@22
I am not against study of pawn endings: you should study them just like you should study KBN vs. K despite it not occuring frequently.
Chess Fundamentals by Capablanca treats rook endings, minor piece endings, queen endings, pawn endings, and the 5 basic checkmates, all in 60 pages only.
So in his expert opinion all of it is fundamental.
@22
I am not against study of pawn endings: you should study them just like you should study KBN vs. K despite it not occuring frequently.
Umm, I guess it's techinically correct to describe pawn endings and KBN endings as "not occuring frequently." In the same sense that it's technically correct to say that Mets don't win very frequently, and neither does someone frequently pitch a perfect game.
Or to put that another way, I could easily play five or ten pawn endings in a month (and dozens of other games where either I or my opponent know enough about pawn endings to know we need to avoid going into to one). That's a rather different order of "infrequent" than KBN vs K, which I've never once had either side of in my whole life.
Wow thanks everyone! Yes, I know it is veery uncommon to see two bishops and a king vs a king but I just wanted to know this anyways just for fun and plus you never know!
Thank you everyone again!
“Just for fun” is a more than adequate reason. It’s not a job, after all.
it's difficult. i think the idea is to bring the king to a corner
Queen, Rook, and Two Bishops is all easy ?
Just keep taking space from the king, avoid a stalemate, get him into a corner, and the last moves are trivial.
Now Bishop and Knight, thats really hard.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oRK7XLhGz_c
@29
"Bishop and Knight, thats really hard"
++ KNN vs. KP is even harder.
I have practiced the two bishop mate and I have found out that it is actually very easy lol
Next goal: Bishop, Knight and King and vs King
Checking the enemy King randomly accomplishes nothing.
Use the two Bishops to confine the enemy King, not to check him.
Slowly edge him back into a corner. Bring up your King. THEN you can start checking him.
"Two Bishop Mate" refers to a checkmate delivered with the help of two bishops. It's a graceful and often underestimated form of checkmate in chess, showcasing the power and versatility of these pieces when utilized in harmony. The two bishops work together to control diagonals, slicing through the opponent's defenses with precision.
Achieving a "Two Bishop Mate" typically involves coordinating the bishops to control key squares around the enemy king, restricting its movement and setting up a lethal final blow. This checkmate can occur in various positions on the board, often arising from a strategic buildup of pressure or a sudden tactical combination.
Players who deliver a "Two Bishop Mate" demonstrate a deep understanding of chess principles, positional awareness, and the ability to capitalize on their pieces' potential. It's a satisfying conclusion to a well-executed game, illustrating the beauty and elegance of chess as a strategic art form.
Spambot detected.
@19
"rook endings are important too, but to play them well, you also have to be good in pawn endings." ++ You argue above that KBB vs. K (and also KBN vs. K or KNN vs. KP) do not occur that often and thus are worth less study. Pawn endings occur less often than rook endings.
Pawn endings occur *all the time* at the beginner and intermediate levels. In master games, they're less common, but only because (1) masters are better at judging when to avoid them and (2) most master games are drawn or resigned before they reach the pawn ending stage. Nevertheless, even in master-level rook endings (or knight endings or queen endings, etc), the *possibility* of pawn endings is contemplated repeatedly. They really are the foundation of all endgames. And they're extremely complicated, extremely unforgiving, and often counterintuitive, so they particularly repay careful study.