Corresponding squares

Hola Berder,

Rooperi and Escapest_pawn have given precious links to another topics where Tantale has posted a bunch of examples.

Dvoretsky's Endgame Manual and The Final Countdown are mentioned (the first time I hear about the later, while Dvoretsky's Manual is explicitly for players rated above 2200 ELO). I would point you to Maizelis' "Pawn endings" (I don't know if there is an English version of that; I know there are Russian and Spanish versions available), as well as Averbakh & Maizelis "Pawn Endings". That's the book that treats and explains corresponding squares.

Here is also a couple items of advice how to reach and understand corresponding squares concept:

-First learn the concept of "weak" (Nunn calls them "critical"), and "strong" squares of a bare pawn (e.g. bare pawn on e4 has weak squares on d4, f4 and e5, while "strong" on d5 and f5, since the opposing king can't step onto these squares).

-Second learn the concept of "key" squares in KPvK endgame (Averbakh & Maizelis, again - note that many excellent books on engame, such as Fine and Benko's Fundamental Chess Endings doesn't mention the concept at all).

-Third learn the concept of "key", "strong" and "weak" squares in KPvKP. Note that "weak" squares of a pawn blocked on e4 aren't the same as of a passed pawn on e4 (See Averbakh & Maizelis).

-Fourth learn the concept of "poisoned" squares in KPvKP

Once you do all of that, you are ready to study corresponding squares according to Averbakh & Maizelis, it will unroll in front of you as a piece of cake. They start to appear in KPPvKP. Limit yourself to a couple of "simple" positions, don't go further. Once you understand two easiest positions from the Averbakh & Maizelis' book, go and play chess for a year or two, and then come back and do the other positions from the book and the topic to which the links were given by Rooperi and Escapest_pawn.

My 2 cents also is to avoid computer in studying these, just a book and a board in front of you.

Caveat - I don't consider myself an expert neither in chess nor in coaching.

64idi0t, do you understand corresponding squares?  Can you apply them to the position in the OP to number the squares and explain how you did that?

Berder, I meanwhile had a quick read over The Final Countdown, and I find it an excellent book.

Do I understand the corresponding squares? I don't know if I do. Once I meet it OTB and manage to win, then I'd dare to say I do. A kind of.

OP position is not one of corresponding squares (unless you take corresponding squares in broader sense, meaning every opposition is actually corresponding squares; that might be kind of a truth, but it is not what we mean as corresponding squares), some posters before have already pointed to that. It's a distant opposition and outflanking, not corresponding squares.

Edit: It's a bit late where I am so you will have to wait until tomorow for my 2 cents if you want to read the explanation. But I have already said that I'm not an expert and given you advice which you are free to follow or reject.

Berder, while we are waiting for my 2 cents on the position, please do the following:

-list here the weak squares of black pawn and the strong ones;

-list here the weak squares of each of the white pawns, and the strong ones;

-list the weak and strong squares of all the pawns in case of pawn exchange, i.e. c5-dxc5 position.

-list the key squares of the remaining white pawn in case of c5-dxc5-Kxc5 sequence.

Berder, until you post what I have asked from you in my previous post, I'll be considering you are not interested in hearing my answer anymore.

I'd be interested in your answer if it involved corresponding squares.  But you have already said you don't know if you understand corresponding squares, and you don't believe it can be used in this position.

But I will answer your question.  As for the key squares after the pawn exchange, they are c6, d6, e6, c7, d7, and e7.  If white can occupy any of those squares he can promote the pawn.  You didn't ask, but before the pawn exchange, I believe the key squares for white are c6 and e6.

I don't see what weak and strong squares have to do with pawn endgames.  Weak and strong squares are more of a midgame technique.  Did you just want me to list what squares the pawns attack?  Sounds silly to me.

I'm pretty sure corresponding squares can be used since this is a king and pawn endgame with blocked pawns.  I can identify several pairs of corresponding squares and confirm they are mutual zugzwang, with the aid of an endgame tablebase.  So it can be used, it's simply a question of how much is possible.

That is not quite what I said, but never mind.

Yes, I did ask (explained in the next paragraph), and, no, these are not the only key squares before the exchange. As a consequence, you cannot possibly understand the corresponding squares concept before you know the key squares. You can't do the proper calculation because you don't know what you are calculating. I have also asked about the weak and strong squares before the exchange for black as well.

It's not silly at all. If you had studied Averbakh & Maizelis, you'd have learned that the weak squares of a blocked pawn become the key squares for the opponent. And there are two pawns blocking each other in this position - white blocked pawn protected, while black blocked pawn hanging. Moreover, in case of blocked pawns, the weak/key squares are extended accross the board according to specific rules, but I'll let you discover theese by yourself by reading Averbakh and Maizelis' book. Heck, the goal here is not suppesed to be that I prove that I understand the concept and can calculate it well, than that you learn it.

As I have already said, it depends on what we consider under "the corresponding squares" notion. I had the opportunity to listen to the reasoning that the opposition as a method for winning the key squares is actually a type of corresponding squares concept, but a precise one, because there are the squares that correspond to each other in simple KPvK. Corresponding squares as understood here, and what we are supposed to discuss, are a remainder of the positions not already having been covered and explained by opposition as a method for fighting for key squares.

The position you set does not have all pawns blocked, therefore, I wouldn't consider it a clear and clean corresponding squares position. And clear and clean examples are what one should study to get a grasp on any concept, not only in chess. For instance, there was a calculation above where black would have won by using the poisoned squares concept and trebouchet position.

Once you find time to study what I have written above, from the sources I've referred, we can continue here.

I find my knowledge of corresponding squares helps me, in those positions where it occurs, which admittedly is probably about 1 or 2 games a year out of over 100.  It is a huge advantage in those positions to be able to identify the corresponding squares quickly and move appropriately. Had I attempted to calculate those positions, not only would I probably have been unable to do so, I would not have had enough time.

Given that corresponding squares problems arised in about couple of dozens of known games, this would be a thunder-news into the chess world that you had such a luck of having so many such games. Would you enlighten us with some of such positions that had occured in your games?

Corresponding squares situations occur far more frequently than "a couple dozen known games". The most common type I get into is where a pair of pawns block each other with three adjacent key squares next to my opponents pawn on the same rank and I use simple corresponding squares to gain access to one of the three key squares. This type of situation is in fact extremely common. I see it quite regularly in lots of games, not just mine.

I'm not quite sure that I understand your description. Could you post the position in diagram, or describe it such as: White: Ke4, e3, c5 Black: Kd7, c6

This isn't from one of my games ( I don't have access to my games right now. I play over the board ,but it is kind of typical of one of the types of situations I sometimes see with 3 key adjacent squares and two pawns against one.

White Kg4,h4  Black Kf8,g6,h6  -- Black to move

In fact the simple example of a a single pawn endgame is an example of corresponding squares although it is a trivial one.   

I remember having a fairly non-trivial corresponding squares position just a few months ago but unfortunately do not remember the position.

I think a lot of club players get into these types of positions but just don't recognize them as corresponding squares as they are unaware of the theory.

I"m affraid this is not what Maizelis (and others) understand as corresponding squares. Though, you are right, in a broad sense, the squares corresponds even in a simple KPvK opposition. The position here is won by black by outflanking.

Corresponding squares are a kind of overloading.

64idi0t:

I got very interested on the concept "poisoned squares" in pawn endings. I ordered, from amazon.com, the book of Averbakh and Maizelis, so attractive all the concepts you cite appeared to me. Shipment is not so ready to my country. If possible, 64idi0t , could you, please, advance some "tutorial-like-as-possible" definitions, aspects, ocurrences of "poisoned squares", as Averbakh-Maizelis see them? Please note: no matter as brief or amateurish they may look, they still will be certainly helpful for me and I'll thank you very much for that.

@bemcertinho

Duh. O.K. I'll try to post a blog about this in the next couple of days/a week or two.

The problem is, it can't be "a tutorial-like". Unlike rook endings, which mainly need to be memorized, pawn endings need to be understood. And the understanding is to be gained gradually.

The main problem is "jumping" - most people don't understand KPvK ending. Heck, even Fine & Benko (and it is considered among the best book on endings, with novelties in Queen endings) don't introduce the key squares concept. Muller and Lampraht do, but at the end they point that in KPvK it is a draw if pawn advance to 7th rank by giving check to the defending king on 8th rank - that is true, but it shows that they either don't understand the concept of key squares, or they don't want the readers of their book to understand it.

Final countdown is excellent, really, I've learned that it was first time corresponding squares are explained in English, but they don't treat KPvK and key squares concept - they assume one already know it, and that is usually a wrong assumptions (and not their fault - the book is about CS, not about opposition).

I've already given tips for studying certain notions before biting into corresponding squares, but I see you have already read them. Therefore, I'll post it in a blog as promissed. Track me, or send a friend request.

You'll also owe me. Once you understand it, you owe me to learn about it at least one kid who is eager to know and know to ask for it. You should also charge him with the same request. Confirm that you'll fulfill this by replying here, and expect a blog as promissed.

Sure, 64idi0t, I'm surrounded by kids eager to learn about chess. They pushed me back, to learn and re-learn, urging me to understand things toughly to, after that, explain them smoothly. I'm trying to buy the book on Pawn Endings, by Averbakh and Maizelis, but having difficulties in delivery to my address. I'll certainly look for help at your blog. I'm sending, right know, a friend request.

bemcertinho, have you tried looking for 'Secrets of Pawn Endings' by Muller and Lamprecht? That's a good book in my opinion.