# Question
Title: A question about the time to evacuate a queen in a master game
I am studying a book about chess strategy, and in the chapter concerning the d4,e4 center I have this game:

(PACHMAN, VESELY, Pragues, 1953)

```
r1b2rk1/pp1nqppp/2pb1n2/4p3/2PP4/2N1PN2/P1Q1BPPP/R1B1R1K1 b - - 0 11

```

The last move of white is 11.Re1!, and the author said black can no more play exd4 because the queen has to retreat from the column e with a loss of time.

But there is still the bishop in the column e! Is it a master subtlety? I mean that if the bishop moves, it has no threats and the black queen has time to escape from the column e...

# Answer
Very good question and I'll try my best to answer properly. As you correctly pointed out, there would be no direct threat on the black queen after 11...exd4 12.exd4 because of the e2 bishop on the e-file (and no good discovery). But if we think further, what does the rook e1 really achieve for the white camp in the current position? Honestly, it's not doing much at all: protecting an already protected bishop and that's about it. Now considering the position after 11...exd4 12.exd4. In that case, the e1-rook is ideally placed on a open file and almost directly facing the black queen. Black would have to lose a tempo at some point by moving his queen and white could prepare an invasion on this e-file. Obviously it's a long-term plan but it's actually what strategy is all about! To conclude, I would say that 11...exd4 is not a great move because it justify the previous white move 11.Re1.
> 3 votes

# Answer
I disagree to a certain extent with the author. The big problem after ed ed is that white's pawns on d4 and c4 have a lock on the center and black has no further stake in the center having given up his e5 pawn. Some time in the past black also managed to exchange his well placed pawn on d5 for white's poorly placed pawn on b3 which now looks like a big mistake as it was the first step in giving up the fight for the center. Black is also a bit cramped with his pieces stepping on each others' toes. Admittedly a big part of the problem is the queen on e7.

Imagine one small change to the position, black's queen on c7 instead of e7. Now ed is a real problem for white. Black can follow up with Ng4 with threats against h2 and f2 and Ndf6 to come unleashing the white squared bishop. Both g3 and h3 for white have their tactical drawbacks. As it is black will need to do some regrouping of his pieces before he can make any freeing pawn breaks or captures.
> 2 votes

---
Tags: strategy, queens, master-games
---


# Question
Title: About how to compose retrograde analysis problems
Are there any books or articles devoted to *composing* retrograde analysis problems? It seems that you would need some techniques beyond ones for standard problems.

# Answer
See my answer to About retrograde analysis. The Retro Corner is not about *composing.* but it has lots of easy and hard examples with detailed solutions, comments, etc.
> 3 votes

---
Tags: retrograde-analysis, composing
---


# Question
Title: Is this really limitation of absolute ELO?
Lately I've been wondering what could be maximum Elo achieved by a computer. I mean, we have super-computers, give super computer (1st in the world) chess program and let it play, it will probably pre-calculate first 30 (or maybe 50) moves within a second.

I went Googling and this site offered, kind of answer, particularly this one: https://chess.stackexchange.com/a/5252

Answer shortly was:

> Given these assumptions, the machine will max out at about 3351 ELO1, where if it wins, its Elo will increase by less than half a point (+0.49 to 3351.49), which will be discarded (rounded down to 3351).

Okay, so there's 3351 Elo, which currently maxxed out value. Is there any other value that I could absolutely assign to human as well as computers? I don't want to sound cocky, but I'd really like to compare power of my processor to the one of human brain. Of course I know that processors as fast as human brain will come within 40 years and don't exist now. But I mean, I want to measure and compare on how **my computer** performs compared to **champions**. In absolute values, so it's not just limited because it's extremely relative. Just... you know, hard to explain, I hope you understand. Is there such absolute measure for human/computer calculation/prediction?

# Answer
My experience is with the ECF system, which is probably not technically elo but I understand it approximates it. With that understanding, Tony gave the correct answer, but I want to elaborate.

A simple explanation of how the ECF rating works, using elo units: when you beat your opponent, you get his rating + 400 points for that game, if you draw you get his rating and if you lose, his rating - 400. Your rating for a period is calculated by averaging out all the ratings points so obtained over that period.

As you can see, your rating is normally expressed as a function of *your opponents'* rating. (There may be exceptions like when your opponent has no rating, or a rating very far away from your rating, but that can be safely ignored for this discussion). That means that no matter how good you are *actually*, you can only be measured in terms of how good you are relative to your opponents.

The implication of this is that if all your opponents' ratings remain static (as it would be between rating set points), your maximum possible rating is the highest opponent's rating plus 400. This can only be obtained if you keep on playing the next best rated player and win every game.

Let's say someone with Magnus Carlsen's ability appears out of nowhere and enters a junior tournament where all his opponents have ratings of +-1400. Low and behold, he wins all his games - but his rating for the tournament will still only be +-1800, because it is calculated based on the strength of his opponents.

Hence, as you can see, there is no *absolute* maximum theoretical rating, but there is a *relative* theoretical limit. As your opponents' ratings increase, your theoretical maximum rating also increases, but never above the highest opponent rating + 400.

\** Note to technically minded: ECF rating is convertible to elo using a formula established by the ECF as described here. How accurate this is is probably disputable, but according to the latest formula, I should have used 375 points instead of 400 as described above.
> 3 votes

# Answer
The maximum ELO (computer or otherwise) is 400 points above its highest rated opponent.
> 2 votes

---
Tags: software
---


title: End game King an Rook - Beginners

text:
# Question
Title: End game King an Rook - Beginners
In different ocasions I find my self in a very dificult situation (for me). The only pieces on the board are: Mine - King an Rook ; Oponnent - King.

It is very dificult for me to check mate... Can somebody give me the main lines to do so, or where can I find this information?

# Answer
Here's one way:

1. Use the Rook to restrict the opponent's King to one part of the board.
2. Use your King to gain the opposition (Kings facing with one space between them, and it being your move)
3. Use the Rook to take a rank (or file, as appropriate) from the opponent's King.
4. Repeat until checkmate.

```

[Title "Checkmate with K+R vs K"]
[FEN "8/8/8/3k4/8/8/6K1/R7 w - - 0 1"]

1. Ra4 {Now the king can't access half of the board.} Kc5 {He chases the Rook. Don't get fixated and let him take it! #guilty} 2. Rh4 {Keep the Rook away from the enemy King} Kd5 {The opponent will not want to leave the the 5th rank.} 3. Kg3 {This move is actually a little tricky, but the concept is key to quickly winning this ending. We must not allow the opponent to gain the 'opposition'. Whenever there is one space between the two Kings and they are lined up (even diagonally), that is, when they _oppose_ one another, the player on move has the advantage. Thus if we played Kf3, Black would have the opposition and we'd waste moves.} Ke5 {Keeping in the center, the best defense.} 4. Kf3 {Note this position - your King between your Rook and the enemy King. Now the enemy has 2 choices, charge or run. Might as well charge...} Kf5 5. Rh5+ {Absolutely fundamental here is that you gained the opposition (the Kings had one space between them and it was your move). In this position, you take the row away from the opponent's King.  This is what this checkmate technique is all about.}  Kg6 {Never give up. Maybe White will make a careless error...} 6. Ra5 {Nope. The Rook runs.} Kf6 {chases!}
7.Ke4 {Now if the enemy King chases, White gains the opposition again...} Ke6 (7...Ke7? {when defending, do not surrender space} 8. Ra6! {Gobble that rank!}) 8. Ra6+ Kf7 {Black knows he's doomed.} 9. Ke5 {Other moves allow Black to get the opposition. Do not allow it.} Kg7 {He runs because he knows what happens if he goes the other way.} 10. Kf5 Kh7 11. Kg5 {almost there...} Kg7 {what else??} 12.Ra7+ {Forces the King back} Kh8 {Kf8 is better but I have to go to work!} 13. Kg6 {will gain the opposition next turn. Not Kh6? which allows the king to escape to g8. Then you'd have to chase him to the other side of the rank. Go ahead and try it, it's annoying.} Kg8 14. Ra8#

```

One thing about your Rook when checkmating like this - never give up a row once you take it. Never loosen your grasp.

Another thing is that your King should be between the opponent's King and your Rook. If he chases your Rook anyway, you'll get him in opposition and force him back. If he does not chase your Rook, then he'll run out of room to run and you'll gain the opposition. Sometimes, you'll need to move your Rook one square to 'waste' a move. If you do, don't surrender the rank! Keep the king contained. See the 2nd diagram.

You can use the *opposition* in lots of endgame positions to force your opponent to make a move he does not like. Learn it, love it.

Per the note above. In this case it is White's move. But the natural `Kh5` and `Kf5` give Black the opposition which means the game will be extended. The horrid `Kg6` allows the King to slip the noose. So White needs to put black in Zugswang (which means to make him make a bad move.)

```

[TITLE "It Happens."]
[FEN "8/7k/R7/6K1/8/8/8/8 w - - 0 1"]

1. Rb6 {Now Black has no good moves.} Kg7 2. Rb7+ {There we go, we're back on track.}

```
> 2 votes

# Answer
Actually, this is a very fundamental ending and once you grasp the concept, it is quite simple.

Essentially, you need to get your King close to your opponent's King and then coordinate with your Rook to close (or force) his/her King to a corner. A bit of care is needed (e.g., using the concept of opposition) to give the final mate.

The following should help you:

http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Chess/The\_Endgame/King\_and\_Rook\_vs.\_King
> 0 votes

---
Tags: endgame, beginner
---


title: Game played by day or week

text:
# Question
Title: Game played by day or week
Currently I aking me about How many games by day or week, need a beginner to improve their game.

I asking that because I read a beginner player need to play 80% and study 20%, but How much is this 80%?

# Answer
> 2 votes
There's no magic number, especially since your definition of "improve" could be different from anyone else's.

I play about 5-10 rapid games per day, and have a few ongoing correspondence games at any time. Then again, I'm not a beginner, and if you're truly a beginner I'd say keep playing games as long as you're enjoying it. No need to keep grinding out more games if you're not having fun. For one, you'll not learn as much, and what's the point of playing a game if you're not enjoying it? Also there's no reason to stop if you've hit the day's "magic number" of games.

Most important is analyzing your games after the fact. If you're reading a chess book (i.e. How to Reassess Your Chess, etc), after you're done with a game go back through the moves and see if you're following the guidelines the author laid down. See what you could've done better. See what you did well.

Saying you'll play 100 games a day to get better won't likely make you better if you're not enjoying it, and aren't following a study plan.

---
Tags: learning
---


title: Chess Heroz (Android)

text:
# Question
Title: Chess Heroz (Android)
As far as chess training applications go the Chess Heroz application is excellent.

My question though is can anyone explain the mathematics behind the ratings system?

I am new to chess ratings and believe that there are a number of systems used?

# Answer
> I am new to chess ratings and believe that there are a number of systems used?

Every chess federation (doesn't quite equal every country because some countries, like the UK, have several federations) has its own rating system. In addition FIDE, the international chess federation, has its rating system.

> Can anyone explain the mathematics behind the ratings system?

The basic mathematical principle behind rating systems is that every time you play a game, or group of games, against already graded opposition, your results and their respective ratings are used to adjust your rating or give you a rating for the first time.

Because players' ratings can change with different speed depending on their strength and age there is usually not a single constant factor which is used for all rating adjustments. Instead the factor will give bigger corrections / adjustments for young players, who are likely to be improving rapidly, and smaller corrections / adjustments for players who have been playing for a long time or who already have a high rating because these players are less likely to change in strength very much. Rather for these players the variability they show in playing strength likely just reflects the fact that they are human beings who have good days and bad days.

For details of how FIDE ratings are calculated you can read FIDE's Rating Regulations.

Section 8 - **The working of the FIDE Rating System** \- gives the mathematical rules and tables used in calculating FIDE ratings.
> 0 votes

---
Tags: software, rating
---


title: Million dollar Question for me!

text:
# Question
Title: Million dollar Question for me!
I am from India,passionate about chess.What is the actual procedure to become a professional player.Recently my parents are planning to send me to USA for graduation,If that happens will I able to represent my country?Or that doesn't happen(seen Nakamura Japanese Origin representing USA!!!!)Also heard that 1200 points will be given as default like chess.com to a player who registerd for professional chess.Is that true??Friends help me out!!!!

# Answer
> What is the actual procedure to become a professional player

First you need to be born with the necessary talent. Very few are. Then you need to spend years studying and playing chess until you are so much better than most other players that you can actually earn enough money to live.

> Recently my parents are planning to send me to USA for graduation,If that happens will I able to represent my country?

Almost certainly not. Both India and the US have very many excellent chess players. It is extremely unlikely that you will get into either country's top 10 any time soon, if ever.

> Also heard that 1200 points will be given as default like chess.com to a player who registerd for professional chess.Is that true??

You will not be *given* anything, as a default or otherwise. What will happen if you play in rated tournaments is that a default value of 1200 will be used as your estimated rating for ratings calculations until such time as you actually manage to at least draw a game against a rated player. At that time you can be given a real rating.
> 2 votes

---
Tags: rating
---


title: Longest DTM in the endgame KQPPKQ

text:
# Question
Title: Longest DTM in the endgame KQPPKQ
What is the longest DTM in the endgame queen and two pawns versus a queen (KQPPKQ? This position is a mate in 167 moves.

```
[FEN "8/k7/6K1/1Q6/8/P6q/7P/8 w - - 0 1"]

```

Are the DTC and/or DTZ records also known for this endgame? Please do not only submit the number of moves, but also the position.

# Answer
This page claims that the longest DTM in this type of endgame is 182 moves.

```
8/4k3/8/Q7/8/7P/P7/q1K5 w - - 0 1

1. Kc2 Qd4 2. Qe1+ Kf7 3. Qf1+ Kg7 4. Qg2+ Kh8 5. Qa8+ Kh7 6. Qb7+ Kh6 7. Qc6+ Kh5 8. Qe8+ Kg5 9. Qg8+ Kh6 10. Qe6+ Kh7 11. Kb3 Qd3+ 12. Kb4 Qd2+ 13. Kb5 Qd3+ 14. Qc4 Qf5+ 15. Kb6 Qf2+ 16. Kb7 Qf3+ 17. Kc7 Qa3 18. Kb6 Kh8 19. Qd4+ Kh7 20. Qd7+ Kg6 21. Qe6+ Kh5 22. Qd5+ Kg6 23. Kb5 Qb2+ 24. Kc6 Qc3+ 25. Kd7 Qg7+ 26. Kd6 Qf8+ 27. Kc7 Qf2 28. Kc6 Qe2 29. Kd7 Qf2 30. Qe6+ Kg7 31. Kc6 Qf3+ 32. Kb6 Qa3 33. Qb3 Qd6+ 34. Ka7 Qc5+ 35. Kb7 Qe7+ 36. Ka8 Qd8+ 37. Qb8 Qh4 38. Qb7+ Kf8 39. Qc8+ Ke7 40. Kb8 Qa4 41. Qc5+ Kd8 42. Qg5+ Ke8 43. Qe3+ Kf8 44. Qf3+ Ke7 45. a3 Qc4 46. Ka7 Qd4+ 47. Kb7 Qd7+ 48. Kb6 Qd4+ 49. Kb5 Qb2+ 50. Kc5 Qc2+ 51. Kd5 Qd2+ 52. Ke4 Qc2+ 53. Kf4 Qc7+ 54. Ke3 Qa7+ 55. Ke2 Qa6+ 56. Kf2 Qd6 57. Kf1 Qd4 58. Ke2 Qa4 59. Qc3 Ke8 60. Kf3 Qh4 61. Qc8+ Ke7 62. Qg4 Qf6+ 63. Qf4 Qa1 64. Qe3+ Kf8 65. Kg2 Qb1 66. Qf4+ Kg8 67. Qc4+ Kh8 68. Qd4+ Kg8 69. a4 Qg6+ 70. Kf2 Qf5+ 71. Kg3 Qg6+ 72. Kf4 Qf7+ 73. Kg5 Qe7+ 74. Qf6 Qd7 75. Qg6+ Kh8 76. Qh5+ Kg7 77. Qg4 Qd5+ 78. Qf5 Qd8+ 79. Kf4 Qd2+ 80. Kg3 Qe3+ 81. Qf3 Qg1+ 82. Kf4 Qc1+ 83. Kg4 Qc4+ 84. Qf4 Qe6+ 85. Kf3 Qb3+ 86. Kf2 Qb6+ 87. Kg3 Qg6+ 88. Kh4 Qh7+ 89. Kg4 Qg6+ 90. Qg5 Kh8 91. Kf4 Qf7+ 92. Qf5 Qc4+ 93. Qe4 Qc1+ 94. Kf5 Qc8+ 95. Qe6 Qc2+ 96. Kf6 Qf2+ 97. Ke7 Qc5+ 98. Qd6 Qa7+ 99. Qd7 Qc5+ 100. Ke6 Qc4+ 101. Ke5 Qc5+ 102. Ke4 Qc2+ 103. Kd5 Qd1+ 104. Ke6 Qe1+ 105. Kd6 Qb4+ 106. Kc7 Qf4+ 107. Kb6 Qb8+ 108. Kc5 Qe5+ 109. Qd5 Qe7+ 110. Kb6 Qb4+ 111. Qb5 Qd4+ 112. Kb7 Qe4+ 113. Kc8 Qe6+ 114. Kb8 Qg8+ 115. Ka7 Qg7+ 116. Ka8 Qg2+ 117. Qb7 Qxh3 118. a5 Qc3 119. a6 Qc4 120. Qb2+ Kh7 121. Qb6 Qc8+ 122. Ka7 Qc4 123. Kb7 Qe4+ 124. Qc6 Qb4+ 125. Ka7 Qf4 126. Qc8 Qg3 127. Ka8 Qd6 128. Qc2+ Kh6 129. Kb7 Qb4+ 130. Kc6 Qa3 131. Kb5 Kg7 132. Qc7+ Kh8 133. Qc8+ Kh7 134. Qd7+ Kg8 135. a7 Qb3+ 136. Ka6 Qa3+ 137. Kb7 Qb4+ 138. Kc7 Qc4+ 139. Kd8 Qh4+ 140. Qe7 Qd4+ 141. Kc8 Qc4+ 142. Kb8 Qb5+ 143. Qb7 Qe5+ 144. Ka8 Qc5 145. Qb3+ Kf8 146. Kb7 Qe7+ 147. Ka6 Qd6+ 148. Qb6 Qd3+ 149. Kb7 Qd7+ 150. Ka8 Qd5+ 151. Kb8 Qe5+ 152. Kb7 Qe4+ 153. Qc6 Qe7+ 154. Kb8 Qe5+ 155. Ka8 Kg8 156. Qc4+ Kh7 157. Qd3+ Kh8 158. Qd8+ Kh7 159. Kb7 Qb5+ 160. Qb6 Qd5+ 161. Qc6 Qb3+ 162. Kc7 Qg3+ 163. Qd6 Qc3+ 164. Kd7 Qf3 165. Kc8 Qe4 166. Kb8 Qb1+ 167 Kc7 Qc1+ 168. Kd7 Qh1 169. Qc6 Qh3+ 170. Kd8 Qh4+ 171. Kc8 Qb4 172. Qb7+ Qxb7+ 173. Kxb7 Kg7 174. a8=Q Kg6 175. Kc7 Kf5 176. Qa4 Ke5 177. Qg4 Kd5 178. Qf4 Kc5 179. Qe4 Kb5 180. Qd4 Ka5 181. Kc6 Ka6 182. Qb6#

```

According to the Sygyzy tablebases, the longest DTZ is 171 moves.

```
8/K6k/8/8/P7/Q6P/8/1q6 b - - 0 1

```

Records for DTC are not provided and I was not able to find any. DTC in this case occurs at 173, which is pretty high and a good estimate for a possible record holder (given the maximum DTM is at 182).
> 4 votes

---
Tags: endgame, tablebases, queen-endgame, records
---


# Question
Title: Is capturing a piece while castling legal?
Is it possible for white to do a queen-side castle in this situation and capture black's bishop? Assuming both rook and king haven't moved, of course. The rook would be capturing the bishop in this case.

```
[FEN "8/8/8/8/8/8/8/R1b1K3 w - - 0 1 "]

```

I've been trying to find examples or rules one way or the other, but I could not.

# Answer
> 14 votes
No, such a move is illegal, because one requirement of castling is that there be no pieces (of either color) standing between the king and the rook. From the FIDE Rules of Chess, 3.8(b):

> 2. Castling is prevented temporarily:
>
> a. if the square on which the king stands, or the square which it must cross, or the square which it is to occupy, is attacked by one or more of the opponent's pieces, or
>
> b. if there is **any piece** between the king and the rook with which castling is to be effected.

---
Tags: rules, castling
---


title: chess program wilhelm

text:
# Question
Title: chess program wilhelm
I still search an executable file of the chess program wilhelm. It is not only a chess endgame database, you can fix pieces to be on concrete squares and check all such position to get a statistic how many positions are won/draw/lost.

I downloaded a version long ago, but it did not work. I could not find any results.

Does anyone know if there is an executable file ? And if yes, does it also consider DTC or DTZ - metrics ?

# Answer
Here is a link with informations you can get on chess program Wilhelm.

http://web.archive.org/web/20081208015339/http://www.geocities.com/rba\_schach2000/overview\_english.htm

Unfortunately, this chess program by Rafael B. Andrist stopped being developped in 2006.
> 4 votes

---
Tags: software, endgame, tablebases
---


# Question
Title: Material for knowing more about Cylinder Chess
I love the usual way of playing chess, but I also like a lot Cylinder chess. Does anybody know a book, website or other way of learning more about it? Like maybe a strategy book about cylinder chess or a book about opening theory on it.

# Answer
> 1 votes
There exists several books presenting quickly various variant of chess, here is one example : http://www.barnesandnoble.com/w/fairy-chess-books-llc/1103593111?ean=9781157372424

About learning strategy or opening theory, both of this concept require a lot of experience and games to be played. For instance in classical chess we had to wait centuries before such thing become available. A first step is to watch games played by the best players. A world championship and tournaments are organized by The Circular Chess Society : http://www.circularchess.co.uk/

Also, it should be decent training to practice with exercises, many studies has been created with this variant of chess, here is one example : http://www.mayhematics.com/v/cylin.htm

---
Tags: chess-variants
---


title: Chess960 human database?

text:
# Question
Title: Chess960 human database?
Is there a database for the different starting positions of Chess960? I would like it to have only human played games, because it it was for engines, I'd have lots of computer chess games.

# Answer
Here is an example of what you are looking for : http://chess960jungle.blogspot.fr/2014/02/chess960-database-complete-games-2001.html
> 3 votes

---
Tags: chess960
---


# Question
Title: Can you identify this game with a mate in 12?
I vaguely remember it being from a game played in the USSR ca. 1960. I'm certain it was from before 1985.

```
[fen "2k1r2r/ppn3pq/b7/5p2/5Qn1/2N1B1P1/1P3PB1/2RR2K1 w - - 0 1"]

```

# Answer
I can't find the actual game neither in my database nor at, say, chessgames.com. However, the position appears as puzzle 210 -- with the apt description "Running around like a squirrel in a cage" -- in the book *1000 Checkmate Combinations* by Victor Henkin, and there it is attributed to a game Aleksandrov-Zaitsev 1974.
> 13 votes

---
Tags: history, sacrifice, identify-this
---


title: Energy drinks for chess tournament

text:
# Question
Title: Energy drinks for chess tournament
I am planning to participate in a tournament, and I was thinking about using energy drinks or caffeinated drinks to enhance my performance.

Is this a good idea? I normally don't take any energy drinks. Will it be counterproductive if I suddenly take up energy drinks, or is it better since I won't develop reliance on energy drinks?

If it is good, how much energy drinks should I take (in milligrams of caffeine), and when is the best time to do so?

Or does energy drink has no effect on chess performance whatsoever?

The only side effect I know about energy drinks is that it is diuretic, but it won't be much of a concern as the time control for the tournament is long.

Thanks.

# Answer
From a guy that drinks for too many energy drinks.

Don't.

They give a rush for 40 minutes tops and then a crash.

Anxiety is also massively induced/increased.
> 5 votes

# Answer
Caffeine increases 'manual productivity' while decreasing creativity commensurately. That is, if you're packing groceries or stocking shelves, tank up. If you need to think, ease up. YMMV of course.

There is no silver bullet. Eat right, sleep plenty, and exercise.
> 4 votes

# Answer
It probably depends on the person and how often you drink energy drinks to begin with. If you don't ordinarily drink them, I would advise against it. I made the mistake of taking an energy drink before a tournament even though i ordinarily didn't drink them. It increased my energy at the expense of focus. My mind was racing and i couldn't concentrate. Instead of an energy drink, i would recommend plenty of rest, and good breakfast is instead.
> 3 votes

# Answer
It is best not to drink them before a tournament. At best you can drink coffee however do not buy energy drinks as those really won't help you win at all.

You should always go refreshed and have a good meal (2 hours or so) before heading off to a tournament. I have been on many tournaments and from personal experience, I can tell you this will work best in the future.
> 1 votes

# Answer
This is the abstract of the paper 'Effect of caffeine upon chess problem solving', authored by Harold Holck and published in the Journal of Comparative Psychology, Vol 15(2), Apr 1933:

> There was a slight but insignificant increase in efficiency after injections of 0.4 ml. containing 200 mgm. of caffeine sodium benzoate. Injections of saline solution were used for control purposes. The author, who served as the subject, did not know when he was injected with saline solution and when he was injected with caffeine. The improvement following caffeine was 7 to 9%.

Link: http://psycnet.apa.org/journals/com/15/2/301/
> 0 votes

---
Tags: performance
---


# Question
Title: Does memorizing chess games improve chess ability?
It is common for strong chess players to have chess games in memory. Is this because it helps to memorize chess games?

# Answer
I would switch the cause and effect. Strong players have many games memorized because chess memory improves with strength, not because the memorization made them strong. I am not saying that memorizing games is useless but I think that there are more efficient ways to improve.
> 1 votes

# Answer
I am not sure if memorizing games helps as much as studying games. If you want to learn how masters execute long-term plans or how tactics support strategies or how strategies yield tactical opportunities - then you want to study games (or sequences of moves). Having memorized games (and positions) can help very much when it comes to teaching chess. When I demonstrate the Opera Game to my son I want the experience to be seamless - not interrupted by me looking up the next move.
> 0 votes

# Answer
Many people think that chess is a sport of memorizing moves and tactics, because they see people do the same moves over and over and over in many games, from openings to even end game tactics.

However it's not because we memorized the games, not by any means. For example until today I have not memorized even one single game in my life, yet I have beaten masters before. But if you showed me a game where a certain tactic is played I would still know it even if I didn't memorize the game itself.

In short, memorizing is something that happens to a chess player when he plays a lot, you will intuitively know moves without having to think, you will know what will lead to where in many scenarios (as long as you don't hit the 2000+ bracket)... And the main reason is because you had trial and error and learned these same tactics they are using by heart.

---

***^^^^ That was the main answer, if you wish for more in depth, please read further :)***

In essence, memorizing a chess game does not make you better, nor does it NOT make you better. if you memorize a chess game it is not because you want to use it in an actual game, rather it should be memorized so you can learn from it.

Memorizing anything besides openings in chess will mostly end up in failure... In tournaments you will not be thinking about what you last memorized or whether or not that certain tactic (whatever it may be) will work according to the piece placement that was in the game... That will never help you in a real chess match.

However, they **will** help you when you reach a high level of chess and already know a good amount of tactics, strategies, sacrifices and of course end games. They will truly serve you well then, however until you reach that level I advise you to focus on learning the heart of the game.

By that I mean start off by learning some basic openings that will help you learn chess in all kinds of positions (usually I advise people with the Italian Game and French Defense) and learn the basic tactics and value of pieces and when to trade a good piece for a bad piece etc... There are many things for you to learn even until today Masters learn the game. So don't be surprised if there's a lot out there :)
> 0 votes

---
Tags: learning, rating, preparation
---


# Question
Title: How to search for a particular opening on the Internet
I am very new to forum and formal chess play. Please bear with me.

I would like to be able to search for an opening that is being used. How would I search for that on Google or another search engine? I do not know many opening names, only a few. Would I use E3 white...etc.? Any guidance on this will be appreciated.

# Answer
If you're using a chess program such as ChessDB you can see something with the phrase "ECO: B00a \[King's Pawn\]" and you can go to Google and search for 'eco B00a' or something along those lines until you come across an answer that works for you.
> 1 votes

# Answer
My advice to you would be to start off by learning 2 openings in chess. Italian Game (white)and French Defense(black), those will help you learn chess in many types of positions, both closed and open games.

http://chesstempo.com/game-database.html

This will provide you with many more openings, and their statistics. Although don't focus too much on the statistics, as those won't win you a game.
> 2 votes

# Answer
You can Google something like "1. e3 e5 2. d4" etc. Or, Chess.com has a pretty good Game explorer: This link. It lets you make the moves, shows how often people reply with other moves, etc.
> 1 votes

# Answer
If you can find out the name of the opening via ECO at a list of ECO codes eg http://www.365chess.com/eco.php you can then search eg '"French Defense" + chess' for 1.e4 e6 on google, youtube etc to find articles, videos on the opening.
> 1 votes

---
Tags: opening
---


# Question
Title: Chess coaching and coaches training different players
What does coaching actually mean in chess?

In relation to that, how is it possible for a chess player to coach two different players? Do the trainees share their work, or does the coach work on different areas of the game with each player, and in that way avoid any "moral conflicts"?

Two of the most notable examples would be:

-Peter Heine Nielsen, who was coaching Anand for *ten* years (Wiki), before switching to his main WCC rival Carlsen in 2013 (although he was also helping Carlsen before 2013);

-Vladimir Chuchelov, who coached both Fabiano Caruana and Anish Giri (I am not sure whether he even coached them simultaneously at some point).

On the other hand, Gelfand stated in 2012 that he refused an offer from Kasparov to help him in his match against Anand, since Kasparov was helping Anand in his WC match against Topalov in 2010.

I cannot imagine coaches deliberately trying to keep secret some of the work they have previously done (it seems too artificial). Also, revealing all the secrets of the player they previously worked with, does not seem to me as "morally sound". So, what is the deal then?

# Answer
> 2 votes
Well first lets start with the most simple answer... Chess is not such a simple sport that if taught to multiple people will result in the same thing. Even if what you learned was exactly the same.

If you are interested in getting into more detail then please read on :)

Chess coaching in a sense is just you sharing what you know... That's all there is to it, you tell your students how to think as chess players but that does not necessarily mean they WILL think like that.

Chess coaches simply hone, and help their students master their skills, they give them the knowledge needed (and of course more) but that doesn't mean it will always result in the same thing.

If I were to give a real life example, this would be the most simple and true to chess.

You can have a machine that takes metal as a material and it constructs a bike, however if you go to another machine and give it the exact same material that doesn't mean it will also produce a bike, it might give you a car! Who knows...

**-----------------------------------------**

**^ That was the answer**, here is some extra stuff if you are interested in more.

Over time in the history of chess, many players like Mikhail Tal, Boby Fischer, Alekhine and so on... All of them had their own unique play style that is remembered until today. However no one can deny the fact that ALL of them had a lot of shared knowledge, they knew the same things yet even so, they played differently.

Chess is simply a beautiful war on a small 64 square battlefield... Even if you both know the same things and same tactics, you still have your own unique plans.

And now I am done :P Sorry for the long post, but hopefully I helped.

# Answer
> 1 votes
In general a "coach" is someone, which has some more experience and will help you to improve your chess. So at first, he will teach you all the basis concept, show you the most important games played in the history, make you practice and help you improving your analysing process. Finally, when you become a grandmaster (or even stronger in the examples you give) will help you in the "every day training" and in a specific part which is very important in modern chess "the openings". When playing opening you need to be always up-to-date and always have news ideas. Having a coach which can focus to this part is a big help as players must focus and opening AND training there abilities.

About players sharing a coach, some players are training as a team, for instance chinese top players are for most of them training together. Then if people become rival, as in the fight for the world championship. This guys are preparing always new stuff to surprise your opponent, so even if the coach is sharing with his new student it won't be so big problem.

# Answer
> 1 votes
At the top, coaching usually means opening preparation.

In the case of Chuchelov, who trains rather young players, there also some kind of positional assessment course at the beginning of a collaboration and regular calculation training. (According to a chessbase interview.)

It is also very common for players to work with each other on certain openings. So for Chuchelov's trainees to play each other won't be much different from training partners playing each other, which really happens all the time. (For example Svidler/Grischuk)

And apparently it is not unusual that seconds also participate in the training of physical fitness as well.

Peter H. Nielsen didn't coach Carlsen in his first match against Anand, although he had already stopped working for Anand. To me this implies that opening theory moves quickly enough and specific match preparation is sufficiently different from match to match, that after one, two years there aren't that many "deadly" secrets left to reveal.

---
Tags: preparation, coach
---


title: What are some common chess traps?

text:
# Question
Title: What are some common chess traps?
What are some of the most common traps to be aware of?

I am talking about examples such as

While such traps are easy to avoid in long games, they can come up and be quite effective in bullet games.

# Answer
One sort of not-always-obvious trap that players can fall into are pawn forks that aren't immediately apparent in a given position. For instance:

```
[FEN ""]

1.c4 e5 2.g3 Nf6 3.Bg2 Bc5 4.e3 Nc6 5.Nc3 d6 6.Nge2 Be6 $2 7.d4 $1

```

Here White wins material since `7. d4!` gains time against the bishop on c5, and can then push on to d5. I've actually won with this exact tactic in more than one OTB tournament game, even against A-class players; and in internet blitz it's happened countless times. If you're not used to playing the black side here, I think it can be easy to miss the shot before you let go of the bishop on e6. This same kind of scenario can arise in other positions with a lot of centrally-located minor pieces.
> 15 votes

# Answer
I can also think of the Légal Trap in the Italian Game or Philidor Defense (Black's 2nd and 3rd moves may be transposed). It involves a Queen sacrifice:

```
[FEN ""]

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 d6 4.Nc3 Bg4 5.h3 Bh5 $2 6.Nxe5 $1 Bxd1 $4 7.Bxf7+ Ke7 8.Nd5#

```

Wikipedia has a list of common chess traps, though it's not exhaustive:

> Ordered by chess opening:
>
> Many more opening traps, all ending in checkmate, are given under Checkmates in the opening.

Also, chess.com's blog has a post about traps, which includes some which Wikipedia doesn't (like the Fischer Trap), and you can play through them on that page.
> 8 votes

# Answer
I've won quite a few games in this line of Cambridge Springs in blitz.

```
[FEN ""]

1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 e6 3. Nc3 d5 4. Nf3 c6 5. Bg5 Nbd7 6. e3 Qa5 7. Bd3 Ne4 8. Qc2
Nxg5 9. Nxg5 dxc4

```

And black is winning a piece since, knight on g5 and Bishop on d3 are both attacked.

Notes:

1)`7. Bd3` looks logical, but it not the best move (though it is not losing). Main-line moves are: `7. Nd2` and `7. cxd5`.

2)`8. Qc2` looks logical, it protects the knight on c3 and attacks the black knight on e4; however, this move loses a piece. Better for white is `8. Bxe4 dxe4 9. Ne5` with roughly equal position.
> 5 votes

# Answer
I have noticed that new players who learn opening principles like "don't move the same piece more than one time", "concentrate on the center" often fall into the trap of blindly following these general principles and totally overlook simple tactical threats. A typical blunder example:

```
[FEN ""]

1.e4 Nc6 2.d4 e5 3.d5 Nd4?? 4.c3

```

Black is toast because the knight is trapped.
> 4 votes

# Answer
Videos on many of traps can be found at http://www.thechesswebsite.com/chess-traps/index.php
> 3 votes

# Answer
There are several traps in the Ponziani, e.g. leaving the pawn on e4 unprotected, and if the knight takes it, `Qa4+` is winning the knight. Or pushing the d-pawn threatening the knight: If it goes forward instead of b8 or e7, it's lost.
> 3 votes

# Answer
There are 40 traps from wikipedia in an expandable chess openings tree at http://www.chesstree.net
> 0 votes

---
Tags: blitz, bullet-chess
---


# Question
Title: Instructive chess positions (and famous games/studies containing these) that engines do not understand well
Basically, I would like to ask people to share their knowledge on famous and/or particularly instructive examples of chess positions, which chess engines do not understand well (i.e. do not evaluate correctly).

A good example of the kind of positions I am interested in is the Vančura Position-Wiki (cf. also Vančura Position-Chessbase), which occurred very recently (at the Sinquefield Cup 2014) in the game Carlsen-Aronian. Although the engine was saying white is completely winning, the game was a theoretical draw after black's 48th move.

Thanks in advance!

P.S. I should stress that I am looking for realistic examples, i.e. those which are likely to happen in a real game. Positions of the following type,

```
[fen "4k3/4p3/3pPp2/2pP1Pp1/1pP3Pp/pP1K3P/P2RRR2/8 w - - 0 1"]

```

and similar artificial positions is **not** the kind of thing I am looking for.

I should also say that endgame tablebase examples are OK. The only requirement is that engines (run on an average computer) are not able to evaluate the position correctly after given, say, 10-15 minutes time to "think".

# Answer
The following two links seem to be exactly what you are looking for (many such positions in each one of them).

http://en.chessbase.com/post/can-we-still-deceive-computers-in-chess

http://www.chess.com/forum/view/general/positions-engines-get-wrong--please-contribute

A cute study, which engines are unable to solve last I checked (white to move and win):

```
6r1/p1p1p1pP/P1PpP1P1/8/2P1B3/2K3pp/3P2rq/R5bk w - - 1 0

```
> 10 votes

# Answer
http://chesstempo.com/chess-tactics/90023 The final position of the solution is an ending with queen against two knights with pawns on both sides where the knights can set up a blockade. Looks like a draw but the engine evaluates that the queen side wins.

```
8/5ppk/7p/3pP3/5P2/5N1P/4NKP1/7q b - - 0 5

```
> 5 votes

# Answer
```
1Q2r1k1/P6p/8/8/4q3/7P/6PK/8 w - - 2 6

```

White to move. 1.a8=Q Qxa8 2.Qg3+ may be a perpetual check that is hard to analyze. See the comments in the discussion of this tactics problem at http://chesstempo.com/chess-problems/103006
> 4 votes

# Answer
Besides fortresses, another type of position the engines tend to get wrong is when the weaker side is about to promote a pawn but the promotion can be delayed indefinitely.

```
[FEN "5Q2/8/8/8/2k5/7P/1p4PK/r7 w - - 0 1"]
[White "Anatoly Karpov"]
[Black "Anthony Miles"]
[Event " Biel"]
[Date "1990  (analysis, white to move)"]

```

For a human player it is easy to see that this is a draw, but the engine has to try all the different checks from all possible squares in all different orders. (I haven't tested this position with the newest engines, perhaps some of them can handle this?)
> 3 votes

---
Tags: engines, endgame
---


# Question
Title: Is it common for super grandmasters to have the ability to play simultaneous blindfold chess?
Magnus Carlsen against 10 blindfolded. Timur Gareev plays 30 players blindfolded. I was wondering if these super grandmasters all can at least play 7 masters blindfolded and beat them.

# Answer
> 4 votes
This is more a comment than an answer.

The attached fragment is Mikhail Tal commenting his blindfold simul against 10 *first category* (approximately 1800-2000 Elo) players - as the match goes, board by board. The fragment is a part of 1968 documentary on limits of human mental abilities.

The movie is in Russian; if there is an interest, I may try to translate.

# Answer
> 2 votes
The answer to the headline is definitely "yes". I would be very surprised if there is a top player who is unable to play 10 blindfold games.

Playing seven masters and beating (all of) them is a different issue. Remember that Kasparov limits the rating of his opponents at simultaneous exhibitions to under 2000 Elo. Of course he can beat much stronger players simultaneously, but it increasingly becomes a question of energy and concentration, not so much pure chess class.

This is even more of an issue in blindfold chess. If we talk about US master titles (I think they roughly start at 2000+ Elo aka 2100 USCF rating), I think it already becomes quite hard to get a 100% score in seven simultaneous blindfold games. But I still believe a top grandmaster would score highly. If we talk about real masters, i.e. IMs, GMs, I think even top grandmasters would struggle to score more than 50%.

Paul Morphy once played a blindfold simultaneous against the 8 strongest players of Paris and score 7/8. Maybe that's comparable to top player against lower masters.

---
Tags: blindfold-chess, super-grandmaster, simultaneous
---


# Question
Title: What is the most complex game you know since 2014?
Which classical top player chess game is the most complex since 2014 you know ?

A good candidate for such games are games with few pawns but many figures.

This year, Timman played a rather complicated game in Tata Steel. It was his only win in the B-group in this tournament.

Other examples ?

# Answer
Played a few days ago and commented upon on chess24, this game is quickly a real tactical mess:

```
rnbqkbnr/pppppppp/8/8/8/8/PPPPPPPP/RNBQKBNR w KQkq - 0 1
[Event "European Individual Championship"]
[Site "Jerusalem ISR"]
[Date "2015.03.03"]
[EventDate "2015.02.24"]
[Round "7.6"]
[Result "1-0"]
[White "Liviu Dieter Nisipeanu"]
[Black "Ivan Bukavshin"]
[ECO "B48"]
[WhiteElo "2654"]
[BlackElo "2622"]
[PlyCount "137"]

1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 e6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 Nc6 5. Nc3 Qc7 6. Be3 a6
7. Qd2 Be7 8. O-O-O Nf6 9. f3 b5 10. Kb1 Ne5 11. g4 h6 12. Qg2
b4 13. Na4 d5 14. f4 Nexg4 15. Bc1 e5 16. fxe5 Nxe4 17. e6
Ngf2 18. Qxg7 Bf6 19. Nb5 Qxc2+ 20. Kxc2 Bxg7 21. Nc7+ Ke7
22. Nxd5+ Kxe6 23. Bg2 Be5 24. Rhe1 f5 25. Nc5+ Kf7 26. Nxe4
Nxe4 27. Bxe4 fxe4 28. Rxe4 Re8 29. Rf1+ Kg6 30. Nf4+ Bxf4
31. Rexf4 Bh3 32. Rg1+ Kh5 33. Rxb4 Re2+ 34. Kb3 Rf8 35. Rg3
Rxh2 36. Rb6 Rh8 37. Rxa6 Bg4 38. Rc3 Bf5 39. a4 Kg4 40. Rb6
Be4 41. Rf6 Re2 42. Ka3 Rd8 43. Bxh6 Rd1 44. Bc1 Bc2 45. Rf4+
Kh5 46. Rh3+ Kg6 47. Rg3+ Kh5 48. Rf8 Kh4 49. Rg7 Rd3+ 50. Ka2
Bb3+ 51. Ka1 Rd5 52. Rf1 Rd1 53. Rxd1 Bxd1 54. a5 Re4 55. Kb1
Ra4 56. Bd2 Bb3 57. Be1+ Kh5 58. Rb7 Be6 59. b4 Kg4 60. b5 Kf5
61. b6 Ra3 62. Kc2 Ra2+ 63. Kd3 Ke5 64. Re7 Ra3+ 65. Bc3+ Kd5
66. Rxe6 Kxe6 67. b7 Rb3 68. a6 Kd7 69. a7 1-0

```
> 6 votes

---
Tags: famous-players
---


title: Pawn Promotion to Queen

text:
# Question
Title: Pawn Promotion to Queen
I have my rook on the 8th rank. My pawn is directly behind it. I want to move diagonal with my pawn to promote it to a queen. Can I move diagonal to reach the 8th rank and promote my pawn?

# Answer
> 6 votes
You may do so only if the pawn is capturing one of the opponent's pieces; that is the only way a pawn ever moves diagonally. So here you can do what you describe:

```
[fen "3Rn3/k2P4/8/8/8/K7/8/8 w - - 0 1"]

1.dxe8=Q

```

But if you're talking about a situation like the following, then no, the pawn cannot move as you described:

```
[fen "3R4/k2P4/8/8/8/K7/8/8 w - - 0 1"]

```

---
Tags: rules, pawns, pawn-promotion
---


# Question
Title: Is this line of the Grunfeld playable for White?
So, I was playing this line of the exchange variation of the Grunfeld: 1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 g6 3. Nc3 d5 4. cxd5 Nxd5 5. e4 Nxc3 6. bxc3 Bg7 7. Bc4 c5 8. Ne2 O-O 9. Be3 Nc6.

```
[Fen "r1bq1rk1/pp2ppbp/2n3p1/2p5/2BPP3/2P1B3/P3NPPP/R2QK2R w KQ - 0 10"]

```

In my computer's opening book, the only recommended move for White is 10. O-O.

However, I want to know whether 10. dxc5 is playable?

# Answer
> 4 votes
The problem with this line is that this is exactly what Black is hoping for.

You give the center to "win a pawn", but Black has several compensation : first of all the black bishop on ...Bg7 is now very strong. Also with ...Qc7 follow by ...Rd8 black will win the d-file. If Black want then they can easily win back the pawn by the following plan : ...e5, ...Bf8 and ...Bxc5.

# Answer
> 1 votes
According to http://chessok.com/?page\_id=352 this has been played five times (by weaker players) and gives black a very slight advantage (-0.11) after 10…Qc7.

So, depending on you level this is certainly playable. If you analyse it a bit you might even have practical chances to achieve an opening advantage. But probably black will just win back the pawn and you'll have to be careful not to just be left with your worse structure.

---
Tags: opening, grunfeld-defense
---


title: Overprotection Of A Piece

text:
# Question
Title: Overprotection Of A Piece
What exactly is the logic behind the concept of “overprotection of a piece”?

Wikipedia says that it "...provides greater freedom of movement for the pieces protecting that square." If the protected pieces moves, then one of the protecting pieces leaves and that seems like it goes against the concept. What is the actual logic?

# Answer
From the cited Wikipedia article:

> The strategy of protecting a pawn or specific square of the chessboard more than is immediately necessary. This serves to dissuade the opponent from attacking that specific point and provides greater freedom of movement for the pieces protecting that square.

The sense in which overprotection provides "greater freedom of movement for the pieces protecting that square" is that, with multiple defenders already in place, no *one* of them is necessarily tied down to defense.

What follows isn't the greatest example, but I think it illustrates the concept fairly well. (I'm not claiming any of these moves are the best or are necessary; I've chosen them specifically to illustrate overprotection.)

```
[FEN "r1bq1rk1/ppp1npbp/3p1np1/4p3/2P5/2NPP1PP/PP2NPB1/R1BQ1RK1 w - - 0 1"]

1.Kh2
    {Overprotecting h3, and thus creating a genuine threat against b7 by
    the Bg2. That makes it so that the Bc8 can't develop immediately.}
    ( 1.Rb1 {In this variation White leaves the Bg2 as the only defender
    of h3, and so Black can immediately develop the Bc8 if she likes.}
    1...Be6 2.Bxb7 Bxh3 3.Bxa8 Qxa8 4.e4 Bxf1 5.Qxf1 )
1...Rb8
    {Black responds by overprotecting b7 herself. Again, having this
    second defender frees the Bc8 to develop.}
    ( 1...Be6 $2 2.Bxb7 )
2.Rb1 Be6

```

The Wikipedia entry continues:

> \[Overprotection\] can cause an opponent to pursue a faulty plan or no plan at all.

I'm not sure about that wording, but I think the intended meaning is this: the opponent might press on against the overprotected piece/square in what will be a futile attempt thanks to the overprotection (faulty plan) or will be forced to abandon that endeavor and look for something else to do (no plan at all).

For example, in the basic structure of my position above, it is very common for Black to line up a Be6 and Qd7 to harass the h3 pawn (or just try to trade off the light-square bishops if the pawn is still on h2); but once White has played h3 and Kh2 as above, Black won't really be able to effect that plan. She might press on and ultimately be unsuccessful (faulty plan), or instead need to figure out something else to do in the position (no plan).
> 8 votes

---
Tags: theory, strategy, positional-play
---


title: How do I mate here?

text:
# Question
Title: How do I mate here?
I'm White, and I lost this game because the time was over. What move do I need to do the mate combination?

```
[FEN "8/6pp/p3R3/5rk1/3B2N1/5P1P/PP3P2/5K2 w - - 0 1"]

```

# Answer
> 8 votes
You have so much material and positional advantage that in time trouble you just need to make moves that consolidate and defend, and trade your pieces. For instance, moving `Kg2` to protect f3. You don't need to do anything fantastic to win, just gradually close in.

Tony's answer is a solid way to win without taking much time to think. If you're up in material, **the more you trade, the better**. `1. Re5` will help you out the most, since the fewer pieces Black has, the less likely you are to stumble into a blunder.

That said, `1. Bxg7` stands out to me as a good move. It does allow `...Rxf3` but the f-pawns were doubled anyway, so it's a great trade for you. After playing around with the position and toying with `2. Bh6+` (not a great idea), I decided the simple `2 Kg2` is the move I would play.

At this point, I used an engine (Stockfish) which tells me that the original position is mate in 11 beginning with `1. Bxg7 Rxf3 2. Kg2`. The full mate it gives is:

```
[FEN "8/6pp/p3R3/5rk1/3B2N1/5P1P/PP3P2/5K2 w - - 4 1"]

1. Bxg7 Rxf3 2. Kg2 Kf5 3. Rf6+ Ke4 4. Rxf3 Kd5 5. Rf6 a5 6. Ne3+ Kc5 7. Bf8+ Kd4 8. Kf3 Ke5 9. Bg7 Kd4 10. Rf5+ Kd3 11. Rd5# 1-0

```

But that's far too complicated to figure out in actual play if you're a beginner under time pressure. You would win faster by simply picking off Black pawns and promoting one of yours.

Basically, you did not have a mating net quite yet, if Black played smart. But you had at least the rook. You're probably wondering "what if Black didn't play the moves shown above?" Let's try `1. Bxg7 a5`: Stockfish calls this position a mate in 6:

```
[FEN "8/6pp/p3R3/5rk1/3B2N1/5P1P/PP3P2/5K2 w - - 4 1"]

1. Bxg7 a5 2. Kg2 a4 3. Rh6 a3 4. Kg3 Rxf3+ 5. Kxf3 axb2 6. h4+ Kf5 7. Ne3#

```

Black's useless pawn moves go to show that he is completely helpless. Anything else he tries results in a quicker mate. For instance, `4... axb2` allows `5. h4#`.

And trying to escape with his rook is futile too. True, he doesn't have to play `1... Rxf3`, but you saw what happens if he leaves his rook on f5. How about `1... Rb5`? `2. Rh6` leaves Black helpless. Notice how the Black king is completely boxed in by the white rook along e6, f6 and g6, and h5 and h4, and the knight takes care of h6 and e5, and the f3 pawn snags e4. The Black king now only has three squares in his box (the f3 pawn is guarded by the White king on White's next move), and Black's rook is helpless because of White's extra bishop and a2 and b2 pawns.

But always, which line you take depends on how much time you have on your clock.

The latter lines might be more advanced of a process than you're used to, but it is always good to study a little deeper than you're comfortable playing.

```
[FEN "8/6Bp/p6R/1r4k1/6N1/5P1P/PP3P2/5K2 w - - 2 2"]

```

# Answer
> 8 votes
I don't see a mate. The way forward is to remove his Rook by `1. Re5`. Since this pins his Rook against his King he can't move it away. The Rook is coming off the board.

Once his rook is off the board, you have 2 extra pieces and an extra pawn on each side of the board. You really can't lose. Mating with a Knight and Bishop is not easy, so push your Queenside's *unopposed* pawn - the `b` pawn. If you push the `a` pawn you allow him to exploit a backward pawn.

Here's one possibility. There are better moves, but this is sure and simple.

```

[FEN "8/6pp/p3R3/5rk1/3B2N1/5P1P/PP3P2/5K2 w - - 0 1"]

1. Re5 Rxe5 2. Bxe5 g6 3. b4 h5 4. Ne3 Kh4 5.Kg2 Kg5 6. a4

```

...and it's pretty clear White is going to Queen a pawn. White must be careful not to stalemate black.

---
Tags: tactics, checkmate
---


# Question
Title: Can someone explain how this pawn endgame works?
I'm sorry if this position has been asked before, but can someone explain how it works?

```
[Event "?"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "????.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "?"]
[Black "?"]
[Result "*"]
[FEN "8/4k3/3p4/3P4/2P5/8/8/5K2 w - - 0 1"]

1.Kg2 Kf8 2.Kf2 Ke7 3.Kg3 Kf7 4.Kf3 Ke8 5.Kg4 Kf8 6.Kf4 Kg8 7.Ke4 Kf8 8.Kd4 Ke7 9.Kc3 Kd8 10.Kb4 Kc7 11.Ka5 Kb7 12.Kb5 Kc7 13.Ka6 Kd8 14.Kb6 Kd7 15.Kb7 Kd8 16.Kc6 Ke7 17.Kc7 Kf8 18.Kxd6 Kg7 19.Kc7 Kf8 20.d6 Kg7 21.d7 Kf8 22.d8=Q+ *

```

This is perfect play, but I don't understand it; can someone explain it?

# Answer
I think considering an intermediate position first helps clarify what is going on. Consider the following position with Black to move. The white king is on d4, poised to head for infiltration on either the queenside or the kingside. The only drawing move for Black is to play `1...Kd8!`, not committing to one side or the other. (For instance, `1...Ke7?` reaches a position from the OP's main line, where White wins by heading to the other side via c3.) Playing through the variations and annotations below from this position will (hopefully) show how the opposition and distant opposition come into play rather immediately from this point.

```
[White "Intermediate"]
[Black "Position"]
[FEN "8/3k4/3p4/3P4/2PK4/8/8/8 b - - 0 1"]
[StartFlipped "0"]

1...Kd8 $1
    {This is the only drawing move. When the white king comes to d4, so
    long as the black king can play to d7 or d8, the game is still drawn.
    But if the black king has to commit to one side or the other (to the
    c-file or e-file) then the white king will be able to infiltrate on
    the other side.}
    ( 1...Ke7 $2 {This reaches a position from the OP's main line, where
    now White can infiltrate from the queenside.} 2.Kc3 $1 Kd7 3.Kb4 Kc7
    4.Ka5 $1 {Not giving Black the chance to steal back the opposition.}
        ( 4.Kb5 $2 Kb7 )
    )
    ( 1...Kc7 $2 {Going this direction lets White invade on the kingside.}
    2.Ke4 Kd8
        ( 2...Kb6 $5 {White must keep in mind this counterattacking idea,
        but it doesn't work out.} 3.Kf5 Kc5 4.Ke6 {White wins via the
        classic trebuchet.} )
    3.Kf5 Ke7 4.Kg6 Ke8 5.Kf6 Kd7 6.Kf7 Kd8 7.Ke6 Kc7 8.Ke7 )
2.Kc3
    ( 2.Ke4 Ke7 3.Kf5
        ( 3.Kf4 Kf6 )
    3...Kf7 {Black maintains the peace.} )
2...Kc7 3.Kb4
    ( 3.Kb3 Kb7 $1 {Again the only drawing move. Without maintaining the
    distant opposition, White can infiltrate.} )
3...Kb6
    {Black maintains the peace.}

```

Returning to the starting position, then, if White can maneuver his king to d4 in such a way that Black cannot play her king to the d-file in response, he will have a won game. What needs to be done to achieve that? *White needs to force matters such that Black must either (1) allow the intermediate position where she can't get to the d-file, or (2) get outflanked and allow infiltration anyway.* Use of the distant opposition is the only way for White to force such a decision onto Black; what complicates matters is that the mass of central pawns take squares away from each king, and that affects when one "really" has the (distant) opposition or not. The following variations and annotations attempt to show how this plays out, and to give a sense as to what considerations come into play. Certainly not every possible variation is given, but hopefully just enough wrong turns are explained to show what is going on.

```
[White "Starting"]
[Black "Position"]
[FEN "8/4k3/3p4/3P4/2P5/8/8/5K2 w - - 0 1"]

1.Kg2 $1
    {This, and only this, gives Black no way to grab the distant
    opposition. Whatever move is made now, White will be able to force an
    untenable decision onto Black.}
    ( 1.Kf2 $2 Kf6 $1 {Maintaining the distant opposition keeps the
    balance.}
        ( 1...Kf7 $2 2.Kf3 $1 {Stealing away the distant opposition, the
        only winning move.} 2...Kf6 3.Kf4 $1 {Keeping the opposition. Now
        Black has a choice. Either allow the White king to infiltrate
        along the outside of the kingside, or try to force the white king
        toward the center. The latter is more stubborn, but we end up in
        the intermediate position from above where the black king is
        overcommitted and cannot get to the d-file after Kd4.} 3...Ke7
            ( 3...Kg6 {Now on the g-file, there is no time to get back to
            the d-file when the white king heads to d4.} 4.Ke4 Kf6 5.Kd4
            Ke7 {Now we are in the OP's main line, and also the
            intermediate position where black has had to commit to the
            kingside and allow infiltration on the queenside.} )
        4.Kg5 Kf7 5.Kf5 Ke7 6.Kg6 Ke8 7.Kf6 Kd7 8.Kf7 Kd8 9.Ke6 Kc7 10.Ke7
        )
    2.Ke3 Ke7 $1 {Keeping the distant opposition, and not falling for an
    appealing alternative.}
        ( 2...Ke5 $2 {This looks like taking the opposition, but because
        d5 is unavailable, this is just a mistake.} 3.Kd3 $1 Kf6 4.Kc3 {
        Black won't be in time to keep White out of the queenside.} )
    3.Kd4 Kd7 $1 {Kd8 works as well. This is our intermediate position
    where Black just needs to be on the d-file.} )
    ( 1.Ke2 $2 {This also lets Black get the distant opposition.} 1...Ke8
    $1 {The only drawing move, taking the distant opposition.} 2.Kf3
        ( 2.Ke3 Ke7 $1 3.Kf3
            ( 3.Kf4 Kf6 )
            ( 3.Kd4 Kd7 {Safely on the d-file.} )
        3...Kf7 $1 )
    2...Kf7 $1 3.Ke4 Ke8 4.Kd4 Kd7 {Safely on the d-file.} )
1...Kf6 2.Kf2 $1
    {Only this, taking the distant opposition.}
2...Ke7
    ( 2...Ke5 3.Ke3 $1 Kf6 4.Kd4 Ke7 {The intermediate position, where
    Black hasn't stayed on the d-file.} )
    ( 2...Kf5 3.Kf3 Kf6 4.Kf4 {This is the same position as after 1.Kf2?
    Kf7? 2.Kf3! Kf6 3.Kf4 given in another variation. Either Black gets
    outflanked on the kingside, or allows the intermediate position
    unfavorable.} )
3.Kg3 $1
    {Starting to outflank, and doing so in such a way that Black cannot
    grab the distant opposition. Only this wins.}
    ( 3.Ke3 $2 {This looks like grabbing the distant opposition, but it
    cannot be maintained because of squares made unavailable by pawns. Now
    the game is drawn.} 3...Ke8 $1 {Only this. It prevents an unfavorable
    instance of the intermediate position, and allows Black to grab the
    distant opposition should White head toward the kingside.} 4.Kd4
        ( 4.Kf4
            ( 4.Kf3 Kf7 $1 )
        4...Kf8 $1 )
    4...Kd7 {Safely on the d-file.} )
3...Ke8
    ( 3...Kf6
        ( 3...Kf7 4.Kf3 $1 )
    4.Kf4 $1 )
4.Kg4 $1
    {Again not allowing Black to grab the distant opposition, and only
    this wins.}
4...Kf8 5.Kf4 $1
    {Only this.}
5...Kg8
    {Now that the black king is on the g-file, White can head for Kd4 and
    the intermediate position where the black king can't get back to the
    d-file.}
    ( 5...Ke7 6.Kg5 {Infiltrating as in other variations given.} 6...Kf7
    7.Kf5 Ke7 8.Kg6 Ke8 9.Kf6 Kd7 10.Kf7 Kd8 11.Ke6 Kc7 12.Ke7 )
6.Ke4 Kf7 7.Kd4 Ke7
    {White wins as in the OP's main line.}

```
> 4 votes

# Answer
This is about maintaining "the opposition." This is a technique where by placing one's King carefully, the opposing King can be forced onto bad squares. Fast forward to move `17. Kc7`. That is the entire goal of the game. Now Black's choices are all bad and the defending pawn will fall.

A player is said to have the opposition when, after his move, there is one space between the Kings horizontally or vertically. That is, when they are facing each other. And that's what we see on move 17. See how the opponent's King is limited and pushed back.

Then there is the 'distant opposition' where the Kings are separated by more squares but one side has the ability to maneuver into the opposition.

It is not easy to choose the correct first few moves in the diagram above. I would have chosen `Ke1` incorrectly and suffered a draw against best play. Your best bet is to read the link below, and play through the possibilities.

Here's the wiki entry, for more info.
> 2 votes

---
Tags: analysis, endgame, pawn-endgame
---


# Question
Title: How many female players participated in the european indivdual championship?
The female players, I found out in the european individual championship, are

WGM Aleksandra Goryachkina WGM Maria Manakova WIM Olga Vasiliev WIM Camelia-Adriana Ciobanu

Did any other female players participate ?

# Answer
> 2 votes
You can find the final rankings here to get a list of all participants. You could then check the names against the FIDE ratings website which would tell you the gender of the player.

A quick glance through the list shows these additional female players (probably not exhaustive)

Shlomit Vardi

Limor Altshul

Sophia Toporkova

Michal Lahav

---
Tags: tournament
---


# Question
Title: What happened in the game Draskovic - Sutovsky (EICC 2015)?
In the European Individual Championship, the game Draskovic-Sutovsky is exhibited as a win for white although the end position is totally drawn.

It is also hard to imagine that black lost on time in such an easy position getting 30 seconds at each move.

So what happened in this game? Is the result correct or should it be a draw?

```
[Event "16th European Individual Championship"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "2015.03.08"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Draskovic, Luka"]
[Black "Sutovsky, Emil"]
[Result "*"]
[WhiteElo "2432"]
[BlackElo "2626"]
[ECO "B17"]
[fen ""]

1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 dxe4 4.Nxe4 Nd7 5.Bc4 Ngf6 6.Ng5 e6 7.Qe2 Nb6 8.Bd3
h6 9.N5f3 c5 10.dxc5 Bxc5 11.Ne5 Nbd7 12.Ngf3 Qc7 13.Bf4 Bb4+ 14.Kf1 Bd6
15.Ng6 Bxf4 16.Nxh8 Nc5 17.Bb5+ Kf8 18.g3 Bd6 19.Kg2 b6 20.Rhe1 Bb7 21.a4
Nce4 22.Ba6 Rc8 23.Bxb7 Qxb7 24.Rad1 Bc5 25.Nxf7 Kxf7 26.Ne5+ Kg8 27.f3
Nf2 28.Rd2 Re8 29.Qc4 Nd5 30.Rxf2 Bxf2 31.Kxf2 Rc8 32.Qe4 b5 33.a5 Qc7 34.
Nd3 Re8 35.c3 Qxa5 36.Qd4 Rd8 37.Rxe6 Nf6 38.Rd6 Re8 39.g4 Qa1 40.Rd8 Rxd8
41.Qxd8+ Kh7 42.Qd4 a5 43.h4 Qd1 44.g5 Qd2+ 45.Kf1 hxg5 46.hxg5 Qxg5 47.
Nf4 Kh6 48.Qd2 a4 49.Qe3 Kh7 50.Kf2 Qh4+ 51.Kg2 Qg5+ 52.Kf2 Kh8 53.Qd4 Qf5
54.Qd8+ Ng8 55.Qh4+ Nh6 56.Qd8+ Kh7 57.Qd3 g5 58.Qxf5+ Nxf5 59.Ne6 Kg6 60.
Nf8+ Kh5 61.Ne6 Kh4 62.Ke2 Nd6 63.Nd4 Kg3 64.Ne6 Kh4 65.Nd4 Nc4 66.Nxb5
Kg3 67.Na3 Ne5 68.c4 Nxf3 69.c5 g4 70.Nb5 Ne5 71.Na7 Ng6 72.c6 Nf4+ 73.Kd2
Nd5 74.Nb5 Kh2 75.c7 Nxc7 76.Nxc7 g3 77.Ne6 g2 78.Nd4 Kg3 79.Ne2+ Kf3 80.
Kd3 Kf2 81.Nf4 g1=N 82.Kc3 Ke3 83.Nd5+ Ke4 84.Nb6 Nf3 85.Nxa4 Kd5

```

# Answer
chess-results.com says the result was a draw. I wonder if it was one of those DGT errors where an incorrect result is reported due to the position of the kings.
> 4 votes

---
Tags: tournament
---


title: Adjusting in one's turn only

text:
# Question
Title: Adjusting in one's turn only
There is this touch-move rule which doesn't apply when the player says "Adjust" .

Wikipedia says :

> To adjust the position of a piece on its square without being required to move it. A player may only do this on his turn to move , and he must first say "I adjust", or the French equivalent "J'adoube".

* Is "**only on his turn to move**" a very strict and binding rule ?
Since I see that this is done many times during the opponent's turn and no one complains about it .
* Is this there so that the opponent doesn't get disturbed while calculating ?
* If a scenario comes up where a piece is out of its square and is disturbing me, can I say adjust during his turn? (Maybe he may get irritated once in a blue moon.)
* Is this rule required in all OTB events as it hardly gets followed ?
* What is the historical background behind the "J'adoube"? Why is French the lingua franca in this case?

# Answer
> If a scenario comes up where a piece is out of its square and is disturbing me , can I say adjust during his turn ? ( maybe he may get irritated once in a blue moon )

If it's your opponent's move, you were the last person to modify the board and had the opportunity to adjust then.

If it's bothering you that much then get up, get a drink of water, look at the other games, and wait until your opponent has moved and you can make the world right again.
> 3 votes

# Answer
From the FIDE Laws of chess:

> 4.2 Provided that he first expresses his intention (for example by saying “j’adoube” or “I adjust”), only the player having the move may adjust one or more pieces on their squares.
>
> 6.2.d Only the player whose clock is running is allowed to adjust the pieces.

The USCF rules are similar.

As you surmised, the rule is there to avoid distracting the opponent. In my experience in USCF tournaments, the rule is generally followed. If my opponent were to adjust a piece during my move, I probably would let it go if it only happened once, but if he continued, I would inform him that he can only do it on his own move.
> 2 votes

# Answer
OK, so it's your turn and you're in the middle of a deep long think in a complicated position when this big hairy arm reaches all the way across the board obscuring your view of a large part of the board and adjusts your castled king and rook. It's not just a quick tap of the piece. It's a lengthy, thumb and 2 fingers adjusting of the pieces. That's a good thing in your view? It doesn't matter, by the way, whether your opponent says "j'adoube" or anything else in that situation. It's not his turn and so he can have no intention of moving the pieces touched.

Do that to me and I'll immediately call the arbiter and I'll expect him to penalize you by giving me an extra 2 minutes on the clock. If an arbiter is actually watching and sees it happen I don't expect to have to complain and tell him. I expect him to intervene immediately and penalize you.

On the other hand we have in our club a couple of players with the following bad habit. They make a move, press the clock and then instinctively touch the piece further on its square whether it needs it or not before writing the move down. At standard time controls where I'm also writing the moves down I'd probably let this go but at rapid or blitz when time is more critical I'd complain to the arbiter.

Note that when I'm arbiter in a competition with these two players I warn them after the game if they do it and their opponent doesn't complain. If an opponent complains then I give an automatic 2 minute penalty. One player is pushing 70 and I don't really expect him to change. It's only thanks to the increment that he no longer hits the clock in Zeitnot, but the other player is in his mid 20's and quite strong (2100+). He needs to fix this bad habit before he starts getting penalized in stronger competitions.
> 2 votes

---
Tags: rules, history
---


title: Modus in the reykjavik open 2015

text:
# Question
Title: Modus in the reykjavik open 2015
* Is it correct that the reykjavik open 2015 is a KO tournament ?
* If the game is a draw, does black achieve the next round ?

# Answer
> 2 votes
No, according to the tournament page; it is a Swiss.

---
Tags: tournament
---


title: Bye-rule in the reykjavic open

text:
# Question
Title: Bye-rule in the reykjavic open
I am confused about the bye-rule in the reykjavic tournament. If I understand it right, a player can take a half point for free under some conditions.

* Does anyone know the exact rules ?
* What is the sense of this rule ?

# Answer
The exact rules are on the tournament rules page. If your schedule does not permit you to play every game or you just need some rest, you can can take a half-point bye instead, getting 1/2 point instead of playing. This is pretty much the same bye rule used in every Swiss System tournament.
> 2 votes

---
Tags: tournament
---


# Question
Title: Is there a full tutorial for Queen vs Rook endgame?
How do I convert the game into KQK easily, or simply mate? I've already learned the Philidor position.

# Answer
Unfortunately, no "easy" fool-proof method is known. It can take 31 moves until the checkmate or capture the rook with best blay from both side in the worst possible initial position. Nevertheless, the queen can always win if the player with the rook has no perpetual check or a fast win of the queen or a stalemate trap.

In particular, you have to avoid stalemate traps. Human defence tends to lose faster because of the fear of putting the rook far away.

A difficult position is, for example W : Kd5, Qf7 S : Kd8, Rb6

where white has to find the counterintuitive move Qf4! which is not the only winning move but soon or later white must come to this idea to win.
> 1 votes

---
Tags: endgame, queen-endgame
---


# Question
Title: Do 5 connected pawns usually win against a rook?
Suppose, white has 5 connected pawns, black only a rook. Under normal circumstances (black cannot immediately win a pawn, the white pawns are not too far advanced, say on the rows 2 to 4, black's king is standing in front of the white pawns)

Can the pawns triumph in such a situation ?

# Answer
> 4 votes
Yes of course, there are more chances for white who has 5 connected pawns to wins instead of black who has a rook. A rook can't check the king all the time and the pawns are always helping each others to get to the final state to get a queen. This problem is usually won by the 5 pawns.

---
Tags: endgame, rook-endgame
---


# Question
Title: Can the bishops and knights triumph over the queen?
I heard that two bishops and two knights have good winning chances against the queen according to the 7-man tablebases. Unfortunately, even the pawnless 7-man tablebases are not available online. So, I am wondering if this special position is won for white.

```

[FEN "3qk3/8/8/8/8/8/8/1NB1KBN1 w - - 0 1"]
[TITLE "White to move and win?"]

```

Houdini's Shootout at Level 21 Ply :

```
[Event "Stellung ausspielen (Houdini15aw32, 21p)"]
[White "Neue Partie"]
[Black "Houdini 1.5a w32"]
[Result "1-0"]
[FEN "3qk3/8/8/8/8/8/8/1NB1KBN1 w - - 0 0"]

1. Nf3 Qa5+ 2. Nbd2 Qb4 3. Ne5 Qc3 4. Nd3 Qf6 5. Bb2 Qh4+ 6. Ke2 Qh2+ 7. Nf2

Qc7 8. Bd4 Kf8 9. Nfe4 Ke7 10. Ke3 Kd7 11. Bc4 Ke7 12. Bd5 Qd7 13. Nf6 Qc7 14.

Nf3 Qc1+ 15. Ke4 Qc8 16. Ng5 Qc2+ 17. Ke5 Qc7+ 18. Kf5 Qc2+ 19. Nge4 Qd1 20.

Bc5+ Kd8 21. Ke6 Qe1 22. Bb6+ Kc8 23. Ke7 Qe2 24. Kf7 Qf1 25. Nc5 Qf4 26. Bb7+

Kb8 27. Bc6 Qf5 28. Na6+ Kc8 29. Bd7+ Qxd7+ 30. Nxd7 Kxd7 31. Nb4 Kc8 32. Ke6

Kb7 33. Nd5 Ka6 34. Be3 Kb7 35. Kd6 Kb8 36. Kc6 Ka8 37. Nc7+ Kb8 38. Bb6 Kc8

39. Ba7 Kd8 40. Nd5 Ke8 41. Kd6 Kf7 42. Ne7 Kg7 43. Be3 Kf6 44. Bf4 Kf7 45. Bg5

Ke8 46. Nc6 Kf7 47. Ne5+ Ke8 48. Kc6 Kf8 49. Kd7 Kg7 50. Ke7 Kg8 51. Bh6 Kh7

52. Bf8 Kg8 53. Ng4 Kh7 54. Kf7 Kh8 55. Bg7+ Kh7 56. Nf6# 1-0

```

# Answer
> 3 votes
Theoretically yes, as a practical matter (for humans), no.

What is known is that a pawnless position cannot be won (barring unusual positional circumstances) if one side has an advantage of a bishop or knight, but it can be won if one side has the advantage of a rook (or a queen versus a rook).

The "old" wisdom is that three minor pieces are worth about a queen, so white has the advantage of one minor piece. As a matter of fact, three minor pieces may be worth more than a queen, pushing white's advantage closer to, say, queen versus rook.

The other thing is that with so many pieces and moving parts, White has "coordination" problems. That's why as a practical matter, human beings won't win with this kind of advantage. The advantage of a computer is that it can calculate its way around coordination problems. If the minor piece synergies indeed give the computer an advantage greater than a minor piece, the computer will find a way to bring this extra power to bear; a human being (other than a world champion caliber player), will not.

---
Tags: endgame, tablebases, queen-endgame
---


# Question
Title: Normal draw positions in the endgame KQPKQ with a bishop-pawn?
Suppose, in the endgame queen + pawn vs queen (KQPKQ) , the stronger side has a bishop-pawn (c-pawn or f-pawn). The weaker side cannot win the pawn, nor has a perpetual check, nor can play on stalemate.

Is there any drawing position left with all these conditions?

# Answer
According to the tablebase here, this position is a draw. Of course, with the open position, Black threatens perpetual check with any free move.

```

[FEN "3k1q2/8/8/8/8/8/5P2/3KQ3 w - - 0 1"]

```
> 1 votes

# Answer
> The weaker side cannot win the pawn, nor has a perpetual check nor can play on stalemate. Is there any drawing position left with all these conditions?

I will answer this with a **no**, and for a reason that's more general than the KQPKQ scenario you're specifically interested in. But ultimately, whether the answer to your question is yes or no comes technically down to definitions. First, consider this KQPKQ position, with White to move:

```
[FEN "8/5k2/5Pq1/4K3/8/8/8/5Q2 w - - 0 32"]

```

This is a drawn position, and perhaps one might be tempted to say it meets your criteria: White never needs to lose the pawn, nor allow a perpetual check from Black, nor play into a stalemate. So why don't I think this gives a "yes" answer to your question? *Because even so, the only **reason** it's a draw is because White can only avoid those fates by playing into a different repetition himself.*

My more general point is this: there are really only two essential reasons a game is ever drawn (ignoring mutual agreement, since we're talking theory).

1. Stalemate
2. Repetition

Perpetual check is a particular case where one side forces a repetition directly, and the 50-move rule is theoretically redundant: if mate can't be forced, players will unavoidably fall into a repetition once there are no more captures or pawn moves available (as there are only finitely many chess positions in total). The 50-move rule is merely a convenience for practice. Even insufficient mating material as a reason is theoretically redundant, as again, if a mate can't be forced and stalemate doesn't arise, eventually repetition will crop up.

What I'm getting at is, even beyond your KQPKQ endgame, the only base reason a position is ever theoretically drawn is because either stalemate or repetition is ultimately unavoidable; that's it. You could take my example position as giving your question a "yes" answer, since White can choose to enter a repetition that isn't Black perpetually checking the white king; my preference is to say the answer is still "no" as I consider that functionally equivalent to allowing a perpetual from Black, but it's all semantics at that point.

---

*A preemptive point of clarification.* It is of course the case that the set of positions which are drawn with the 50-move rule in effect is different than the set of positions which are drawn without it in effect. So the 50-move rule has a definite impact on "practical endgame theory." The sense in which I'm calling it "theoretically redundant" above is only that, in an ideal setting chess never needed such a rule in the first place, as draw by repetition would eventually arise for any position in which progress can't be made.
> 1 votes

---
Tags: theory, endgame, tablebases, queen-endgame
---


# Question
Title: Current top player with most aggressive style?
Which current top player (at least ELO 2600) is the most aggressive and most compromiseless player (of course only on the chess board :) ) ?

Beliavsky is a candidate for this topic, but I do not know, if he still has this style.

# Answer
Baadur Jobava is probably the most aggressive top player right now. If you go even further up the ranking, Mamedyarov is very aggressive as well.

And although he is not one for wild and dubious attacks, Caruana is actually quite uncompromising, his draw rate is very low.

Topalov and Morozevich are two names that stand for aggressive chess. But I think they both slowed down in recent years. The same could be said for Nakamura.
> 5 votes

---
Tags: famous-players, aggressive-play
---


# Question
Title: Which top player risks complicated positions?
Which current top player (at least 2600 ELO) does not avoid complicated positions in important classic tournament games, even if they are risky ?

This is closely related to the question which player is most aggressive and compromiseless.

# Answer
> 4 votes
As wrote in my answer to your other question: Jobava and Mamedyarov play very aggressively.

Ding Liren and Arkadij Naiditsch are another two top players who regularly risk absolute chaos on the board.

# Answer
> 1 votes
Topalov definitely. See his games at Gibraltar especially against lower rated opposition.

# Answer
> 0 votes
I have to tell you honestly, Michael Adams is the top in that. Lots of his 2700-level games are absolute craziness.

---
Tags: famous-players, aggressive-play
---


# Question
Title: Quality of inputs in chess game databases?
```
[Event "FIDE Women's World Chess Championship"]
[Site "Sochi RUS"]
[Date "2015.03.17"]
[EventDate "2015.03.17"]
[Round "1.1"]
[Result "1/2-1/2"]
[White "Tatiana Kosintseva"]
[Black "Mary Ann Gomes"]
[ECO "B47"]
[WhiteElo "?"]
[BlackElo "?"]
[PlyCount "159"]
[FEN ""]

1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 e6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 Nc6 5. Nc3 Qc7 6. Be2 a6
7. O-O Nf6 8. Be3 Be7 9. f4 d6 10. Qe1 Nxd4 11. Bxd4 O-O
12. Qg3 b5 13. a3 Bb7 14. Bd3 Rad8 15. Kh1 Nh5 16. Qh3 Nxf4
17. Rxf4 e5 18. Nd5 Bxd5 19. exd5 g6 20. Raf1 f5 21. Bxf5 gxf5
22. Rxf5 Rxf5 23. Rxf5 Rf8 24. Qg4+ Kh8 25. Bc3 Qc8 26. Rxf8+
Qxf8 27. Qf3 Qh6 28. h3 Qc1+ 29. Kh2 h6 30. Bb4 Bg5 31. Bxd6
Bf4+ 32. g3 Qxc2+ 33. Qg2 Bxg3+ 34. Kxg3 Qg6+ 35. Kf2 Qxd6
36. Ke2 Qc5 37. Qe4 Qc7 38. Kd2 Qd6 39. h4 Kg7 40. h5 Qf6
41. Qg4+ Kf8 42. Ke3 Ke7 43. Ke4 a5 44. Qg3 Kd7 45. Qxe5 Qh4+
46. Kd3 Qg4 47. Kc2 Qc4+ 48. Kd2 Qg4 49. Kc2 Qc4+ 50. Kd2 Qg4
51. d6 Qg2+ 52. Ke3 Qg1+ 53. Ke4 Qg2+ 54. Kd3 Qf1+ 55. Kd4
Qc4+ 56. Ke3 Qc1+ 57. Kd3 Qd1+ 58. Ke3 Qe1+ 59. Kd4 Qg1+
60. Ke4 Qg2+ 61. Kd3 Qf1+ 62. Kc2 Qc4+ 63. Kd2 Kc6 64. Qe8+
Kxd6 65. Qf8+ Ke5 66. Qxh6 Qd5+ 67. Kc1 Qc4+ 68. Kd1 Qf1+
69. Kd2 Qg2+ 70. Kd3 Qf1+ 71. Kc2 Qf5+ 72. Kc1 Qf1+ 73. Kc2
Qf5+ 74. Kc1 Qf1+ 75. Kd2 Qc4 76. Kd1 Qf1+ 77. Kd2 Qg2+
78. Kd3 Qf1+ 79. Kc2 Qc1+ 80. Kxc1 1/2-1/2

```

First of all, how can I avoid the automatical numbering installed here, which is not useful for the purpose of entering games ?

I wonder about the quality of entering chess games in databases. The most recent entry I found in chessgames.com was the one above, but not the only one. In a game of the reykjavic open there was also a game where the last move was absurd. It was a rook end game and the last move shown was Rh8, which would simply give away the rook ( I do not remember the game).

Why do regularly appear such errors ? Are the games entered manually or is there an electronic devise which produces such annyoing errors ?

# Answer
I guess the answer is "both".

Usually (in lower leagues and opens) games are entered manually, which obviously can lead to all kind of errors. But top level games are recorded by electronic boards, which can lead to trouble if the players are moving too fast or are positioning the pieces imprecisely. And there is the constant annoyance of arbiters placing the king on the central squares to input the result, which is quite often interpreted as an actual game move by the electronic board.
> 1 votes

---
Tags: database
---


title: Running chessbase Reader on ubuntu

text:
# Question
Title: Running chessbase Reader on ubuntu
I'm currently working on ubuntu, and installed wine with chessbase reader. I wanted to watch a few videos of GM Daniel King that I had. I open the folder through chessbase, but when I click on the videos, they won't work.

Have any of you experienced something similar? Could you help me out? I appreciate your help.

# Answer
When I converted the 2014 ChessBase Database to PGN format, and finally to SCID format, I used VirtualBox (x86 and AMD64/Intel64 virtualization, for which you need to install Windows and ChessBase) because I sure what Windows programs run perfectly with it. However, I don't know if your hardware is powerful enough for a virtualization
> 3 votes

---
Tags: software, chessbase
---


# Question
Title: According to official FIDE rules, when queening a pawn, can you pause the clock?
I have heard that you are allowed to pause to clock to find your queen. Is this true?

# Answer
> 8 votes
You may stop the clock if the piece that you wish to promote to is not at hand:

> 6.12.b. A player may stop the chessclock only in order to seek the arbiter’s assistance, for example when promotion has taken place and the piece required is not available.

---
Tags: rules, pawn-promotion
---


# Question
Title: Convert ChessBase format to PGN on Linux
I have some ChessBase-format database files, and I would like to convert them to PGN so that
linux-compatible programs (like scid, chessdb, etc.) could read it.

Since I am running on linux and not windows, I can't use that workaround that involves downloading ChessBase Light then converting from there. However, I really need to use those files.

How can I convert them painlessly ? Is there an free online service that can do so ? Is there a
linux-compatible program that can do so ? Is there an opensource program that can do so (regardless of platform), so that I can port the conversion source to linux ?

# Answer
> 2 votes
I believe scidb can do it. You can get it here: http://scidb.sourceforge.net/

# Answer
> 3 votes
Scidb can do it.

Here is how

* Open the CBH database.
* When it is opened, go to the Database tab.
* Right-click on the rectangle of the CBH database and click on Export.
* Choose PGN or any other format.
* Enter the filename and click on Save.

The only drawback of Scidb for now is that it cannot unarchive `.cbv` file by now.

I made to tool to unarchive `.cbv` files. I believe it will be integrated into scidb in the future.

# Answer
> 1 votes
I want explain my procedure to convert the ChessBase MegaDatabase 2014 in to scid format...Normally it's quick if you have a little database.

1) I have used Virtualbox to install Windows7 and the ChessBase MegaDatabase 2014 in my Ubuntu.

2) After from Chessbase under Virtualbox with Windows7 installed. I have created a new database with PGN format and copy the files from database 2014 into the new PGN database.

3) ChessBase MegaDatabase 2014 have up 5.700.000 games, and need to be converted in 2 or 3 parts and this procedure take a lot of time !!!...When you have your parts run on a terminal:

"cat mypart1.pgn mypart2.pgn mypart3.pgn \>\> mypartsregrouped.pgn"

4) And finally with scid (you need scid installed), in a terminal run: (to convert the pgn file in to scid format):

"pgnscid mypartsregrouped.pgn"

and the scid database (consisting of myfile.si3, myfile.sg3 and myfile.sn3) will be created...

It's not difficult...but your computer to convert chessbase format to pgn format take a lot of time (with 5.700.000 games of course!!!).

I have make and put my aMule (emule) in share with the ChessBase MegaDatabase 2015 in **SCID FORMAT** **591.72MB**...you can now directly download.

**ed2k://|file|Chessbase%20Megadatabase%202015%20%20scid%20format%20by%20Don\_Dario.tar.bz2|620460834|8D23336F3466D29F43EB3DAC1A95F493|/**

I hope that I helped you.

---
Tags: software, pgn, database, chessbase, linux
---


# Question
Title: How do I change Stockfish's Engine Parameters?
I have no clue how to do this, I want to change its Contempt to -100.

# Answer
> 4 votes
As shown in the screenshot below. Goto Tools -\> Analysis Engines -\> Edit. You'll see a UCI configure dialog. In this example, I had another engine but the idea remains the same.

---
Tags: engines, stockfish
---


# Question
Title: Stalemating the opponent in order to not lose
There are some defensive ideas to get one's own king stalemated in order to not lose the game (mostly in the endgame, but sometimes also in the middle game).

1. Have (master) games been played where the only idea not to lose was to stalemate the *opponent*?
2. What about any legal position (which need not have occurred in a real game)?
3. What if you forget about the "only idea" requirement?

**Edit:** Although there is already a totally fine answer, I would not mind more answers using another patterns.

# Answer
> 8 votes
It's possible to build a bit on magd's answer. Consider the following position.

```
 [Title "White to move"]
 [SetUp "1"]
 [FEN "8/8/8/8/8/1N6/pk1K4/8 w - - 0 1"]

 1. Na1! Kxa1 2. Kc1

```

The only way to draw is `1. Na1! Kxa1 2.Kc1` (or `2. Kc2`) stalemate. I think there are some nice studies with this theme, but I can't find them right now.

# Answer
> 6 votes
Here is an example of such a position.

```
[FEN "4k2K/7P/8/8/8/8/8/8 b - - 0 1"]
[startflipped ""]

```

The only ways to draw are Kf8 and Kf7, since both stop Kg8 and stalemate the opponent. This has surely been played in master games.

For a slightly more complicated pawn endgame see, here is a Anand - Kramnik game. Black has to stalemate White at the end of this game, or else they lose.

---
Tags: problems, stalemate
---


# Question
Title: Which openings offer the best chances to reach an endgame quickly?
If you are strong at endgames, which openings are favorouble for you because they tend to lead quickly to an endgame ?

# Answer
The Berlin comes to mind.

White can avoid this famous endgame, but only at the cost of relinquishing any prospects for an opening advantage.

Generally I have a hard time coming up with *openings* leading to endgames. There are rather *variations* within openings that are endgame prone.

To find variations like the Berlin I advice you to look at the games of Ulf Andersson. He is famous for going into the endgame as quickly as possible.
> 4 votes

# Answer
My answer is: none. Even if some variants allow some quick piece exchanging, the other part has always a chance to complicate things.

Also you don't have to fall for the false idea that once the Queens are exchanged the game has reached, or is about to reach shortly, the endgame.
> 2 votes

---
Tags: opening, endgame
---


# Question
Title: Do better board representations than the standard one exist?
Consider *the classical representation* of the state of a chess game. I'll draw the board:

```
R BK BNR
PPPP  PP
  N Q
    PP
    p
  np p
ppp   pp
r bkqbnr

```

Here is its move list:

```
d5 d5
c4 c6
Nf3 e6
Qd3 Nf6
...

```

Here is its FEN notation:

```
rnbqkb1r/pp3ppp/2p1pn2/3p4/2PP4/3Q1N2/PP2PPPP/RNB1KB1R w KQkq -

```

These three ways to describe the game state are isomorphic and contain exactly the same information represented differently. A computer would have no problem converting from one representation to the other (kind of, the castling flag isn't available in the first representation and the second one encodes all the game states). Computers uses even stranger representations like bit boards which I won't go into here.

In fact, there is an almost endless amount of ways to represent the state of a chess game. For example, here is one I just came up with:

```
R.BK.BNRPPPP. PP..N.Q.......PP......p.....np.p..ppp...ppr.bkqbnr

```

But if I asked you to "find the best move for white" the first representation would be much easier for you than the others.

Why? Is it just because the classical representation is what most players are used to or does it have some inherent advantage? Could you train your skill at playing chess using only FEN notation and over time come to prefer that? Has any research been done into this area? Maybe there is a better way to represent a chess game than the classical one which gives you a huge advantage when calculating lines deeply but just no one has found it?

# Answer
> 6 votes
Chess is a game in two dimensions. The game is made to be played in two dimensions. Pieces move horizontally, vertically, and diagonally very naturally on a chess board. It's purely visual and the sort of thing our brain does very well. Other depictions of the position sacrifice the two dimensional nature of the game. When this information is lost, we have to calculate to reconstruct the spacial relationships in the game. Consider the difficulty of spotting a pin or discovered check when using FEN.

In the other notations other than the standard diagram, you'll spend a lot of time doing mechanical sorts of math.

The different representations (diagram, moves, and FEN) exist because they fill different needs.

---
Tags: engines, psychology, fen, computer-chess
---


# Question
Title: Why do many people think that top grand masters can always reach a draw?
I often heard the claim that top grand masters can assure a draw, if they do not risk anything. I disagree with this claim.

What are the reasons that so many people think that very strong players cannot lose a game, if they do not play risky moves ?

# Answer
The basic dynamic in modern top-level chess is that White wants to find a way to get some edge, often quite small, out of the opening. Black wants to find a way to equalize or otherwise draw. This means that a lot of what has been rejected by White are lines that lead to equality. So, I would agree that a top-10 player wanting a draw with White will basically never lose because he will simply select one of those ways that has drawn in the past. With Black, though, I disagree because making a draw is the essence of the challenge and often eludes even Carlsen.
> 1 votes

---
Tags: draw, famous-players
---


# Question
Title: How to play against an engine using scidb?
I'v just installed the scidb chess database, and I can't figure how to play against an engine from there.
Is this feature even supported ? If it is, how to use it ?

# Answer
On this page, you can see that Scidb is not intended to be used to play against an engine.

You can use `scidb` for game analysis (click on the train button in the board tab), `chessx` to play against the computer (and game analysis too) and `raptor chess interface` or `Jin` to play on FICS (Free Internet Chess Server). These softwares all work on Linux. Other softwares are availble on Windows and OS X.
> 1 votes

---
Tags: engines, software, database, scidb
---


title: Ideas for white in closed sicilian?

text:
# Question
Title: Ideas for white in closed sicilian?
What are the ideas for white in closed Sicilian? I am talking about 1 e4 c5 2 Nc3 Nc6

Where do I place my pieces? At which side should I play?

What are the ideas for black and how can I prevent it.

# Answer
Generally white tries to develop a kingside attack by pushing the kingside pawns. Blacks strategy is less fixed. I always try to get counterplay on the queenside and I usually do get some play, but the white attack always stays dangerous.

In this game by Magnus Carlsen you can see some typical ideas:

* The Qd2-Be3 setup.
* Bg2 and going for f4.
* 0-0! Contrary to the open sicilian, castling long would be suicide here.
* Bringing the Nc3 to the kingside and kicking out the d4 knight with c3.
* Nh3 is a bit unusual, but it speeds up f4. Completely normal would be Nf3-h4.

Carlsen-Wojtaczek:

```
rnbqkbnr/pppppppp/8/8/8/8/PPPPPPPP/RNBQKBNR w KQkq - 0 1
1. e4 c5 2. Nc3 d6 3. g3 Nc6 4. Bg2 g6 5. d3 Bg7 6. Be3 e5
7. Nh3 Nge7 8. f4 Nd4 9. O-O O-O 10. Qd2 Bd7 11. Nd1 Qc8
12. Ndf2 Ndc6 13. c3 b5 14. fxe5 Nxe5 15. Bh6 N7c6 16. Bxg7
Kxg7 17. Nf4 Qd8 18. Rad1 Rc8 19. Qe2 h5 20. d4 cxd4 21. cxd4
Ng4 22. h3 Nxf2 23. Qxf2 Ne7 24. Rd3 b4 25. Rf3 Qe8 26. g4
hxg4 27. hxg4 Bb5 28. Re1 Qd8 29. g5 Qb6 30. Bh3 Rcd8 31. Be6
Be8 32. Nd5 Nxd5 33. Bxd5 1-0

```
> 4 votes

---
Tags: opening, sicilian-defense
---


# Question
Title: Full-point-losing move in an endgame rook vs rook?
Does anyone know a game, where a full-point-losing move was made in an endgame where each side had only one rook and pawns ?

# Answer
> 3 votes
Here's an example between two super grandmasters:

```
[White "Laurent Fressinet"]
[Black "Vladimir Malakhov"]
[Event "FIDE World Cup 2013"]
[Site "Tromso"]
[Date "2013.08.16"]
[FEN "8/2r5/8/6R1/3k1Pp1/6P1/2K5/8 w - - 4 59"]

1.Kb3 $4 ( 1.Kb2 $1 { The only winning move. } Rb7+ 2.Ka3 Kc4 ( 2...Ra7+ { Continuing to check like this isn't useful, as the king just walks towards the rook. } 3.Kb4 Rb7+ 4.Ka5 Ra7+ 5.Kb6 ) 3.Rxg4 { The win with the connected passed pawns is still a bit tricky, as White's king is badly placed. What follows is a sample line. } Rb5 4.Rg6 Rf5 5.Ka4 Kd4 6.Kb4 Ke4 7.Kc4 Ra5 8.Re6+ Kf3 9.Re5 Ra1 10.Rg5 Ke4 11.Kb5 Rc1 12.Rc5 Rg1 13.Re5+ Kf3 14.Rg5 Ke4 15.Kc6 Rd1 16.Re5+ Kf3 17.Rd5 Rf1 18.Rg5 Rd1 19.f5 Ke4 20.g4 Ke5 21.Rg6 Rd2 22.Re6+ Kf4 23.Rd6 Rf2 24.Rg6 Rd2 25.f6 Ke5 26.g5 Ke6 27.Rg7 Rc2+ 28.Kb7 Rf2 29.Kc8 Rf1 30.Re7+ Kf5 31.Kd8 Ra1 32.Rd7 Kg6 33.f7 Kg7 34.Ke8 Ra8+ 35.Ke7 Rb8 36.g6 Kxg6 37.f8=Q Rxf8 38.Kxf8 ) 1...Rc3+ 2.Kb4 Rxg3 3.Rg8 Ke4 4.Kc4 Rg2 5.Re8+ Kxf4 6.Kd3 Ra2 7.Rf8+ Kg3 8.Ke3 Kg2 0-1

```

White has a won position here, but must play Kb2. Instead he played Kb3, which loses to Rc3+. (I have generated a FinalGen tablebase to confirm the status of the positions. The Lomonosov tablebases could be used instead, but I don't have access to them.)

---
Tags: blunder, rook-endgame
---


# Question
Title: What are some popular anti sicilians and what are their respective strengths and weaknesses?
I dislike the positions in the sicilian in which both sides kamikaze each other. What are some popular anti sicilians which will bring the black players out of their comfort zone?

# Answer
For me it was very helpful to pick one opening (continuation) from moves available in big chess database like here

http://www.365chess.com/opening.php?m=3&n=3&ms=e4.c5&ns=3.3

I wouldn't recommend going with most common move 2.Nf3: that is what your opponent (a Sicilian player) is most used to, prepared and comfortable with.

For example Sicilian player played Smith Mora Gambit in less than one percent of all his games against 1.e4. But I played Smith Mora Gambit in 100% games against c5. Which can be considered an advantage.

Best thing is that you don't have to spend many hours studying all Sicilian dragons and other variations. But if your opponent wants to be ready for you he will have to study all variations of Smith Mora on top of all his previous studies of usual Sicilian theory.

(Don't forget to check sanity of variation with the best engine available.)
> 3 votes

# Answer
First off when dealing with the Sicilian defense there is a lot of ground to cover and this question is very broad as the open Sicilian has 4 major variations and the closed Sicilian has at least 3 major variations that immediately come into my mind.

The following are good readings for anti-sicilians:

Alapin Variation, Moscow Variation, Rossolimo Variation, Grand Prix Attack, The Closed Sicilian (this has 3 major variations), Smith-Morra Gambit, Wing Gambit

Now if you wish to avoid the Sicilian entirely, you may want to consider switching your own opening strategy. As white and black I see the Sicilian a lot in online play, I started using the queens gambit as white to go into fresh lines of play which leads to a more relaxed build up of both players armies into the middle game, it also has several trapping lines that you can use to catch an uneducated player with.

I hope that helps, just keep in mind that when dealing with the Sicilian there is a lot of theory to cover and it is considered the most solid reply to white's king pawn opening.

References:

http://www.chess.com/blog/Torkil/anti-sicilians

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glossary\_of\_chess#Anti-Sicilian
> 2 votes

---
Tags: opening, theory, strategy, sicilian-defense
---


# Question
Title: Can someone describe a good/easy mental procedure to choose the best move here?
This is kind of like magic to me. Once they show you it becomes obvious :) :(

Can someone point out a good/easy strategy that a player can mentally train/use to decide what is the best move here for black?

**Note:** Guys, there is a best move for black there can lead to a checkmate later. The goal is not to find it, but to come up with a procedure to find it so it can be applied to other positions.

# Answer
I guess there is none logical strategy to follow. You just need to try to calculate in your head somehow and use intuition.
> -6 votes

# Answer
I would say there are two tactical possibilities for black here:

* 1…Bxd3 2.Rxd3 Rxa4 3.Qxa4 Nxb2 wins the pawn back with a better position (the a3 pawn is now weak).
* 1…Rxe3 2.fe Nxe3 3.Qe2/d2 Bxd4 and the a4 Knight is hanging and the d1 rook is hanging with check … it still isn't over, in a game you should probably calculate further, but I'm to lazy to do that now.

There actually is an easy rule to find both of these tactical strikes:

Consider all captures!

Usually this rule is even broader: Consider all forcing moves! This includes captures, checks and attacks on stronger pieces.

Disclaimer: As with all rules this maxim has to be tempered by experience.
> 6 votes

---
Tags: theory, strategy, puzzles, middlegame
---