Bishop, Knight & King versus King.

That last one looks Familiar ...  hmmm
seen it somewhere or other.

I wasn't forced to do that on here yet.

However it takes me one minute to do the whole dance from pushing you to the corner and walking you the one your going to be executed on. 

Endgame section under the learn heading. Sharpens the blades.

I did however have the defending side and used the fact that it's not the average checkmate to achieve so I got my draw

In other words you got the engine to go over the 50 move mark ??
????    

But I think that only works if your bishop is very well out of it. In most positions you hit potential stalemates if you try to drive the king along the edge KNNKP fashion. And driving the lone king along a whole edge with K+N in any case relies on the lone king being unwilling to settle for incarceration in any corner. In this case he doesn't too much mind a wrong corner.

The lone King having a pawn means he loses against two knights?
I never looked into that one.

I knew about the lone knight plus King versus 'rook-pawn' plus King.
But its probably seldom a win.
I think a player could go through a lifetime of chess games without seeing such a win in his games even once. I've never encountered it.
Regarding Bishop and Knight versus King - it is difficult -
And part of the difficulty is that there seems to be no short way to properly describe the key points.

Just saying - force the K to the edge and then a correct corner and then mate - .... doesn't do the job. That's just glossing over it.
Its not hopeless to try and describe it properly though.
How many True points are there in it - and then how many words to accurately describe them?
A 'project'.

I usually can do it in about 40 moves against stockfish, I practice by putting my pieces in 3 corners and the computers king in the center to make it as difficult as possible. However stockfish seems to run the king to the edge/corner faster than it has to, so it seems easier even if it just takes longer. The main thing is to learn this pattern:

It's important to play the order of these moves accurately, especially when the king starts to escape a little on f6, you have to cut off escape squares exactly. I don't know the exact technique to get the king from the center to the edge though.

Forcing the King to the edge is probably the easiest part by far.
Since you have two extra pieces to move you have total zugzwang advantage.
To get his King out of the center you just bring your King there.
His King has to keep yielding to your King.
You don't need the knight early.
Just use your bishop to deprive him of any of the four center squares.
He can't get back in the center because your King is then there.

You then use similiar to force him to the edge.
Mostly with the bishop.

You use the knight only to burn a move when you want to.
For example your King and his King in opposition with your bishop in the middle square between them.
Now you move your knight somewhere.
And Bingo - his King has to move Back. He can't 'hang out'.

But that's the easy part. The final mating isn't that hard either.
The tough tough thing is forcing his King to a corner controlled by your bishop - without letting his King 'bounce off' the edge too much and heading back out into midboard open country.

There's something called Deletang's triangles for that.
But that's not sufficient. Because 'motifs' are needed too.
Even if one masters it - you could find it forgotten a few weeks later.
The mind rebels.
Doesn't want to hold onto that visual Info.

Black does best to play 6...Kg7 followed by 7...Kf6, when White can no longer play 8.Bg5. Also he should prefer 8...Ke8 or even 8...Kf8 to 8...Kg7 in your sequence. Also 13.Ne6 Kh7 14.Kf7 Kh8 15.Bf4 (or anywhere on c1-e3) Kh7 16.Nf8+ Kh8 17.Be5# would finish one move faster in your sequence if you were to reach the position after your move 12.

There are in fact a variety of optimal lines to mate from your starting position, so you don't need to learn that one in particular (but all optimal lines will reach the position after move 4).

6...Kg7 does nothing. It merely delays it a move.

6...Kg7 7.Be3 Kf6 8.Bf4 Kf7 9.Bg5 Ke8 10.Ke6 Kd8 11.Bf4 Ke8 12.Bc7 Kf8 13.Nf5 Ke8 14.Ng7+ Kf8 15.Kf6 Kg8 16.Kg6 Kh8 (or 16...Kf8 17.Bd6+ Kg8 is the same thing) 17.Bd6 Kg8 18.Nf5 Kh8 19.Bc5 Kg8 20.Nh6+ Kh8 21.Bd4#

This is the longest possible mate from the Knight check in the corner. So you have 29 moves to create the starting position of post 168. Note that the Bishop could be anywhere away from the King on that diagonal, so it could be on g1, f2, d4, etc, with the same solution.

I wouldn't go as far as saying it's an error. It is the mating pattern I was taught, using the W pattern for the Knight.

In the worst case scenario, it is mate in 33. If I take an extra move there, and maybe even 5 extra moves to shove you to the corner, that is 39. 1 extra moves yet from there is an eternity.

Anybody that knows how to make with B and N will not fall for the 50 move violation.

It's not an error in play, except in unusual circumstances. I meant an error in determining the mate depth of @EndgameEnthusiast2357's starting position.

(You can still make it a W pattern if you like because 10.Nf5 also works.)

The point I would make is that a large number of your opponents will not know how to mate with B and N (including my version of Rybka).

Somebody put together a collection of recorded games that finished in KBNvK on chessgames.com. All players rated 2500+ apart from one rated just below. Sixteen endgames starting from winning positions; two of them drawn where the winning side fell for the 50 move violation. (Ushenina's was added subsequently.) The only accurately played endgame was a mate in 6 when it first appeared.

This particular endgame is notorious for 50 move rule draws.

Someday in one's chess games - one might get K plus knight and bishop against LoneKing.
Maybe just once. In an important tournament game.
But one might also get Queen versus rook. Not simple.
Or the very difficult Rook plus bishop versus rook - which isn't even always a win.
One might also get opportunities to exchange down to these endings - whether as the attacker or as LoneKing.

But all of that is unlikely.
Any time invested in the study of those endings is time one didn't invest in the study of tactics (central to development and strength).

Regarding classic endings that are difficult - but come up constantly ..
key is bishop versus knight with pawns for both sides.
and rook and pawn endings. Even more common and more difficult.

I honestly forgot all those philidor positions. I really should start restudying them to refresh my endgame skills.

Rook and knight there's four classic mate types.
Rook and pawn there's at least six classic position types.
The Euwe position is most important and pivotal I'd say.
The 7th rank skewer trick should be known. Comes up in games.
The Philidor's position its a draw. Because of 'King in front'.
The Lasker position.
The Vancura position shouldn't be memorized - but one should understand when a 'rook pawn' can win when each side has a rook.
The Lucena position and bridge building. A must-know.
Point: any time invested in B+N versus King is time not spent on those.
But on the other hand ...
its a game and B+N versus lone K is an intellectual exercise!
Its neat with no 'messy' pawns.

Pawn moves and captures are irreversible, but with bishop and knight, you can always re-coordinate or play a waiting move.

Yes. Its neat. And a change.
Pawnless endings have a certain stimulation.
And the 50 move rule is cutting in more sharply - further defining the exercise.
Creating a 'finish line'. A good thing.

No. Strictly no. There aren't dozens (hundreds) of videos on Youtube, tons articles on chess sites and blogs and whatnot. These do not exist at all.