Do you even need this crap when trying to get better at chess?

like in terms of CHECKMATE exercises, because other than that, it is just normal chess game, so other things other than checkmate in "endgame" activity is useless.

Anyway, do you even need this thingy to be good at chess? I mean, I don't think there's gonna be any chance of there being only one king for the opposing player, and only king, and 2 rooks for ya in real game. And also, in real game, I just try to do what is best and bam, checkmate. So I really see no point in doing these exercises. How should I really get better at chess? Are there any other activities that are better than this?

Just as there are "openings" when starting a chess game (checkmates are far out of sight) there is "endgame theory" when finishing it. It is not about K vs K+2R but about material distributions where finding a checkmate is hard like K+Q vs K+R or K vs K+B+N. Keep in mind that you cannot make endless tries to find the checkmate in a game as you will run into the 50-move rule - which says that your opponent can claim a draw if you don't move a pawn or capture a piece or pawn in 50 moves. You probably think that 50 is a lot but many theoretical endgames require a large number of moves to checkmate even when you play the best moves. So take my word for it, you'll need the endgame theory in your games.

Yes. However, I would say I've had more than a hundred games that have been won because I have known these positions. Believe me, they happen much more frequently than you think. Learn the easy ones: Single queen mate, promoting pawn, and rook mate, and you should be set for a long time. However, there are probably better things to do before this, like: actually playing chess. You have 3 games against bots on your account. 3.

You sound like a 900 level player and then I saw that you are 800. Please read in depth the advice of others, grasshopper! Mic drop!

If you don't know what type of positions are winnable then you don't know what to play for and what to avoid. I was playing a lower rated player at a big OTB tournament and he was very happy to stay materially even for about 30 moves. I told him that he may have been materially even but he lost it on move six when he allowed me to double and isolate his h pawns. I then simply traded off pieces to win it in the endgame.

In another OTB tournament game against somebody just a little lower rated we each had K+R+B+7P with our bishops traveling on opposite colored squares. I offered a Rook trade to go into the Bishop and Pawns ending that he wanted to draw (with Bishops on opposite colored squares and even Pawns you can figure on a better than 99% chance of a draw). He quickly traded Rooks and eventually discovered that the pawn position was one that allowed my King to penetrate decisively.

Learning simple endings allows you to see how to go from somewhat more complicated endings to those simple ones, then from somewhat complicated middle games to those advantageous somewhat complicated endings, then from complex positions to those somewhat complicated middle games or endings. Eventually you will be able to see the occasional opening edge that is likely to lead to a won endgame.

Yes.

There are people who can´t solve finals and you have a chance for stalemate

Chess is the one place where the more crap you have in your head, the better you are.

No, but grandmasters do.

Hi

Normally your opponent should resign if they are down a Queen or 2 Rooks but in speed chess it is not always the case, especially if you play with no increment (for instance 3|0 game) when your opponent hopes for a draw if your run out of time. So a good technique with those endgames may payback. But once you solved already a couple of puzzles on those you will do better if you go for most difficult endgames like Pawn + King for instance.

Good luck!

After you stalemate your opponent a couple times with R+R+Q+B+N vs K or some other insane material advantage like that, you will understand why these exercises are useful.

Endgame needed for understandhard position. Study endgame for pattern you not know.

You are only a new beginner. You need aĺl kind of traìning for years to be and good.

If you find the puzzles in one chapter skip a few ahead. If they are still too easy survey the next few chapters and then see if you are met with a challenge. I have "1001 winning chess sacrifices and combinations". The puzzles are difficult from the beginning peppered with harder problems even master players have trouble with. There is another book which seems like what you may be reading wihich is called "1001 winning chess combinations and sacrifices for beginners".

What do you really need to know to be good at chess?

1. Tactics and Strategy

2. basic opening principles

3. know how to attack and defend

4. endgame principles (this is probably the most important because players of equal strength will arrive at the endgame level. That is usually 1500 and above I would say.).

This is a good start.

I've lost so many games because I'm bad at end games you have to be up like 10 material to beat someone who knows this theory

Bit like saying, "Do I even need to know where I'm going before I get on a bus?".

The OP's name is really Gretel. Her life story made headlines in the last century when she was left in the woods with her sibling Hänsel by their father and stepmother. I don't recall the details but I know they wanted to leave the woods and had to wait for a whole year for the next bus to arrive. Right on schedule as the bus operator later claimed in court! Gretel is still wrestling with the PTSD aftereffects of the experience which explains why she drops weird coded messages in numerous Internet Forums!

Well knowing endgames makes converting small advantages much easier. It gives you a nice easy framework for your game to evolve around, especially if you want to know whether to accept a trade down or not.