Was this the right decision?


In this game, I had the black pieces.  I made a mistake or 2 early that put me down a minor piece and a pawn.  I ended up fighting back and getting a draw.  My question here though is regarding the endgame I agreed to simplify too.  I got the draw, but I have this feeling it may not have been drawn, and that it was a mistake to simplify to it.  I have commented on the whole game, but move 37 is the one I'm most curious about.  Feel free to comment on any part of the game.  I'm always looking for feedback.



Trading rooks leads to a lost pawn endgame (shown in the diagram). I'm not honestly sure whether keeping the rooks on ought to draw (though it feels unlikely), but it's harder to analyse and there is more scope for White to go wrong.

Having said that, White went wrong in the supposedly simple pawn ending, so it's hard to criticise... :)


Excellent.  Thank your for the breakdown.  I really need to spend a little more time on the King and multiple pawn vs pawn endings.


Yeah I don't know how I screwed that up at the end but it is driving me crazy. :)

Great analysis on the game, and move 21 for me was definitely a mistake. I thought I played a pretty good game up until the end there when I gave away the bishop for free (completely unnecessary but at the time I must have been thinking it set up the pawn advantage for me).

Anybody know where exactly I completely screwed up the pawn-king at the end there? I played it through lots of times before the race to the other side of the board started and thought there was no way I could screw it up, and yet somehow managed to do so.

Altogether it was a really fun game though against a fun opponent.


Ah, good analysis camembert, I see where I went wrong.

Amazing how out of practice one can get, I used to know the king-pawn thing well, but it just goes to show without regular play, nothing is elementary! :)


I believe this position is a draw! Kh6 is a blunder.


On the other hand:


Else if Black goes backwards:

Therefore I concur that it was bad to swap off the rooks!

And if white had have played b4 one move earlier..... :D



In your diagram, a simple 4.b4 leads to an easy win. although there are many patterns, camembert is essentially correct.

edit: above  refers to your 1st diagram.  did not see 2nd two until posting. Your 2nd 2 diagrams are completely correct and it is indeed bad to swap the rooks.

General rule:

When ahead, swap pieces not pawns

When behind, swap pawns not pieces.

2 pawns against 1 usually wins especially when the kings are about equally positioned as is the case here.

I believe white can force the swap starting with



another rule of thumb in rook and pawn engames - Rooks on keeps drawing chances, rooks off: better winning chances.


Sorry, I messed up the above diagram and black should have drawn. 25 b4 is a blunder for white, (I am a bit tired and punchy) and black should have retained the oposition with Ke6.  This is better.  Move 1. here is move 25 above.


Excellent.  All this analysis of our endgame is really making me realize how much room I have for improvement.


Yes this is great stuff, thanks to Remludar for posting the game and the experts for their comments!

It seems that the rook swap was good for white, should have led to a win but the endgame was fumbled and black made no mistakes getting itself in the best possible position for a draw.


Trent, you're blundering with White.  It doesn't matter when you play b4.  In the draw you gave, White can play 3. b4+ winning the pawn in two moves or 4. b4 winning the pawn right away.


But even if you hadn't traded rooks white should still win, athough it would be much more difficult.


here is how game the might have gone if you hadn't traded rooks.