avoid lose
Chess.com's Weekly Study: November 7th 2016
Sort:
Very nice and I missed the black promotion defense (I don't solve against the interface)! This study is a good example of the function of tablebase analysis in endgame verification. One of the variations is a very tricky ending that even GM-level players would wrestle with. I assume the author spent many hours to check it back in 1927 but a modern composer would feed it to Nalimov and know its status in a second. The proper attitude for a solver is to understand that an arduous endgame can never be the outcome of an aesthetic study and "feel" its proper score in the context of the whole solution. I never said that solving is an exact science!
Nov 7, 2016
0
#4
Arisktotle wrote:
One of the variations is a very tricky ending that even GM-level players would wrestle with.
I haven't found that line. How does it go?
n9531l schreef: I haven't found that line. How does it go?
It's the line after 6. Kf1?. Black wins the white pawn quickly but then needs to sweat to find a strategy to dislodge the mad white hopper. Of course, if you see 6. Kd1! right away you won't have a problem but if not you first need to understand that the ensuing 'tablebase fight' cannot be the objective of the study!
I play a few random tablebase endings every day and it is very hard to predict when and how to win the N+P vs N endings. I am always glad to see a few moves ahead and then adjust my plan to the counterplay. Usually get them right in the end though.
Solved it with no mistakes
that was monumental
Hello Chess.com!
Starting with 2016, we will be posting a Weekly Study, courtesy of Yochanan Afek, Grandmaster for composing endgame studies. These challenging positions are designed to stimulate (and improve upon!) your creativity, depth of calculation, pattern recognition and pure imagination.
E. Somov Nasimovich, 1927
Enjoy!