A Chess forum. ChessBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » ChessBanter forum » Chess Newsgroups » rec.games.chess.misc (Chess General)
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

What is more difficult, mating with bishop and horse, or winning withqueen against rook?



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11  
Old October 7th 17, 09:41 AM posted to rec.games.chess.misc
Paul
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 82
Default What is more difficult, mating with bishop and horse, or winningwith queen against rook?

On Saturday, October 7, 2017 at 2:19:03 AM UTC+1, Rainer wrote:
On 06/10/2017 13:05, Paul wrote:
On Friday, October 6, 2017 at 12:02:40 PM UTC+1, Paul wrote:
On Wednesday, October 4, 2017 at 2:43:09 PM UTC+1, Eliyahu wrote:
... who said life is easy?

Many pop songs have the theme that life is easy, so the answer is
that many pop singers have.

Examples include the song that goes: "I'm just sitting watching
flowers in the rain Feel the power of the rain Making the garden
grow."

and the one that goes

"That's why I'm easy I'm easy like Sunday morning"


Or how about Ryan Paris's song "Dolce Vita" from 1983 which contains
the lyrics:

"We've made it down in the Dolce Vita Wipe all your fears away We
live it like in the Dolce Vita A game of yesterday"

Paul


Another old song. Not exactly pop music, but much closer to the essence
of KQ v KR:

Life's a bore but you have to live it
haven't got much but you've got to give it

Life's a lung and you're the cancer
always questions and never an answer

https://youtu.be/qlP43fiYNPs


I would love to study the Q v R endgame in more detail,
so I don't endorse the song as a commentary on the ending.

But that's me -- I love this type of learning. I did read
quite a bit of this chapter in Secrets of Pawnless Endings,
but I didn't digest it thoroughly.
I have a fulltime job (which doesn't involve chess) so my
time for this type of thing is limited. I can understand
that a professional chess player, who is learning this material
out of duty, might find it a bit dull. I like it because it's
relatively easy to understand.

For songs about chess in general,
how about "I get knocked down. But I get up again."?

Paul


  #12  
Old October 8th 17, 03:34 AM posted to rec.games.chess.misc
Rainer[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 29
Default What is more difficult, mating with bishop and horse, or winningwith queen against rook?

On 07/10/2017 10:41, Paul wrote:

[musings on music snipped]

I would love to study the Q v R endgame in more detail,
so I don't endorse the song as a commentary on the ending.

But that's me -- I love this type of learning. I did read
quite a bit of this chapter in Secrets of Pawnless Endings,
but I didn't digest it thoroughly.
I have a fulltime job (which doesn't involve chess) so my
time for this type of thing is limited. I can understand
that a professional chess player, who is learning this material
out of duty, might find it a bit dull. I like it because it's
relatively easy to understand.


I have never read a book on technical endgames. I started studying them
after Ken Thompson's endgame databases became available in the early 1990s.

What I found out about KQ v KR was that the first tasks (driving the
king to the edge of the board and separating the rook from his king)
were only the prelude for the difficult part: conquering the stray rook.

If the defender plays it well, you cannot conquer the rook immediately
but instead, you have to manoeuvre in such a way that the rook cannot
return to his king and at the same time you have to give your king some
protection from rook checks. Then the defender will eventually lose the
rook by zugzwang.

This I find a bit unrewarding because in the final stage you can only
move around until an opportunity to win the rook comes up; you
essentially don't understand what's going on. It is of course possible
that I missed something and Mr Nunn has worked out a neat algorithmic
winning strategy.

Cheers,
Rainer
  #13  
Old October 8th 17, 10:05 AM posted to rec.games.chess.misc
Paul
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 82
Default What is more difficult, mating with bishop and horse, or winningwith queen against rook?

On Sunday, October 8, 2017 at 3:34:18 AM UTC+1, Rainer wrote:
On 07/10/2017 10:41, Paul wrote:

[musings on music snipped]

I would love to study the Q v R endgame in more detail,
so I don't endorse the song as a commentary on the ending.

But that's me -- I love this type of learning. I did read
quite a bit of this chapter in Secrets of Pawnless Endings,
but I didn't digest it thoroughly.
I have a fulltime job (which doesn't involve chess) so my
time for this type of thing is limited. I can understand
that a professional chess player, who is learning this material
out of duty, might find it a bit dull. I like it because it's
relatively easy to understand.


I have never read a book on technical endgames. I started studying them
after Ken Thompson's endgame databases became available in the early 1990s.

What I found out about KQ v KR was that the first tasks (driving the
king to the edge of the board and separating the rook from his king)
were only the prelude for the difficult part: conquering the stray rook.

If the defender plays it well, you cannot conquer the rook immediately
but instead, you have to manoeuvre in such a way that the rook cannot
return to his king and at the same time you have to give your king some
protection from rook checks. Then the defender will eventually lose the
rook by zugzwang.

This I find a bit unrewarding because in the final stage you can only
move around until an opportunity to win the rook comes up; you
essentially don't understand what's going on. It is of course possible
that I missed something and Mr Nunn has worked out a neat algorithmic
winning strategy.

Cheers,
Rainer


It's difficult to find the time to delve into it in such detail.
Are you Rainer Knaak or some other pro by any chance?

Has Nunn presented a "neat algorithmic winning strategy"?
Well, not quite. The ending's too difficult for that to be possible.

But the approach is certainly methodical. He presents a variety of
easily memorable positions, with wins given with both sides to move.
Thus it becomes algorithmic, given that you can force such a position,
and you often can.

He also discusses thematic types of position which he calls "second rank defence",
"third rank defence" and "fourth rank defence".

So, if you haven't read the chapter in Secrets of Pawnless Endings, then I
think you have indeed "missed a trick". However, assuming you're a
competitive player, the time needed to improve your knowledge of this
even further might not be a good investment in time, compared to, for example,
re-studying your own losses or draws that you should have won.

I'm not a competitive player at all, so my chess time can be well-spent
learning whatever I find interesting, no matter how rare the positions are.

Paul Epstein
  #14  
Old October 8th 17, 07:23 PM posted to rec.games.chess.misc
Rainer[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 29
Default What is more difficult, mating with bishop and horse, or winningwith queen against rook?

On 08/10/2017 11:05, Paul wrote:
On Sunday, October 8, 2017 at 3:34:18 AM UTC+1, Rainer wrote:
On 07/10/2017 10:41, Paul wrote:

[musings on music snipped]

I would love to study the Q v R endgame in more detail, so I
don't endorse the song as a commentary on the ending.

But that's me -- I love this type of learning. I did read quite
a bit of this chapter in Secrets of Pawnless Endings, but I
didn't digest it thoroughly. I have a fulltime job (which
doesn't involve chess) so my time for this type of thing is
limited. I can understand that a professional chess player, who
is learning this material out of duty, might find it a bit dull.
I like it because it's relatively easy to understand.


I have never read a book on technical endgames. I started studying
them after Ken Thompson's endgame databases became available in
the early 1990s.

What I found out about KQ v KR was that the first tasks (driving
the king to the edge of the board and separating the rook from his
king) were only the prelude for the difficult part: conquering the
stray rook.

If the defender plays it well, you cannot conquer the rook
immediately but instead, you have to manoeuvre in such a way that
the rook cannot return to his king and at the same time you have
to give your king some protection from rook checks. Then the
defender will eventually lose the rook by zugzwang.

This I find a bit unrewarding because in the final stage you can
only move around until an opportunity to win the rook comes up; you
essentially don't understand what's going on. It is of course
possible that I missed something and Mr Nunn has worked out a neat
algorithmic winning strategy.

Cheers, Rainer


It's difficult to find the time to delve into it in such detail. Are
you Rainer Knaak or some other pro by any chance?


I'm just some random 2200 bungler. There are dozens like me in my home
town. But I have a secret which allows me to find the time for a job,
family life, chess, and a few other things: I don't watch TV.

Has Nunn presented a "neat algorithmic winning strategy"? Well, not
quite. The ending's too difficult for that to be possible.

But the approach is certainly methodical. He presents a variety of
easily memorable positions, with wins given with both sides to move.
Thus it becomes algorithmic, given that you can force such a
position, and you often can.

He also discusses thematic types of position which he calls "second
rank defence", "third rank defence" and "fourth rank defence".


This refers to the part when you drive back the defending king, doesn't
it? That's not the interesting part, see my previous post.

So, if you haven't read the chapter in Secrets of Pawnless Endings,
then I think you have indeed "missed a trick". However, assuming
you're a competitive player, the time needed to improve your
knowledge of this even further might not be a good investment in
time, compared to, for example, re-studying your own losses or draws
that you should have won.


Well, this study-your-losses advice may be useful for rank-and-file
players. If I lose, I usually know pretty well why lose and why I made
my errors before the game ends. Players who wish to improve should work
on their tactics until they are at the level of, say, Stockfish.

I'm not a competitive player at all, so my chess time can be
well-spent learning whatever I find interesting, no matter how rare
the positions are.


Time spent on improving your technique is always well-spent because
superior technique is what separates the current generation of top
players from the greats of the past.

Cheers,
Rainer
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 06:35 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 2.4.0
Copyright 2004-2017 ChessBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.