11656 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!
I'm looking at starting to make an otb jump from 2000 to 2200. What I want to know is it better to spend my time studying straight pawn endgames or rook and pawn endgames.
Probably pawn endgames first.
They are very useful for calculation training as well.
I thought both are important.
Strong expert at my club seems to endlessly go through Secrets of Pawn Endgames, Secrets of Rook Endings, and Secrets of Pawnless Endgames books.
Do you know the 12 reciprocal zugzwang positions in pawnless R+B vs R? Burrrr... makes me shudder. I don't own the books myself but from excerpts he's brought up (and reviews online) they seem to be well respected and quite rigorous.
Indeed. But pawn endgames are the result of many endgames after simplification, so it makes sense to start here (even rook endgames can simplify into pawn endgames).
If you don't have to choose, it's probably better to have a look at rook endgames as well, but if you pick only one...
I think it very much depends what you know currently and where your weaknesses lay. In general, I'd expect a 2200+ player to have reasonable knowledge of both type of endings. Of course, logically pawn endings come first but most players also have better understanding of these than rook endings. What one should not do imo is to try to master all of the pawn endings and then all of the rook endings. Rather first learn some pawn endings then some rook endings then come back to pawn endings at deeper level etc.
Rook endings are very usefull for calculation training as well.
pawn endings should be studied first. The main thing to know about rook endings is to play your rooks with aggression not so much with defensive moves.
That's funny, because I've always seen rook endings as pretty technical phases, where calculation were either unecessary or too difficult for me anyway Meanhile, all my attemps to play pawn endgames 'according to principles' have miserably failed.
But okay, I'm no cador at either of them anyway
Yeah, Me neither...
...but I feel that playing pure rook endings on general principles alone also tends to fail miserably. That impression may be partly influenced by exercises in books/software where most exercises naturally tend to include calculating variations but I've noticed that in games also. Calculating rook endings can be more difficult, I'll give you that.
Actually, according to my experience technical endings in general tend to require exact calculation. It's the positions with bit more pieces and/or pawns on board that can be more positional in nature and can perhaps be played more based on one's intuition.
I think a player should know pawn endings first, before any other kind of ending. One of the major endgame mistakes I see people making all the time is simplifying into a losing pawn ending. This especially seems to happen in rook endings, when a player carelessly swaps rooks and loses, when keeping the rooks on would have led to a draw.
It is surprising how sometimes class B and class A players often do not know how to play simple pawn endings.
by friscodelrosario a few minutes ago
6/18/2015 - Paul Keres vs. Verbak, corres, 1932
by turkhuu_5 4 minutes ago
Some uneducated moderator has removed my content
by kleelof 4 minutes ago
6/27/2015 - M.Tal - R.Dzidzichashvili, 1991
by bluebird21 4 minutes ago
Chess.com users should be REQUIRED to use REAL NAMES.
by tkbunny 4 minutes ago
Beating a grandmaster or an international master...
by ChessOptimist 6 minutes ago
Why Not 2. NC3??
by Fiveofswords 7 minutes ago
by Jion_Wansu 8 minutes ago
by yeres30 10 minutes ago
Should chess be considered a sport?
by wolverine96 12 minutes ago
Why Join | Chess Topics |
Help & Support |
© 2015 Chess.com
• Chess - English
We are working hard to make Chess.com available in over 70 languages. Check back over the year as we develop the technology to add more, and we will try our best to notify you when your language is ready for translating!