https://www.chess.com/daily/game/271747706
The game in question. It is a 960 game, but the set up is pretty close to a standard game and doesn't affect my question about endgame strategy.
King + Pawn vs. King
Sort:
General wisdom on K+P vs K is that to win, you need one of the following things to be true:
1. The enemy king is too far away (outside the square of the pawn) to catch it
2. Your king is two squares in front of the pawn or you can get there safely and it's not a rook pawn.
3. Your king is one square in front of the pawn but you have opposition and it's not a rook pawn.
For the last of those three scenarios, opposition is having your king directly across from the opponent's king, where they have the move (so they have to step out of the way). In the case of the game you show, you end up in a king and pawn, but your king cannot get two squares in front of the pawn because the enemy king is there, nor can it get one square in front of the pawn with opposition, so the opponent can force a draw by continually staying in the way. Your king can never get far enough ahead to support the pawn's advance.
In the game, I only looked at the endgame since that was where you had questions, but the place where I think you go wrong is move 35. You are up two pawns, but they are blockaded up and one of the most powerful remaining pieces, your king, is backed against the wall. The white rook is a dominant piece, pinning your knight and keeping your king away. If you can get that rook out of your hair, you should be able to win with two extra pawns, and you have a way to do it. Here is the sequence I would have looked at at that point to try and untangle the position and get your extra material to count. The plan is to run the king over to the rook, forcing it away, then untangle knight and rook, trade pawns, and get to it. Here's one sequence I would suggest to do that:
If you want to see why each of those three scenarios I listed are winning, let me know and I can put in a diagram showing the pattern to win up the pawn with Opposition and explain why that wins. In your games, you want to avoid trading to a K+P endgame unless one of those circumstances is present.
Jul 24, 2020
0
#5
That pawn+king endgame was drawn as soon as it appeared on the board. That is because white had the opposition. White played with the proper drawing technique until the end. Just check out chess.com's lessons on the opposition
Jul 24, 2020
0
#6
Thanks guys! I know I should have just agreed to a draw, but I was desperate and hoping he would make a mistake. I really need to beef up my endgame skills.
Even before the kings were off the board, it was a drawn endgame. I was looking at the analysis, and your opponent was actually winning until he played the move a6, making the endgame drawn from that point on. So the result of the pawn endgame really had nothing to do with you, your opponent just kept the position drawn and there was nothing you could do about it.
N00BM4STER wrote:
Even before the kings were off the board, it was a drawn endgame. I was looking at the analysis, and your opponent was actually winning until he played the move a6, making the endgame drawn from that point on. So the result of the pawn endgame really had nothing to do with you, your opponent just kept the position drawn and there was nothing you could do about it.
True - but I don't think it was always drawn. Go back to move 35 and I think black had serious winning chances. The error was not finding enough activity for your pieces in the endgame. Moving the king over there as I showed would have given much better chances. Unfortunately, you played a lot of moves with a piece or more neutralized and were unable to take advantage of the material edge, and it became drawn (and was drawn for a long time as N00B pointed out). The K+P that resulted as Lonteon said was a straightforward draw based on them having opposition.
masterdean00 wrote:
N00BM4STER wrote:
Even before the kings were off the board, it was a drawn endgame. I was looking at the analysis, and your opponent was actually winning until he played the move a6, making the endgame drawn from that point on. So the result of the pawn endgame really had nothing to do with you, your opponent just kept the position drawn and there was nothing you could do about it.
True - but I don't think it was always drawn. Go back to move 35 and I think black had serious winning chances. The error was not finding enough activity for your pieces in the endgame. Moving the king over there as I showed would have given much better chances. Unfortunately, you played a lot of moves with a piece or more neutralized and were unable to take advantage of the material edge, and it became drawn (and was drawn for a long time as N00B pointed out). The K+P that resulted as Lonteon said was a straightforward draw based on them having opposition.
What I meant was it was drawn once the move a6 was played by white. createsure had said that he was wanting to improve his king and pawn vs king endgames, and I was just mentioning that during that time, and even some before it, it was already drawn, so the outcome of the king and pawn vs king section had nothing to do with his skill.
Sometimes my lack of chess knowledge is thrown into the light and exposed, and I am forced to admit to myself the fact that I am still a beginner.
In a recent game that was neck-and-neck and quite exciting, I managed to have a pawn and king against their only king in the endgame. I was so happy that I was actually going to pull off the win, and then I didn't. It was a tie, with their king on the back rank, 2 spaces in front of my pawn, with my king unable to assist in kicking their king out of there and promoting for the win.
Does anyone have any pointers or good articles/videos on this situation? I want to know it like the back of my hand, and my endgame is my weakest link right now.