# Equal Endgames are not easy!

I think the point is this:

If 2 gm's reach the 1st position, they will agree to draw.

If I reach the 1st position against a gm (playing either side) and offer a draw, he would and should laugh at me.

And there are no resources to teach me how to wipe that smirk off his face :)

Joshua Waitzkin's endgame courses are brilliant - by far the most principled I've come across. For them you'll need Chessmaster 10 GM edition - a very worthwhile investment!

KarlPilkington wrote:

These positions you guys are posting are dynamic and very tactical.  A computer could solve them, and if I spent 10-15 minutes I could find the winning line.

The whole point of this post was about symetrical positions which are 0.00 eval, totally equal.  There are no wins, and indeed, they should be draws.

Apples and oranges, my friends.

Well there's nothing to do that will give you an advantage, only things you can do that make you lose.  Stay active and protect your pieces and you wont lose.  There's nearly nothing to say theoretically about the position.  If you're unsure about how to play it I'm serious when I say play it out vs a computer (or a friend) a few times until you begin to get a feel for it.

The position posted in #13 is actually an incredibly deep study that requires NINE perfect moves in a row for White to win.

I don't think that was the point the OP was trying to make.

Yes I was looking at it was tough but I found the solution. Kf6 Kh7 g4 g5 Kf7(the point of Kf6) now if black retreats Kg6 wins easily. So black tries h5 h4! now if hxg4 hxg6 and white promotes on g8 stopping black from queening. and if gxh4 g5 h3 g6+ Kh6 g7 h2 g8=Q and black gets mated on g6. A very nice study.

It's pretty difficult for either side to make a losing move in the first position.

gumersindo wrote:

Yes I was looking at it was tough but I found the solution. Kf6 Kh7 g4 g5 Kf7(the point of Kf6) now if black retreats Kg6 wins easily. So black tries h5 h4! now if hxg4 hxg6 and white promotes on g8 stopping black from queening. and if gxh4 g5 h3 g6+ Kh6 g7 h2 g8=Q and black gets mated on g6. A very nice study.

Hang on though, wouldn't Kf6 Kh7 g4 h5! save the day for black?

Ah no, you are right, white doesn't have to take on h5. Kf6 Kh7 g4 h5 g5! and eventually zugzwang and g6 drops

yes correct g5 would win for white if h5

Scottrf wrote:

It's pretty difficult for either side to make a losing move in the first position.

Unless I'm one of the players!

Regarding the position in post #13...

It took me a few minutes to find Black's drawing resource after 1.Kf7.

I was just reading a book review which summed up the difference between strong players and amateurs:

Strong players analyse games and books, amateurs play through games and books. Simply reading the solution is not going to help a player to improve.

You gotta question the moves in a game, try them out, and most importantly, keep notes of the work you do so you can go back and improve on it!

Choose some classic endgames and see if you can beat your computer from the winning side. For instance, try winning as White from Alekhine-Capablanca:

SmyslovFan wrote:

The position posted in #13 is actually an incredibly deep study that requires NINE perfect moves in a row for White to win.

I don't think that was the point the OP was trying to make.

Exactly.

Scottrf wrote:

It's pretty difficult for either side to make a losing move in the first position.

Believe it or not, i lost that position.  He penetrated with his king, and my king sort of got cut off from the action.  I made a few weakening pawn moves, and eventually I lost to some cheap tactic.

SmyslovFan wrote:

Regarding the position in post #13...

It took me a few minutes to find Black's drawing resource after 1.Kf7.

I was just reading a book review which summed up the difference between strong players and amateurs:

Strong players analyse games and books, amateurs play through games and books. Simply reading the solution is not going to help a player to improve.

You gotta question the moves in a game, try them out, and most importantly, keep notes of the work you do so you can go back and improve on it!

Choose some classic endgames and see if you can beat your computer from the winning side. For instance, try winning as White from Alekhine-Capablanca:

I've studied that famous endgame.  Its great to study, but its not an example of a dead drawn endgame.

I just need to see some basic techniques of people playing out equal positions.  Problem is that they never play them out.

@Plinky, you will find (copious numbers of) "equal endgames" in the Nunn books referenced above.

And if you want to be completely overwhelmed by the theory (and excruciating details) behind those "equal endgames," buy Dvoretsky's Endgame Manual.

But be warned, Dvoretsky is fairly impenetrable, and thoroughly convoluted, IMHO.

zborg wrote:

But be warned, Dvoretsky is fairly impenetrable, and thoroughly convoluted, IMHO.

Whilst going through the Dvoretsky book, I felt like I was learning a lot from it. But it didn't take me long after finishing it to realise my practical endgame play hadn't really improved, i.e. I had forgotten anything useful I had learned already. Whether that's a problem with the book or a problem with me is an open question.

KarlPilkington wrote:
Scottrf wrote:

It's pretty difficult for either side to make a losing move in the first position.

Believe it or not, i lost that position.  He penetrated with his king, and my king sort of got cut off from the action.  I made a few weakening pawn moves, and eventually I lost to some cheap tactic.

If you could show the actual moves then it might be possible for us to see what concretely you did wrong but I don't think it makes much sense to give any general advice on that position as it is very quiet position without any concrete threats and imbalances. There are just too many ways the game could reasonably develop wihout departing from the path to draw.

Shakaali wrote:
KarlPilkington wrote:
Scottrf wrote:

It's pretty difficult for either side to make a losing move in the first position.

Believe it or not, i lost that position.  He penetrated with his king, and my king sort of got cut off from the action.  I made a few weakening pawn moves, and eventually I lost to some cheap tactic.

If you could show the actual moves then it might be possible for us to see what concretely you did wrong but I don't think it makes much sense to give any general advice on that position as it is very quiet position without any concrete threats and imbalances. There are just too many ways the game could reasonably develop wihout departing from the path to draw.

Okay, don't have time right now, but later I will post how the game developed, and also I'll play this against a computer, as Wafflemaster suggested and post those moves.

If you are looking for equal endgames, pick almost any game Carlsen has played in the last few years against Anand, Aronian, or Kramnik and set up the position around move 25. Then try to come up with some plans and ideas on how to play it.

After spending half an hour on your own, try those ideas against your favorite silicon monster. Keep extensive notes.

When you're done with all that, compare what you've found with what the great players actually did. Go back and try again against your silicon friend.

You will get better in a hurry if you're willing to do the work.

SmyslovFan wrote:

If you are looking for equal endgames, pick almost any game Carlsen has played in the last few years against Anand, Aronian, or Kramnik and set up the position around move 25. Then try to come up with some plans and ideas on how to play it.

After spending half an hour on your own, try those ideas against your favorite silicon monster. Keep extensive notes.

When you're done with all that, compare what you've found with what the great players actually did. Go back and try again against your silicon friend.

You will get better in a hurry if you're willing to do the work.

Do you recommend any specific Carlsen game that might be similar to the rook position that I posted?