Endgame
Sort:
yes, but that doesn't mean you should ignore openings :)
We could divide chess training in two categories, strategy and tactics. I think basic endgames should be the first part of the tactical training (with basic tactical concepts like skewers, forks, etc.) and the opening principles (this means not opening lines) should be the first part of strategical training and neither should be neglected.
divided_sky wrote:
I have been told that studying the endgame will make one a better player more so than trying to learn openings. While you may gain a slight advantage using traps in an opening it will not overcome one who is a master at the endgame. Does anyone else agree with this?
Studying endgames is generally considered more important for beginners than studying openings, but that's not why.
If you study opening traps, and your opponent falls for them, you'll win. Endgame skill won't matter. But what do you do if your opponent doesn't fall for the trap?
If you learn just enough about openings to know general principles, without memorizing tons of variations, you'll be able to reach a playable position most of the time. Occasionally, you'll lose to an opening trap you don't know, but you don't need to spend a ton of time on opening study to reach a playable middle game. Then, your ability at middle game tactics and endgames will determine who wins the game.
On the other hand, if you spend all your time memorizing your openings 10 moves deep, what are you going to do on the 11th move? And in the middle game, tactics are good, but if you can't gain an obvious advantage tactically, you'll end up in a materially even endgame, and that's when endgame study comes in handy. The more you know about endgames, the better you'll be at judging which materially even middle game piece trades help you and which ones help your opponent when it comes to better placement in the endgame.
So many famous grandmasters, such as Capablanca and and Tarrasch, recommended studying the game from the endgame and working backwards to the opening. That may be a little simplistic, but the general principle of studying chess in reverse order that way more often than not is a good idea. First learn how to checkmate (end the game), then learn what to do when there is no checkmate available.
--Fromper
Fromper's answer is very much what I would have written.
Thank you Fromper.That makes more sense then anything yet.
in the end game you learn how the picews move...(i don't remember who said this, i think capablanca)
So where would I go to study endgame tatics?
Some find endgames boring, but you learn some interesting things. Has anyone noticed how the king can move faster diagonally rather than along ranks and files? (Sticks tongue in cheek). To prove it, here's an endgame study by Reti:
mxdplay4 wrote: Some find endgames boring, but you learn some interesting things. Has anyone noticed how the king can move faster diagonally rather than along ranks and files? (Sticks tongue in cheek). To prove it, here's an endgame study by Reti:
It appears that way but there are just as many squares diagonaly when you take a path to the same point as there are ranks and file squares.
So where would I go to study endgame tatics?
Van Perlo has a book on Endgame Tactics, but you should probably study basic endgames before you study endgame tactics:
That should make for a good introduction to endgames. A quick tip since you're just starting out: a queen is worth 9 pawn, a rook is worth 5 pawns, knights and bishops are worth 3 pawns, and a pawn is worth... well, a pawn! I noticed you are making an effort to develop your pieces in the opening and that's very good. 
bradyj wrote: So where would I go to study endgame tatics?
join my group it's called Tactical Studies
All three phases of chess are important but one reason endings are stressed so much is that if you dont know what to do with kind and pawn vs king how can you know what to do with 32 chessmen on the board? 
divided_sky wrote:
I have been told that studying the endgame will make one a better player more so than trying to learn openings. While you may gain a slight advantage using traps in an opening it will not overcome one who is a master at the endgame. Does anyone else agree with this?
If you think that try playing themainman he plays chess all day and all night he'll come up with a 4 move checkmate
Bump
Wow 😯
There is no need to learn endgame theory if you are just a beginner. No theory, but endgame logic is important for such players - more than anything else. The logic behind chess moves is easy to spot when you are left with only couple of pieces on the board. For example, delievering checkmate with your R+K vs a lone King.
Or, for those intermediate level players, this example shows how endgames can teach you chess strategy. I think that's why well known Shereshevsky's book on endgames is so important for higher rated chess students.
Hope this helps a bit.
That’s
I have been told that studying the endgame will make one a better player more so than trying to learn openings. While you may gain a slight advantage using traps in an opening it will not overcome one who is a master at the endgame. Does anyone else agree with this?