highly recommended! 👍
Queen v Rook Position
Sort:
I have checked out the Grimmel videos.
I have downloaded his database.
OMG
Apparently if saving civilization as we know it depended on solving a QvR problem, Derek Grimmel is the man they would call upon.
this is the critical position. create this with black to move & u could win funbus carlsen. so just triangulate...
...
...
May 5, 2022
0
#26
correct, although derek grimmell points out another win with his 'javelin' videos:
iirc the idea is to force the rook & king to separate & then pick off the rook with a series of checks. 🙂
There are several points to be made on this endgame:
1) It is very rare. I have never played one or seen one in OTB play.
2)I'm sure it is well worth studying as an exercise in broadening one's appreciation of the queen versus rook geometry. For my own part I've never had a bishop and knight against king endgame over the board except on chess. com when a non-resigning opponent has been an excellent foil for my practice of this particular endgame. After studying the B and N endgame I did become my aware of how my minor pieces covered squares to lesser or greater degrees. By the same token I imagine a student of the queen v rook endgame will accrue benefits beyond that particular endgame.
The book "Secrets of Pawnless Endings" covers this quite well. There actually are some "fortress" type positions in which, even with best play, a draw is the result. In OTB games, with the pressure of the clock involved, some GMs have had to settle for a draw because they needed more time in an actually winning position to figure out the best moves.
Curiously enough, I put my copy of "Secrets of Pawnless Endings" on Ebay a few days ago. I've hardly ever opened it :-)
May 7, 2022
0
#30
Ziggy_Zugzwang wrote:
There are several points to be made on this endgame:
1) It is very rare. I have never played one or seen one in OTB play.
2)I'm sure it is well worth studying as an exercise in broadening one's appreciation of the queen versus rook geometry. For my own part I've never had a bishop and knight against king endgame over the board except on chess. com when a non-resigning opponent has been an excellent foil for my practice of this particular endgame. ...
According to the stats published in Müller & Lamprecht, taken from the ChessBase Mega Database 2001, king and queen v. king and rook occurs about 20 times as frequently as king, bishop and knight v. king.
I've had it twice that I remember (once in the first dozen or so games I ever played) but never the bishop and knight ending.
Interesting. Thanks...
I've seen bishop and knight twice OTB in my 45yrs plus of chess. Once carried out by some GM in London during a rapid-play in the 90s and six or seven years ago when a team mate couldn't convert. I think in a way being on the inferior side in the bishop and knight endgame might be a measure of some success as the losing side as some how contrived to sacrifice to get rid of all the opponent's pawns.
I have been on the wrong side of Q and K against N and K. My opponent chased my around the perimeter of the board before converting...
May 7, 2022
0
#32
once you know the patterns, then converting B + N isn't particularly difficult... i even managed to complete the 5 mates on endgame trainer in under a minute;
Q v R is extraordinarily tricky however, as it's very easy to go wrong & allow a fortress, stalemate or 50-move draw with the slightest inaccuracy.
technical_knockout wrote:
correct, although derek grimmell points out another win with his 'javelin' videos:
iirc the idea is to force the rook & king to separate & then pick off the rook with a series of checks. 🙂
derek doesnt have any novel way. its just the same basic stuff from the 1850's. kinda like calling it rouge insteada blush. run it thru AZ & see.
May 8, 2022
0
#34
gonna respectfully disagree with you on that one, as the superior chess engine technique hadn't been discovered yet & AZ is retired.
May 8, 2022
0
#35
Many such examples analysed in Averbakh's Comprehensive Chess Endings first published in English c. 1970. (That volume's in the cellar so I can't quote the original dates.)
Scuze my ignorance (as TGL might say) but what's AZ?
The book "Secrets of Pawnless Endings" covers this quite well. There actually are some "fortress" type positions in which, even with best play, a draw is the result.
no theres not. there is not ONE way to avoid # . o/w show me the fortress ur talking abt. and walk-in stalemates like below are NOT fortresses.
like 1..Rf6 stalemate
this is a ex of the most common fortress. but were talking abt Q Vs just R...
In OTB games, with the pressure of the clock involved, some GMs have had to settle for a draw because they needed more time in an actually winning position to figure out the best moves.
its cuz they didnt know what they were doing. and trust me...the 1st thing they did afterwards was learn how to triangulate.
technical_knockout wrote:
gonna respectfully disagree with you on that one, as the superior chess engine technique hadn't been discovered yet & AZ is retired.
well then run it thru ur FAVORITE silicon ultra grandmistress. see how far it gets ya...yee !
May 9, 2022
0
#38
there are actually some fortress positions that you can get into that are unwinnable.
I can appreciate newbie4711's opinion. I've been spending buckets of time on this - it's insane how much harder it is than knight+bishop. In my case it's a combo of "exercise for the student" and "irrational obsession". I think my pattern recognition skills are getting better, but is it worth it? (But then the obsession part kicks in and I resume studying.) I'll check out the Grimmel videos - maybe after the countless hours I've spent on this some things will kick in and start to make sense.