Sportsmanship in Real Tournaments
by MrDamonSmith 4 minutes ago
Is this a draw? 6/18/2013
by LongIslandMark 5 minutes ago
What's your playing style?
by Ragnarokkr 5 minutes ago
Is it true that you should not exchange pieces when your down in material?
by bellwater99 5 minutes ago
Let us block users who have a history of abandoning games in live chess
by ergingras 5 minutes ago
by LongIslandMark 7 minutes ago
Young chess players
by bellwater99 7 minutes ago
List of Good Admins and SuperAdmins
by franksmith 12 minutes ago
This Site Will Soon Have 8 Million Members
by cabadenwurt 15 minutes ago
Why Join | Chess Topics |
Help & Support |
© 2013 Chess.com