Ok the game finished so perhaps yous can mention it in more detail, it is part of the end game tourney so some people might still be in this position, so perhaps it would be good to discuss it obliquely ? Anyway: frustrating there doesn't seem to be a WIN for white from here, but perhaps they had to do something super dumb.....
To know for sure, consult https://syzygy-tables.info/
Awesome! thanks for that resource, what does
mean?
Awesome! thanks for that resource, what does
Black is winning with DTZ 1mean?
DTZ is "Distance To Zeroing", it's the distance to a move that resets the 50 move rule.
In your position it's a draw regardless of who's turn it is.
well @prometheus_fuschs i don't know if it is relevant exactly, but i am in an end game tourney and it is my NPP vs his R, you would think he could slice and dice me but he can't (connected pawns) in fact he can only win if i do something really stupid, if I had more skill I think i could probably win it, likely will be a draw / stalemate.
My point being, i think most pieces are underrated in end games if they have more pawn(s) and sacs should always be considered, even if on paper it is even / trading down
I do value NPP more than R, if that's the only thing on the board then NPP must be better because if you somehow lost both pawns, you'd still be safe as KRKN endings are draws.
Paradoxically, in the late endgame, R is stronger than NPP, with pawns available on both wings.
That's because of the highly increased rook mobility when pieces come off the board.
In the opening and middlegame, the tables are turned - NPP is stronger than R.
Rooks are way less mobile then.
That's why rooks tend to increase their relative value the closer the ending, while horses, donkeys and mares, contrarily, tend to "wane".
By late endgame do you mean just KRKNPP?
In that case 36% of the times black is winning, 55% of the times it's a draw and 9% of the times white is winning.
Note: Black is the one with KNPP.
https://syzygy-tables.info/?fen=5R2/6pp/K3k3/7n/8/8/8/8_w_-_-_0_1
Those are TB outcomes, not late endgame.
Late endgame would be less than 1/4th total non-pawn material, for instance, RBPPP vs BNPPPPP.
Pawns have to feature on both wings of the board.
well @prometheus_fuschs i don't know if it is relevant exactly, but i am in an end game tourney and it is my NPP vs his R, you would think he could slice and dice me but he can't (connected pawns) in fact he can only win if i do something really stupid, if I had more skill I think i could probably win it, likely will be a draw / stalemate.
My point being, i think most pieces are underrated in end games if they have more pawn(s) and sacs should always be considered, even if on paper it is even / trading down
I do value NPP more than R, if that's the only thing on the board then NPP must be better because if you somehow lost both pawns, you'd still be safe as KRKN endings are draws.
Paradoxically, in the late endgame, R is stronger than NPP, with pawns available on both wings.
That's because of the highly increased rook mobility when pieces come off the board.
In the opening and middlegame, the tables are turned - NPP is stronger than R.
Rooks are way less mobile then.
That's why rooks tend to increase their relative value the closer the ending, while horses, donkeys and mares, contrarily, tend to "wane".
By late endgame do you mean just KRKNPP?
In that case 36% of the times black is winning, 55% of the times it's a draw and 9% of the times white is winning.
Note: Black is the one with KNPP.
https://syzygy-tables.info/?fen=5R2/6pp/K3k3/7n/8/8/8/8_w_-_-_0_1
Those are TB outcomes, not late endgame.
Late endgame would be less than 1/4th total non-pawn material, for instance, RBPPP vs BNPPPPP.
Pawns have to feature on both wings of the board.
I'd think that "late endgame" is applicable to a 7 piece position.
this is surprising, in endgame lovers club the definitions for end games hasn't been this clear!
Test post.
On beginners and improving chess.
Tactics specifically. I read several pages of this thread. I actually read the oldest pages first. A tad confusing until I realised page 1 was posts from January.
Anyway, it prodded me to make an account here.
Really back to tactics now. 😁
I see that the topic of tactics come up frequently in the thread. Here's my take. Doing random tactics problems, even if the tactics are skilled to your level isn't the best way to get better at tactics.
For example, going through 100 tactic problems for 100 different patterns doesn't reinforce any pattern.
Doing 1k problems with 100 patterns will reinforce each pattern 10 times. Good training programs will actually reinforce the pattern in a variety of increasing difficulty if possible, but always at least a new, but similar board position.
For example, the first problem of a new pattern will be easier to show. If you don't get it right the first time, you will get several more versions of the same pattern to solve.
I'm just trying to say that tactics is about pattern recognition.
I watched a video of Magnus Carlsen crush an under 2600 GM in bullet chess, and it was clear that Magnus had exponentially more patterns locked in his head than the opponent
I don't have a rating here, I just signed up, but I'm probably around 1850 +/- 25 points. Both Lichess and a program called Chess King Training have me hovering around 1850.
Almost forgot: many times one has to calculate tactics. Not even Magnus Carlsen knows every possible pattern, but the more patterns you know allows you to calculate a distance to a pattern you know.
For example your opponent has two good moves to choise from, assuming best play. You could look at possible responses and perhaps see down the line a nice tactic. For example you know a 5 move mate pattern, and you can see that a couple moves after your opponent moves you can prod your opponent to that pattern... suddenly you know you can mate in 7 moves.
I think GM Maurice Ashley took that to the extreme when he told a NYC chess hustler "I got this... mate in 23".
Thanks!
Any advice on how to become a better chess player? How to find the best move under pressure?
I use Chess King Training to improve.
At the lower level problems, the program uses repetition to reinforce pattern recognition. With many thousands of problems, it covers an amazing number of patterms for all skill levels. They use seperate modules for different aspects of play, so I have a subscription for all the courses.
Any advice on how to become a better chess player? How to find the best move under pressure?
There are many forum topics on how to improve, but the answer is dull and takes effort; simply put the time in, practice chess, study chess and things like that. There is no "magic" to it, but in the long-term (if you put forth the effort and focus on really learning chess) your chess may feel like magic 
How to find the "best" (or good) moves under pressure is much more fun to talk about. I personally think the key is to not feel under pressure. Pattern recognition, confidence in yourself and experience (which lessens nervousness) will all contribute to you feeling more comfortable in pressure-situations. When you are more comfortable, and creative, then it will seem that the best moves will find you! 
Question: Is there any good way that you have found helpful to stop making hideous blunders?
Question: Is there any good way that you have found helpful to stop making hideous blunders?
For someone rated over 1600, I would reccomend lots of mate-in-twos plus doing combination exercercises.
Combination exercises generally don't involve a mate-in-x, and often force you to look at the entire board to find the correct or stronger continuation. Also they're often designed to cure you of always looking for an attack against the king.
The last problem I did, I got wrong because on the board, the player had a strong kingside attack going on, so I kept looking at for a tactic on that part of the board. Turns out there was a nice tactic to win a piece on the other side of the board, and it wasn't that diffucult... if I'd only stopped trying to mate the opponent's king.
The combinarion exercises are particularly usefull because it forces you to look at the entire board and calculate moves that look good, but are you'll find either lead nowhere, or even outright blunders. The more you calculate positions that you realize leads to blunders, the better and faster you'll calculate and disregard bad moves in a real game.
Ok the game finished so perhaps yous can mention it in more detail, it is part of the end game tourney so some people might still be in this position, so perhaps it would be good to discuss it obliquely ? Anyway: frustrating there doesn't seem to be a WIN for white from here, but perhaps they had to do something super dumb.....