When you are a professional chess player and world champion, you should have found the time and put in the effort at one point in your career at least. My guess is that most 2000 ELO players can check-mate with knight and bishop.
In an over the board game I wouldn't say most. Maybe not even half.
She would have learned it sure, but it's entirely possible to never have the endgame show up throughout an entire chess career, which is plenty of time to forget the details.
Relevant quote:
"... I have seen how many chessplayers, including very strong ones, either missed learning this technique at an appropriate time or had already forgotten it." – Mark Dvoretsky on Bishop and Knight Checkmate
I'm pretty sure it's a case of forgetting a lesson learned too long ago and never using it since. I witnessed once a young IM not being able to checkmate an unrated player, but both of those guys behaved a lot less honourable than the ladies in the video...
I myself struggled with this mate and for me it was a kind of Holy Grail of chess knowledge. The most difficult part was to transfer the opponent king from the bad corner into the good one without letting it slip to the centre and never got it right.
I went back and forth between endgame books until one day I decided to read the Wikipedia article and found out about the Deletang's method. In my opinion, it is the easiest to learn. (I even used it in an online game here on chess.com.
)
When you are a professional chess player and world champion, you should have found the time and put in the effort at one point in your career at least. My guess is that most 2000 ELO players can check-mate with knight and bishop.
In an over the board game I wouldn't say most. Maybe not even half.
I checked with my data base and filtered for players (the one with knight and bishop) between 1850 and 2100 ELO. I got 26 games, 2 of which were resigned before the player could show the technique (or notation is just incomplete), 17 check-mated (or won by resignation, because check-mate was just a few moves away), 7 failed to mate. So 73% won their game.
Anyone with more games can search their database, but I don't think, that the result will change too much.
I checked with my data base and filtered for players (the one with knight and bishop) between 1850 and 2100 ELO. I got 26 games, 2 of which were resigned before the player could show the technique (or notation is just incomplete), 17 check-mated (or won by resignation, because check-mate was just a few moves away), 7 failed to mate. So 73% won their game.
Anyone with more games can search their database, but I don't think, that the result will change too much.
honestly i find it amazing 73% of people at my level can do that. I never bothered to learn how and infact I would probably even sacrifice material against a higher rated opponent to reach the downside of a N+B since i dont oftne believe they can checkmate
I would probably even sacrifice material against a higher rated opponent to reach the downside of a N+B since i dont oftne believe they can checkmate
Even if I thought my opponent couldn't do it, I would avoid it if I can draw otherwise, because it just sucks to sit at the board for 50 moves (if there is 30 second increment).
I checked with my data base and filtered for players (the one with knight and bishop) between 1850 and 2100 ELO. I got 26 games, 2 of which were resigned before the player could show the technique (or notation is just incomplete), 17 check-mated (or won by resignation, because check-mate was just a few moves away), 7 failed to mate. So 73% won their game.
Anyone with more games can search their database, but I don't think, that the result will change too much.
Wow, that is really surprising.
Also how large is your database? 26 games isn't much to go on.
Wow, that is really surprising.
Also how large is your database? 26 games isn't much to go on.
1.25 million games (Fritz 11, latest game played 2007). Mostly master games with higher ratings. That's why I only get 26 games below 2100 elo. If you include higher rated players, you get more games.
Wow, that is really surprising.
Also how large is your database? 26 games isn't much to go on.
1.25 million games (Fritz 11, latest game played 2007). Mostly master games with higher ratings. That's why I only get 26 games below 2100 elo. If you include higher rated players, you get more games.
Probably not very many more though; isn't the ending only supposed to come up once every 5000 games or so?
Some people never get it or even the 2 bishops one. I got it a week ago and won thanks to chessnetwork's video.
Some people never get it or even the 2 bishops one. I got it a week ago and won thanks to chessnetwork's video.
Which one did you get a week ago?
Two Bishops is pretty easy to figure out in game without help, not that I could when I was learning 
She should've read my blog. K+B+N vs K isn't advanced rocket science, and once you know how it doesn't matter how many moves it takes* because it's not just a matter of memorizing moves but in understanding how the pieces work together.
* 34 moves maximum according to BCE, although Fine's example is only a mere 33 moves long.
http://www.chess.com/blog/NimzoRoy/mate-with-kbn-vs-k---together-again-for-the-first-time
I learned this one cold by playing it against my (then six-year-old) daughter. I could win against the computer every time almost blindfolded, but my daughter made such random moves with her King that I had to learn how to play against anything. The first couple times against her I failed because nothing she played made sense :)
Like the rubrik cube. You either got it, or else you just go on spinning forever!
Why does everyone call it basic?
Yeah, its not too hard and all but its such a corner case that its probably not even worth putting time into learning how its done.
It is basic. Advanced endgames are unknown positions, various minor pieces and pawns on both sides that you have to *think* through rather than employ a known, 100% assured, pattern. Its less basic than a queen and a king make, yes. But its a heck of a lot more basic than 3 random pawns and a knight vs 2 pawns and a rook or something complicated. I think I could find the mate if the clock were not very low, and I am terribad.
I also think that under pressure, esp low time, anyone could fail this one. I hope it does not get attention due to her gender, but more because of her high rating. Honestly anyone over 1500 should be able to do it given infinite time (but still a 50 move draw limit), IMHO, and for that reason, its a bit embarrassing for her.
By not being basic I meant the fact that it doesn't come up often and not the difficulty.
You still didn't say which ending it was that you had, the point being that B+B wouldn't be all that impressive (but congrats regardless) whereas B+N would be amazing.
Painful!