I am trying to improve my endgame - help would be appreciated

LosingAndLearning81

I am white. I was playing against a computer supposedly rated at 2000 (I am OTB 1800), but it played much weaker (as did I). Nonetheless, I feel I made many mistakes during the game - but it's the endgame, which is by far the weakest part of my chess, that I'm concerned with. Of course I have a computer to help analyse which moves were bad, but I could use some practical human advice on the whys, wheres, and whens of my endgame - pertinent to positional considerations.

 

Here is the whole game:

 

 

 

Here is the endgame:

 

 

Castore

39 .. R or Kxc4?

SmithyQ

Were you White or Black?

Castore

.. evil.png

LosingAndLearning81
SmithyQ wrote:

Were you White or Black?

Wow. How silly of me. I edited my original post. I was white.

Castore

im niro.  in chess. for me. isnt interesting play with White. im tired, so im sure u'd dont like a game .. a little patience, pls tear.png .. i'd get shame.

bong711

39. Kd2 is a terrible move. You gave black king space to advance. 

SmithyQ

I thought you were White, but I wanted to double-check.  I’m busy right now, but I’ll give my thoughts on the weekend.

LosingAndLearning81
bong711 wrote:

39. Kd2 is a terrible move. You gave black king space to advance. 

In my defence, I was moving instantly - but no excuses.

I know it was a blunder (and perhaps not the only one). In my mind it was obvious that the c-pawn was a goner. I had initially planned for the c-pawn to stay on c2 and be defended by my rook on a-2 but his king got into the game very fast and it threw me off. My reasoning (back when I played c4) was that in that position if he takes with the rook I could force a trade of rooks and I win because of the outside passed pawn. And I thought he couldn't take with the king because 40. Rc1+ and my rook gets behind his king to take his kingside pawns. But of course it doesn't work at all because my king is left to his lonesome and that d-pawn is going to run up the board. I'm not so weak as to have not seen that. I just didn't take any time to think in that position - my fault.

 

 

LosingAndLearning81
SmithyQ wrote:

I thought you were White, but I wanted to double-check.  I’m busy right now, but I’ll give my thoughts on the weekend.

Thank you.

bong711

https://chesscafe.com/the-archives/endgame-corner-pdf-archives/

I learned many endgames lessons here during 2000s.

LosingAndLearning81
bong711 wrote:

https://chesscafe.com/the-archives/endgame-corner-pdf-archives/

I learned many endgames lessons here during 2000s.

Thanks, but unfortunately I can't access it without first donating. I do plan on subscribing to chess.com (I'm just too lazy to go put money on a Visa prepaid) but I wasn't really planning on spending $$$ elsewhere unless the content is exceptional. The problem is that, AFAIK, the site doesn't even offer a demonstration.

ChessBooster

something wrong between moves 20. and 30. , the rook endgame has some drawbacks - you have one extra pawn but your rook was still on h1, but ok. so should be analysed the way you got this endgame, should it be slightelly different (without f2-h3 weak pawns and with rook from h1 put in game earlier)

bellagyaboi

I think you did a really good job. You can't be too hard on yourself. Keep up the good work! 

 

Fromper

Not looking at your game and commenting right now. But generally, what endgame study have you done? What books, web sites, etc have you used to learn endgames?

 

I generally recommend Silman's Complete Endgame Course as the best book around for class level players to learn endgames. Other books cover all the same material, but Silman presents it in a logical, easy to digest manner. He starts with the most common and easiest to learn endings, then moves on to slightly less common and more difficult endgames sequentially. This is a vast improvement over most books that group all endgames involving the same pieces together. There's a big difference between the simple rook endings that everyone should know and the more complex stuff that occupies the same chapter in many books.

 

I've gone through Silman's book a chapter at a time in the past, making sure I truly master the material in any chapter before moving on to the next one. I've gotten as far as chapter 6 or 7, I think (just returning to chess after a few years, so I don't remember exactly), and I'm a better endgame player than at least 80% of people at my USCF rating level (1600s currently, though I peaked in the high 1700s). I'm always amazed how many close games my opponents mess up when we get to the endgame.

 

LosingAndLearning81

Fromper, to answer your question, I don't own any books on the endgame. The extent of my chess education has been youtube videos.

bellagyaboi wrote:

I think you did a really good job. You can't be too hard on yourself. Keep up the good work! 

 

Very nice of you to say - thank you. But it was inaccurate and I should've drawn (or maybe even lost). I was lucky.

 

ChessBooster wrote:

something wrong between moves 20. and 30. , the rook endgame has some drawbacks - you have one extra pawn but your rook was still on h1, but ok. so should be analysed the way you got this endgame, should it be slightelly different (without f2-h3 weak pawns and with rook from h1 put in game earlier

 

Bingo. I completely misjudged the endgame and never should've gone into it. I felt like being up a pawn and the better structure would be winning. But the open b-file and my awkward knight placement gave him chances. I should've rejected the endgame.

 

Daybreak57

Although the Endgame is what a lot of people study to get good fast, it's not the endgame that was a problem in this game.  The Problem for you, was that you failed to see a tactic.  After 23. Rd5, which is a blunder, your opponent could have played pawn to c6, and would have nabbed your knight!  This would have cost you to lose the game had he of seen it.  Knowledge of the endgame is immaterial in this game, as you didn't need to bother to think after your opponent let you win.  He allowed you to become a pawn ahead in the ending.  It's not about endgame skills here, it's about grabbing the free pawn, which you did, and you won the game.  I was expecting you to show us a game you lost in the endgame but now I see you are possibly just a troll and I will stop wasting my time have a nice day!

Devrim03
I’m no chess expert, but you will get more out of it if you have losses analysed
LosingAndLearning81
Daybreak57 wrote:

Although the Endgame is what a lot of people study to get good fast, it's not the endgame that was a problem in this game.  The Problem for you, was that you failed to see a tactic.  After 23. Rd5, which is a blunder, your opponent could have played pawn to c6, and would have nabbed your knight!  This would have cost you to lose the game had he of seen it.  Knowledge of the endgame is immaterial in this game, as you didn't need to bother to think after your opponent let you win.  He allowed you to become a pawn ahead in the ending.  It's not about endgame skills here, it's about grabbing the free pawn, which you did, and you won the game.  I was expecting you to show us a game you lost in the endgame but now I see you are possibly just a troll and I will stop wasting my time have a nice day!

 

EDIT: DAYBREAK57 RECOGNIZED THE FLAW IN THE SUGGESTED TACTIC IMMEDIATELY UPON POSTING. THEREFORE I EDITED THIS MESSAGE (A MESSAGE THAT WAS RUDE OF ME), AS HE/SHE WAS ALREADY AWARE. 

 

LosingAndLearning81
[COMMENT DELETED]