The method shown in my diagram works this way ...
1) threaten to use check to force the king up a rank if he reaches the opposition square
2) threaten to flank the king (when he goes to the edge you move up) when he reaches a position near the edge of the board if he does not move to the opposition square
3) when he is near the edge use the box method to put the king in a box created by the rook.
Thank you for the illustration. That makes sense. I can see where, in the above scenerio, a combination of the box method to start could be switched to the other method too if one wanted. Usng the box so you don't have to chase up the board. Both methods will work but the box is more efficient for sure.
There are some vids on YouTube which show this method, but I once tested it out with the king starting on the third rank and the fifty move limit was actually reached right before checkmate was delivered.
...Why would the chess players want to play that way? Firstly black would want to keep his king in the center at all times if possible and only move it closer to the edge if he is forced. Secondly white would want to limit black's possibilities to move away from the edge when such an opportunity occurs. But for some reason both players in your example avoid those rather logical ideas.
[COMMENT DELETED] (made a double post by mistake)
If you are comfortable with the method that you use and are successfull then that is what is important.
But if you want a faster method practice by yourself on a board with the actual pieces. Play both side and make the best moves that you can and you will be successful.
Bye for now and good luck.
There are some vids on YouTube which show this method, but I once tested it out with the king starting on the third rank and the fifty move limit was actually reached right before checkmate was delivered.
...Why would the chess players want to play that way? Firstly black would want to keep his king in the center at all times if possible and only move it closer to the edge if he is forced. Secondly white would want to limit black's possibilities to move away from the edge when such an opportunity occurs. But for some reason both players in your example avoid those rather logical ideas.
black cannot keep his king in the center - when he steps into the opposition (i.e. opposite the white king with 1 square between them) the rook gives a check on the same rank as the king and he has to move up to the next rank because he can't move to one of the squares controlled by the enemy king
black cannot keep his king in the center - when he steps into the opposition (i.e. opposite the white king with 1 square between them) the rook gives a check on the same rank as the king and he has to move up to the next rank because he can't move to one of the squares controlled by the enemy king
I did not say that black could keep his king in the center. I said that he would want to keep his king in the center at all times if possible and only move it closer to the edge if he is forced. So that would be black's plan. Of course he can not keep it in the center if white forces him to go. But we saw an example where black voluntered to move his king closer to the edge and that makes no sense at all.
From the starting position there are 2 quicker ways to move the enemy king from the third rank. I think the term "box method" is probably used to describe any move that does not occur in the first method.
The objective is NOT ----- > "to move the king from the third rank".
The objective (of the Box Method) is -----> to confine the opposing K into a smaller and smaller Box until the opposing K is driven to the edge of the board where Mate is accomplished.
With 1.Rh4 the Black K can move around only in a 16-square box (a3-h3 and a2-h2).
With 1.Rf1 the Black K can move around in a 30-square box (a3-e3, a4-e4, a5-e5, a6-e6, a7-e7, and a8-e8).
1.Rf1 is OK except that it provides Black's K 30 squares to move around compared to 1.Rh4 where Black's K is confined to only 16 squares.
I am sorry I wasn't trying to explain the box method, there are after all many ways to force the king to the edge and simply putting the rook on the 3rd or 4th rank inevitably leads to a flanking manauver ... you can call it the box method if you want but again white uses the opposition to force checkmate.
The objective in a K+R vs. K ending is NOT just to force checkmate
The objective is not only to force checkmate but to do it in the quickest possible manner.
Will 1.Rf1 accomplish checkmate much quicker than 1.Rh4?
If 1.Rf1 can accomplish checkmate much quicker, then it is the preferable move. Otherwise 1.Rh4 is the best move.
The diagram below is an example of what I mean by "the quickest possible manner".
The move 1.Re7 is NOT the quickest possible manner of accomplishing mate.
1.Re7 will accomplish mate
---> in at least 3 more moves instead of 2 more moves (1...Kc8 2.Kc6 Kd8 3.Re6 Kc8 4.Re8#)
OR
---> in at most 4 more moves (1...Kc8 2.Kc6 Kb8 3.Re8+ Ka7 4.Rc8 Ka3 5.Ra8#.
The quickest possible manner of accomplishing checkmate is in 3 moves not 4 moves nor 5 moves.
And I thought you were a novice so I decided to explain the opposition ! Does that happen to you often? lol. Seriously I have known how to checkmate an opponent with a king and rook for a very long time ... if you study the tempo usage at the ending of this K+R+N vs K+R ending you will see how after the Knight is exchanged for my opponents Rook I am able to force checkmate in the corner by forcefully threatening to put my King on c6.
Why did you have pawns on the board?
Why did you have pawns on the board?
I could not capture all my opponents pawns before the end, and I would prefer not to exchange the pawns because I have an extra knight, so if the rooks exchange I would have a chance to make a Queen if I can take the pawns.
However the example shows how to use the c6, f6, c3 and f3 squares in a checkmate, and once the king is within the corner 9 squares the checkmate is very simple.
It's ok, the checkmate was all done using conditional moves- there is no 50 move draw and no stalemate, thats probably why my opponent resigned.
I agree with the line you have given, however its the same idea, I moved to Rb4 because this move can be the same in both variations and there is nothing white can do, if the white king tries
71. Ka5 Rb4 72. Ka6 {only move} Ra4#
after 70...Kc6, however the result was the same + I didn't even have to wait 3 weeks.
The other option was a 44 move knight tour before finally delivering checkmate so of course my opponent had to resign ... (I wouldn't want to be a jerk though)
From the starting position there are 2 quicker ways to move the enemy king from the third rank. I think the term "box method" is probably used to describe any move that does not occur in the first method.