# Question
Title: How to package PGN in Lichess analysis page format
I am trying to bundle together a couple of games on my own website. I would love to have an interface like Lichess's analysis page:

You can turn on the Stockfish engine, try out different moves and then save it.

Since everything is written in Javascript and HTML, I tried downloading the complete HTML of Lichess's analysis page. Opening the saved page again shows missing board background, Stockfish not working, buttons not showing up. I just can't get it to work. I know Lichess uses chessground.js for their layout engine but that is even more obscure with hardly any examples that show how to even display a full pgn. Does anyone know where I can get a Lichess-analysis-page quality package to display some PGNs while allowing for move exploration and Stockfish integration?

# Answer
> 1 votes
My guess is that just saving the HTML, Javascript, etc. didn't work because the Lichess site also has a server component. If you want to go down that road (which seems like a lot of work!), Lichess is open source; see https://github.com/ornicar/lila .

But maybe you could let lichess.org do the hard work and embed the Lichess view of the games in your website. That is supported: see "Embed a chess analysis in your site" and "Embed a chess game in your site" at https://lichess.org/developers . Unfortunately, I don't think it supports Stockfish and analysis within the embedded widget itself, but it does have a link to go to the full version on lichess.org.

# Answer
> 1 votes
I was able to scrap the Lichess analysis page into independent components, and then recycled the Javascript code for other use.

Unfortunately, it was not simple. You will need to be a competent programmer, able to read HTML/avaScript code say on Google Chrome debugger. The process took me a week of hard works to compete.

I'm not aware of any easy way to achieve what you want to do. Saving a page certainly won't work. Good news to you is that the source code for lichess is open, I recommend you take it a look on Github.

My recommendation is that unless you have strong incentive for the efforts, why not just put a Lichess link on your website?

# Answer
> 0 votes
If you embed your game with frame tag you won't be able to interact with stockfish. If you want stockfish working at your website you should run it from your server, despite the deep calcles can be done at client-size.

I don't know if it will be too much complex, but **stockfish is also an open project and you can download the code** and try to host it connected with any chess game free program. Then at your site you could try to write your own nice features as lichess team does, and offer them to your clients. **Lichess code** is open and you can use their code to figure out how to do it.

Alternatively if you only wish to show your analysed games at the site you can use **lichess api** You migth be able to export all your games you have analysed with the query parameters evals and analysed. You won't have stockfish running but the data of the analysis you did at the site.

---
Tags: analysis, pgn, lichess
---


# Question
Title: What is the main aim and object of the kings pawn opening?
I think that every opening has a particular aim and object.
Can someone tell me the the aim and object of the kings pawn opening?

# Answer
> 3 votes
Generally the goal of the opening is to develop the pieces (knights and bishops in particular) to active squares and to gain space for operation of the pieces (usually achieved by occupying the center with pawns).

If we are talking about the kings pawn opening, i.e. any opening that starts with 1. e4, there is little to say besides:

* white aims to occupy the center with a pawn on e4
* white makes space for the development of the light squared bishop on f1 (and potentially the queen)

Note that the game after 1.e4 could develop in all kinds of ways of very different character. Many of these openings have their own name (Sicilian, Ruy-Lopez, French, Caro Kann...), their own aims and objectives. Really I'd struggle to call a single move like 1. e4 an "opening".

Also often you will find that proper openings like those mentioned above will be listed by their name while the name King's Pawn Opening is reserved for all the rest, i.e. for games that don't follow any of the established openings.

---
Tags: opening
---


title: Can't capture queen?

text:
# Question
Title: Can't capture queen?
I'm new to chess. Just played a game, my king was on d2, opponents queen was on e1, and my rook was on h1. But the program did not allowed me to capture the enemy queen with my rook, it only allowed to move my king to safety.

Why couldn't I capture the queen with my rook?

# Answer
> 5 votes
To illustrate what was discussed in the comments above...

If we can exclude computer bugs, or other problems (there were no other pieces on g1, or f1 were there?), the situation you describe is only possible if:

* the last black move was a promotion of a pawn to a queen on e1 (this pawn could have come from e2 or by capture from f2), and...
* a black rook or queen was positioned on h2, g2 or f2

One example of such situation:

```
[FEN "2k5/8/8/8/8/8/3Kp1r1/7R b - - 0 1"]

1... e1=Q+

```

The technical term for this situation is Double Check and the only response to a double check is a king move as capturing one piece would still leave your king exposed to a check from the other piece.

For the example above, the only legal moves are 2. Kd3 or Kxe1. If the black queen on e1 was protected by another piece (e.g. by a black bishop from g3), the only legal move for white would be 2. Kd3.

---
Tags: online-chess
---


title: How does Syzygy store its information?

text:
# Question
Title: How does Syzygy store its information?
From reading everything I've found so far, I know that Syzygy uses both win/draw/loss files and distance-to-zero files, but I haven't found any information on the internal file format that these files use. I'm looking for the low level nitty gritty explanation.

# Answer
Since there is no single comprehensive publication this is based on the probing code, the generator and various explanations from Ronald de Man (the author of the generator).

---

When probing pretty much any tablebase (aka huge compressed hash map):

1. The position is normalized ...
2. ... mapped to an integer index.
3. The index is looked up in a table that identifies which "block" it belongs to.
4. The block is decompressed until the information for the index can be retrieved.

Then there usually is some code "outside" of probing, at least to resolve en passant captures.

---

Starting with the outside code for WDL. Syzygy tables use an optimization based on the following observation: If a position has a capture that achieves a particular value (e.g. is winning), then the position itself has at least that value (e.g. is winning). In this case the table can store an arbitrary lower value, whichever is best for compression, and this can be easily corrected by checking the subtables for captures.

To get a DTZ, a WDL probe needs to be done first. If the position is drawn, then DTZ is 0 and the table can store anything, whichever is best for compression. If the best move was a capture (which we can remember from the WDL probe), then the DTZ is +/-1 or +/-101 depending on the WDL, and the table can again store anything, whichever is best for compression.

Pawnful tables contain 4 subtables, one for each file of the "leading pawn" (after normalization).

WDL (sub)tables are two-sided, i.e. they essentially contain two seperate tables for each side of the endgame (unless the material is symmetric).

DTZ tables store only one side to move. So a brief 1-ply search may be required to compute the DTZ for the other side.

---

(1) About the normalization: There are multiple ways this could be done and it is not easy to tell in advance which one will lead to the best compression. The generator just tries different permutations. The final order of the pieces is stored in the header of the table file.

(2) Some combinatorics. The challenge is not to have large gaps for impossible positions. Although it is quite tricky, I don't think Syzygy does anything special here. Conceptually, pieces or groups of pieces are placed on the board in the order specified in the header.

(3) Compressed values are stored in blocks. The block size is specified in the table header. The table mapping indexes to blocks is sparse, so it allows jumping very close to the correct block and then requires a brief forward or backward scan to find the exact block. A block can store values for at most 65536 positions.

(4) Syzygy tables use custom compression based on RE-PAIR. An important feature is that it actually allows taking advantage of the opportunities to store arbitrary values that were identified above. Decompression is very fast and can stop as soon as the value for the desired index is available.

Optionally, DTZ tables can require another step f(wdl, stored value) = real value. This extra DTZ map is referenced in the table header and is itself a table with 8-bit entries. (Intrestingly this turned out to be insufficient for 7-piece endgames, even with pawns, so there is now another flag that enables 16-bit entries).

For DTZ values, if the generator determined that all values for a table are less than 100, precise half-move counts are not required to guarantee perfect play. Instead it sets a flag in the table header and rounds half-moves to full-moves to save space.

Also clearly there is no need to store the sign, or an additional offset of +/-100 for cursed endgames because this can be inferred from the WDL value.

Since decompression is very fast, there is no need for a cache. Instead engines can rely on the operating systems page cache to store (still compressed) blocks.

---

The 6 piece tables contain WDL and DTZ information for 3,787,154,440,416 unique positions in 150 Gigabytes, so ~0.3 bits per position.

All in all Syzygy tables improved upon previous tablebase formats in at least 3 of these areas, making it a very compact and fast format. Amazingly the generator is quite fast as well.

And of course using DTZ50 is a pragmatic choice, because this is just enough information to reliably make progress and allows perfect play (wrt. outcome) both with and without the 50-move rule. However based on the changes to Cfish that are published so far (RdM is now working on DTM tables), many of the techniques will apply to DTM as well.
> 19 votes

---
Tags: engines, endgame, tablebases
---


# Question
Title: KRPP vs KRP - maximum depth to conversion?
I am trying to learn single rook endgames with two pawns against one, with added stipulation that the two pawns of the attacking side are on neighboring files with the pawn of the defending side also on one of those files. It could for instance be `e`+`f` pawns vs `f` pawn or `g`+`h` pawns vs `g` pawn.

What is the most complicated such position that is still won for the attacking side? To make the question precise, I am asking for the position with the maximum depth to conversion.

# Answer
> 4 votes
As **Glorfindel** notes, the Lomonosov tables are great but might not have the answer you want. In RPP/RP, according to the list in this article by Guy Haworth, we find that the maximal distance to mate is 200+ moves, from the following position -- which happens not to have the White pawns connected, but worse for your purpose, it looks like most of the play is post-conversion:

```
[Title "Black to move; White eventually wins"]
[Fen "8/k1P5/8/8/1R5P/7p/r7/1K6 b - - 0 1"]
[StartFlipped "0"]

1...h2 2.Kxa2 h1=Q 3.c8=R!

```

after Kxa2 we're in 6-man territory, and the k4it.de site says "Win in 216" starting Qd5+ 4 Kb1 Qa5(d6) -- that's right, not Qd1(h1)+, which lets White win in only 200, nor Qd3+, which hastens the end by another move (199).

Possibly Guy Haworth has enough access to 7-man tables to get the answer to your query.

# Answer
> 2 votes
Just this week the 7-piece Syzygy table for this endgame was published and is now available online, together with some basic statistics about this endgame. It gives a maximum DTZ of 136 (in a position that happens to match your criteria).

So in any case 136 is a lower bound for the maximum DTC.

To get from DTZ to DTC for paths leading through this position we just need to check: (1) It is indeed a conversion (by capturing the black pawn), instead of just a pawn push. (2) The phase was not entered by a non-capturing pawn push.

For (1) see the DTZ-mainline:

```
[FEN "6k1/8/3pP1R1/3P4/8/1K6/8/3r4 b - - 0 1"]

1... Kf8 2. Rf6+ Ke8 3. Kc4 Rc1+ 4. Kd3 Rd1+ 5. Ke4
Re1+ 6. Kf4 Rf1+ 7. Kg5 Rg1+ 8. Kh6 Rh1+ 9. Kg7
Rg1+ 10. Rg6 Rd1 11. Rg5 Ke7 12. Rf5 Rg1+ 13. Kh6
Rd1 14. Kg5 Rg1+ 15. Kf4 Rf1+ 16. Ke4 Re1+ 17. Kd3
Rd1+ 18. Ke3 Ke8 19. Ke4 Re1+ 20. Kf4 Rg1 21. Rh5
Rd1 22. Ke4 Re1+ 23. Kf5 Rf1+ 24. Kg5 Rg1+ 25. Kf6
Rf1+ 26. Rf5 Rd1 27. Rf2 Rd4 28. Ra2 Rf4+ 29. Kg5
Rd4 30. Ra1 Rd2 31. Kf5 Rd4 32. Ra7 Rd1 33. Ra4
Ke7 34. Ke4 Re1+ 35. Kd3 Rd1+ 36. Kc4 Rc1+ 37. Kb4
Rb1+ 38. Kc3 Rc1+ 39. Kd2 Rc5 40. Rd4 Ra5 41. Ke3
Ra3+ 42. Rd3 Ra1 43. Rb3 Re1+ 44. Kd2 Re5 45. Rb5
Rg5 46. Kc3 Kf6 47. Kb4 Rg1 48. Ka5 Ra1+ 49. Kb6
Ke7 50. Ra5 Rb1+ 51. Kc6 Rc1+ 52. Kb5 Rb1+ 53. Kc4
Rc1+ 54. Kd3 Rd1+ 55. Kc3 Rc1+ 56. Kd2 Rc8 57. Kd3
Rc7 58. Ra1 Rb7 59. Rh1 Rb5 60. Rh7+ Kf6 61. Rf7+
Kg6 62. Kc4 Rc5+ 63. Kd4 Ra5 64. Rc7 Ra1 65. Rc6
Rd1+ 66. Kc4 Rc1+ 67. Kb3 Rb1+ 68. Kc2 Ra1 69. Rxd6

```

For (2) it helps that white is giving check, so the last move was:

* A capture on g6. But that would have started the phase.
* Rf6-g6+. But e7 would have been better.
* Rh6-g6+. But Rf6 would have been better.

Admittedly it might still be possible that there are entirely different positions, stringed together by pawn pushes, that achieve a higher DTC (total DTZ).

# Answer
> 1 votes
Download the Lomonosov endgame Android application, it is what you are looking for. This probably solves your issue if you toy around for a while.

In the Play Store, it looks like this.

Hope this helps!

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


# Question
Title: Longest way to mate with 1 queen against 4 queens
What is the longest way to checkmate with 1 queen against 4 queens, with no other pieces on the board?

Since there are 13 moves long games with a queen vs two queens, I conjecture this should be possible also for this certain endgame, but I am not sure. The maximum position I know has the disadvantage that the first move is a capture. It would be nice if the first move is not a capture.

# Answer
This max-DTZ position is mate in 8, but probably also a dead-end because it seems hard to improve starting here.

```
[FEN "7q/4q1q1/8/8/3q2Q1/1K6/8/1k6 w - - 0 1"]

1. Qf5+ Qde4 2. Qf1+ Qe1 3. Qd3+ Ka1 4. Qa6+ Qa5
5. Qxa5+ Qa3+ 6. Qxa3+ Kb1 7. Qa2+ Kc1 8. Qc2#

```
> 7 votes

# Answer
The best I could come up with is 7 moves, I don't believe it could take much longer, because with 4 queens there's not as much freedom as with 2, I cannot put black king in the middle of the board when capturing black queens while keeping king in check:

```
3q4/q7/q7/q7/8/8/8/k1K4Q w - - 0 1

```

And I made it nice as you asked -- the first move it not a capture! =)
> 6 votes

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


title: Pawns VS pawnless?

text:
# Question
Title: Pawns VS pawnless?
I'm writing a story where because of the character's vanity says "you can have pawns but I don't need them, they are beneath me."

In such a game who would have the advantage?

# Answer
> 7 votes
This is pretty much hopeless for the player without pawns. The plan for the opponent is simple: exchange as many pieces as you can, then start a pawn storm.

I tried a couple of times, and after removing the white pawns, I can easily beat Stockfish as black. Unless your character plays only against beginners, they won't stand a chance.

# Answer
> 1 votes
The expression looks related with a strong atack with pieces, so "they are beneath me" can mean the character is playing a decisive atack with no pawns involved and is going to win the game -or think with his vanity he is gonna do it-.

# Answer
> 1 votes
I agree that it is hopeless to play without pawns unless it is against a very weak player. I just want to add some semi-quantitative measure of how strong the handicap is. According to Stockfish, the starting position where White has no pawns is evaluated as -8.0 (not surprising perhaps, since the evaluation function uses a pawn scale and the material disadvantage is eight pawns). This is nearly as bad as having no bishops (-8.4), but not as bad as having no queen (-11.5). It is, however, worse than missing one rook (-5.5 or -5.7). The normal starting position evaluates as +0.4 due to the first-move advantage.

For more context you could read the Wikipedia article about chess handicap. Giving away pieces when playing against weaker players is a historically common practice, and the article discusses the various handicap levels, how they relate to ratings, historical games, etc. While there's no discussion of the "no pawns handicap" (I'd never heard of it either), you can see where rook, bishops, or queen handicap fall on the scale.

---
Tags: chess-variants
---


# Question
Title: How to force the computer to play another move on Chess.com?
I am playing a game against the computer on chess.com. The computer made a move that looks absurd, so I would like to make it do another move instead and analyse the game.

How to do it?

I tried to share the game with you, but when I hit the "share" button I cannot get a link to that particular moment into the game. Anyway I did Qxd7, Ka8 which is check mate after Qa7. I don't understand why the computer does not want to do Kxb6

# Answer
> 2 votes
Judging from the position, you were not playing the strongest computer level. Weaker levels simulate human blunders by deliberately making weaker moves.

Why not just go back a move? There should be an undo button.

---
Tags: online-chess
---


title: Why is playing f4 here not correct?

text:
# Question
Title: Why is playing f4 here not correct?
Yesterday I played a game chess whose link is: https://lichess.org/rnLeeqMD/white#30 The computer tells me that in the 16th move,when I played 16.f4, I made an inaccuracy.

My reasons for playing f4 are the next ones:

-if Black captures the pawn, the file f file will be open for the rook. Besides the d6 pawn will be become weak and susceptible to be attacked right away via Bf4 and Nb5.

-If Black does not capture the pawn, I can still exchange my pawn so the file gets open. However, in both cases, I allow my rook to go to f3 to later move to h3 where along with the other bishops it would exert comsiderable pressure on the kingside.

-My bishops amd Queen point to the kingisde so I think I should attack that part of the board. Maybe my white bishop square is not the best but it does not look probable that my e4 pawn can easily be exchanged or sacrificed so this bishop can effectively go to d3.

-Because Black’s knight has not moved yet I do not want to give any time to Black for them to make that move. So a move like f4 forces Black to move another thing. Exactly for this, I am surprised that the computer suggests taking a slow course of action by preparing a rupture via a3-b4.

The other suggestions I am given such as playing f3 do not convince me much because although it protects the e pawn, it blocks the white bishop whoch already had a bad outlook on the square it is. Playing h3 is I think too slow although it prevents a junp from the knight to g4.

Could someone tell me what I got wrong in my analysis?

# Answer
> 6 votes
White has a big advantage in this position because of her space advantage and her bishop pair. All Black's minor pieces are very passive with no good square to aim for.

After 16.f4?! ef4 17.Bf4 Ne8 (or 17...Qe7, side-stepping any Nb5 attack), intending Nb8-d7-e5 White is still much better but Black has a great outpost on e5 for one of her knights, and the open h8-a1 diagonal for her bishop. Probably White will need to swap at least one piece, which is a minor but definite success for Black. Also, in the long run, the backward Pe4 may become blocked and weak.

If White cannot exploit the opening on the position with a direct thrust (such as Nb5 or e4-e5), she better refrains from 16.f4?! altogether.

On the other hand, a good constructive plan could be to prepare g2-g3 and f2-f4, intending to take back with Pg3 in case of ...ef4 : That way White would keep control on e5 and a dynamic pawn pair e4-f4 that will constantly threaten to advance further.

---
Tags: pawns
---


title: Why was this move in a puzzle?

text:
# Question
Title: Why was this move in a puzzle?
I was on the chess.com app this morning doing the daily puzzle and it wanted me to play Re2. This is questionable to me, because it just delays the mate, but I figured I might have missed something. Then what really perplexed me is that Black then plays Qg7. It appears to me that Black is sacrificing his queen for no reason when he has a mate in 2. I don't see how White has time to mount an attack on Black or come back to defend in time. What am I missing?

```
[FEN "5r1k/1pQ4p/3nB1p1/3P4/5p2/1P5P/rq5P/4R1RK w - - 0 1"]

1. Re2 Qg7 2. Qxg7+ Kxg7 3. Rxa2

```

# Answer
If black plays QxR then white plays Qc3+ with mate to follow. Black's Qg7 stops the mate. With the black queen on b2 white cannot play Qc3. The Re2 move is to divert the black queen

```
[FEN "5r1k/1pQ4p/3nB1p1/3P4/5p2/1P5P/rq5P/4R1RK w - - 0 1"]

1. Re2 Qxe2 2. Qc3+ Qe5 3. Qxe5+ Rf6 4. Qxf6#

```
> 15 votes

---
Tags: puzzles, beginner
---


# Question
Title: What are some good attacking games from the black side of the Queen's Gambit Declined (Exchange variation)?
I read both of the answers to this question, and although one answer hints that black can launch a kingside attack in the Exchange variation, it offers no games demonstrating such a kingside attack.

What are some games demonstrating a kingside attack from the black side of the Queen's Gambit Declined (Exchange variation)?

# Answer
A suggestion :

Boensch-Vaganian, 1983

Bring the Bishop to d6, move the kingside pawns forward, try to dominate square e4.
> 2 votes

# Answer
Perhaps not a very well known game, but Bobotsov-Petrosian is definitely highly instructive how to play the Exchange variation of the QGD:

* First, black exchanges a couple of minor pieces, as he lacks space
* By putting a knight on d6, black stops white's play on the queen side
* Then, black starts a king side attack

**Edit:** A similar approach can be found in the game Portisch-Kasparov, another very instructive game from black's point of view.
> 1 votes

---
Tags: opening, strategy, queens-gambit-declined
---


title: Helpful Zugzwang?

text:
# Question
Title: Helpful Zugzwang?
Are there positions where a zugzwang helps the zugzwang'ed player? For instance, white forces black to make a move that gives black an advantage. Is that possible?

# Answer
> 9 votes
Like Brian Towers wrote, a zugzwang by definition can't be helpful to the recipient, but if we go past the terminology and look at your second question: "white forces black to make a move that gives black an advantage. Is that possible?", the answer is yes. You can even force the other player to checkmate you; there's even a class of chess problems called *selfmates*.

# Answer
> 5 votes
No.

If you look up the meaning of "zugzwang" you will see something like

> Zugzwang (German for "compulsion to move") is a situation found in chess and other games wherein one player is put at a disadvantage because they must make a move when they would prefer to pass and not move. The fact that the player is compelled to move means that their position will become significantly weaker. A player is said to be "in zugzwang" when any possible move will worsen their position.

So, by definition if there is only one legal move and it makes your position better then it is not zugzwang.

---
Tags: zugzwang
---


# Question
Title: Is there any etiquette about how to proceed when a technical problem leads to a misplay in an online game?
Recently I was playing an online game when I moved my king with the intent of castling. However, I apparently didn't get it far enough over, and when I "let it go", the king was placed in a square adjacent to the one it had left and the rook stayed in the corner.

I made a comment in the players' chat along the lines of "That was meant to be a castle." The other player even replied with something like "Yeah, I figured." However he proceeded to take advantage of the situation, eventually winning what had been an even game up to that point.

Unfortunately, this is not the first time this has happened to me. In fact it seems to happen disturbingly often, and I've only played a few dozen online games over the past few months. Also, I've seen some puzzling moves from opponents that I now think might have been due to trouble with the equipment, rather than just poor play.

In the game above, I considered asking for a draw right after the error, especially since my opponent acknowledged that it was a technical problem, not poor play. However I wasn't sure of the etiquette for this, and also had time considerations to worry about. Would it have been considered bad form to ask for a draw? To decline one if it is asked for from an opponent in such a circumstance?

# Answer
That's called a mouse-slip, and it's part of playing online. Watch some of Carlsen's online play (e.g. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SJlOlufG-JM) and you'll see even he mouse-slips on occasion. Common etiquette seems to be to continue playing out the game and try to be more precise next time.
> 30 votes

# Answer
The most standard response you'll see is what Michael said. However, for what it's worth, I've had that happen to me as well and if you ask, occasionally the other player will scoot a piece around until you fix your move.

It doesn't take too much effort to plan it out so their piece is in its original spot once you've finished your "castle" (for example, they could move a bishop 2 squares over, you move your king off the back row, they move their bishop one square back, you move your rook over, they move their bishop back to its original spot, you move your king to it's standard castle position, then play continues).

It messes up the time a little and potentially impacts a draw, but that's seldom been relevant in my cases. Having said that, you're also asking your opponent to deliberately make a sub-par move and trust you won't exploit it, not to mention pass on a winning opportunity. Lots of players won't do that for you, but it shouldn't hurt to ask.

I've also had a few opponents slip up before and offered to let them fix it a few times now. In the dozen or so times I've offered that to my opponent, they've never taken advantage of me for it; they've *always* just made the move they promised. Likewise, in the dozen or so times someone's offered that to me, they've always operated in good faith as well.

Again, this isn't the most common response, but there are some players out there who'd much rather play a good game than an easy one. For what it's worth all these matches were Elo ~1600; I don't know how that affects the competitiveness of the matches.
> 7 votes

# Answer
On lichess.org you can ask for takeback even in rated games.

Your case is very reasonable for such request.

In my experience the option is usually available, but here is an explanation of when it is and not available.

> If you go to "Preferences" - "Game behavior" you are given a choice to allow takebacks "never", "always" or "in casual games only".
>
> Even if you set your preferences to allow takeback always, you will not have the option in games where your opponent does not allow them.
>
> Oh, and I believe there is no option of takeback in tournament games, but I'm not a 100% sure about that.

https://lichess.org/qa/2557/why-in-some-games-does-the-takeback-button-work-and-others-not
> 6 votes

---
Tags: online-chess, etiquette
---


# Question
Title: What happens when both players are out of time in Blitz?
What are the rules when the clock for both players has reached 0? Are these rules different for digital clocks (where the clock shows who was the first player to flag) and analog clock where it might be unclear who flagged first?

I've had some games in blitz where both myself and my opponent were at 1 second and after my opponent moved, his flag fell and he pushed his clock flagging me as well. When wanting to claim the game my opponent claimed that I should have stopped the clock while I still had time on my clock and since now both of us were flagged the game was a draw. The arbiter agreed with this, but I can't find anything about this situation in the Fide rules.

# Answer
https://www.fide.com/fide/handbook.html?id=171&view=article

6.11
a. If both flags have fallen and it is impossible to establish which flag fell first then: the game shall continue if this occurs in any period of the game except the last period.

b. the game is drawn if this occurs in the period of a game in which all remaining moves must be completed.

The only ambiguity is when the claim was made. If your flag fell after you claimed the win--assuming that you had a possible win--you should have won. The standard, tactful action is to call the game a draw, but the rules suggest that one should be declared the winner.
> 3 votes

---
Tags: rules, blitz, chess-clocks
---


# Question
Title: Does this rook endgame have a name or known original analyst?
The position is analyzed in many endgame works, but to my knowledge hasn't been given a name as other similar endgames (e.g. "Vancura's position") have.

Two of the most authoritative works, Nunn (2008) and Dvoretsky (2011), don't give it a name or cite a first analyst.

```
K7/P4k2/8/8/8/8/4R3/1r6 w - - 0 1

```

Dvoretsky, M. (2011). Dvoretsky's endgame manual. SCB Distributors.
Nunn, J. (2008). Secrets of rook endings.

# Answer
> 2 votes
I've looked in several books, including Nunn's earlier edition of `Secrets of Rook Endings` (1992), Muller and Lamprecht's `Fundamental Chess Endings`, and `Silman's Complete Endgame Course`.

None of them have give it a name or source, although Silman refers to it as a "Lucena" but notes that it's not a true Lucena, since it's a rook pawn. It does tend to get grouped together with the Lucena and Philidor positions and the bridge and Karstedt maneuvers.

# Answer
> 1 votes
**Herb Wolfe's answer** checks some of the books quoted by the poster -and some others- where this endgame was mentioned, but any particular name was assigned to the position, being just included at Lucena/Philidor chapters.

The analysis don't look very deep, that migth be the reason why it has not a huge interest on GM analysis.

This is how stockfish wins against himself with white:

```
[FEN ""]
[FEN "K7/P4k2/8/8/8/8/4R3/1r6 w - - 0 1"]

1. Rc2 Ke7 2. Rc8 Kd6 3. Rb8 Ra1 4. Kb7 Rb1+ 5. Kc8 Rc1+ 6. Kd8 Rf1 (6... Rh1 7. Rb6+ Kc5 8. Rc6+ Kd5 (8... Kb5 9. Rc8 Ra1 (9... Rh8+ 10. Kc7 Rh7+ 11. Kb8)) 9. Ra6) 7. Ke8 Ra1 8. a8=Q *

```

However white wins because of black's king position. If the king starts on e7, it is drawn because white's king can't get away from a-column:

```
[FEN ""]
[FEN "K7/P3k3/8/8/8/8/3R4/1r6 w - - 0 1"]

1. Rc2 Kd7 2. Rh2 Kc6 3. Rh8 Kc7 4. Rb8 Rd1
5. Rb2 Rd8+ 6. Rb8 Rd1

```

If it is black's turn, white wins in a similar way.

```
[FEN ""]
[FEN "K7/P4k2/8/8/8/8/4R3/1r6 b - - 0 1"]

1... Rb3 2. Rc2 Ke6 3. Rc8 Kd6 4. Rb8 Ra3 5. Kb7
Rb3+ 6. Kc8 Rc3+ 7. Kd8 Rh3 8. Rb6+ Kc5 9. Rc6+
Kb5 10. Rc8 Rh8+ 11. Kc7 Rh7+ 12. Kb8

```

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


title: Giuoco Piano, Steinitz Variation

text:
# Question
Title: Giuoco Piano, Steinitz Variation
```
[fen ""]

1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bc4 Bc5 4. c3 Nf6 5. d4 exd4 6. cxd4 Bb4+ 7. Nc3 Nxe4 8. O-O Bxc3 9. bxc3 d5 10. Ba3

```

Steinitz Variation.

We play this in regular tournaments and it is very interesting. White gives the sacrifice of Bishop and also blocks Black's ...O-O. When we studied this line it contains lot of interesting variations. In modern times most players are not playing this variation, why?

# Answer
> 4 votes
This line looks unsound.

White's plan seems to be to threaten to win back the piece by **10...dxc4 11. Re1** (pinning the knight), teasing Black into weakening his king's position further by **11...f5** to defend e4, which then leads to a very complicated situation that White hopes to manage better.

However, Black is fine if he just lets go of the knight, since he's still a pawn up. Obviously, his kingside is very weak, but he can move out his queen with tempo (by attacking e4) and castle long.

**11...Be6 12. Rxe4 Qd5 13. Re1/Re2/Qe2 etc. 0-0-0**

The black king is safe and c4 is actually well protected. White doesn't have enough compensation left for that pawn.

---

To back this up, according to the Lichess online database, White has a win rate of 62% if Black plays **11...f5** (71 games), but only one of 27%/38% respectively if the answer is **11...Qd5** or **11...Be6** (11/8 games). **11...Bf5** also seems to work (35%, 20 games).

That's just not enough to make the variation appealing for grandmasters (who probably consider the refutation too obvious), and if none of them play a line it will hardly become very popular. It's a nice Blitz surprise weapon though, as you can see the majority of players from a database leaning towards fast games will choose 11...f5.

---
Tags: opening, italian-game
---


# Question
Title: How can a human figure out best move in this position?
Why is 12. b4 played by a GM? Why doesn't he just capture the bishop? And how can he forsee so far in the future? Am I missing something?

# Answer
Maybe before justifying the pawn sacs one should answer more convincingly why taking on c3 would not have pleased White. The answer is the backward pawn on c-file and future pressure against it by rooks from c-file. Black cannot be happier if the Queens get exchanged on c3 as well. So, taking the bishop back on c3 would have yielded nothing for White. b4 is half out of desperation as it is of creativity!

Augment to this the forcing sequence delineated by the other answers here, and you see that b4 is not as much of an abnormal move as it may look initially.
> 6 votes

# Answer
This position is close enough to the beginning of the game that the grandmaster may have already analyzed it at home.

Even at the board it is reasonable to analyze the forcing sequence 12 b4 Bxb4 13 axb4 Qxb4 14 Rfb1 Qe7 (Qd6? 15 Bg3) 15 Qc6 Rb8 16 Rxa7. Now we can pause to evaluate. White has recovered one of the sacrificed pawns and has a very active position, while Black hardly has a reasonable move: both Knights are pinned to the Queen, and any move by Rb8 or Bc8 drops material. White threatens 17 Bg3, attacking the trapped rook, which Black can't free with b5 because after 17 Bg3 Rb6? White can play 18 Qxb6 anyway. If 16 . . . Ne5 White at least has 17 dxe5 Qxa7 18 exf6 winning two pieces for the Rook.

(I'm analyzing this from the diagram, and may well have missed something. But I'm no grandmaster, and never got as high as 2300 USCF before I played tournament chess 25+ years ago. So for an actual grandmaster this kind of analysis should be routine once the GM had made the leap of imagination to consider 12 b4!)
> 5 votes

# Answer
If you take the bishop by pawn or queen -- you'll get an equal position with approximately even chances.

After `b4`, and exchanging pawns for a bishop, there's a good attack on queen side, with `Rfb1`, then black queen has to find the safe place, and `Qc6` with quite good chances to win a piece.
> 2 votes

# Answer
It's actually a very nice idea. The point is that after:

12.b4 Bxb4 13.axb4 Qxb4 14.Qc6!, White is getting plenty of queenside activity, and is going to win the a7-pawn since Black's rook will have to move to b8. White will still be down a pawn, but will have tremendous queenside activity.

So the point of 12.b4 is that it allows White's queen access to the c6-square, while still winning Black's bishop.

Note that after 12.b4, Black must play 12...Bxb4, or else he just loses his queen since it's trapped.

As for how the GM could have foreseen this, it takes a combination of natural talent and countless hours of practicing calculation to ingrain patterns into the mind. Although I wouldn't say this combination is close to GM calibre, maybe 2200 level at best.
> 1 votes

# Answer
I assume the last move was b2-b4. The idea is 1...Bxb4 2.Rfb1 threatening to trap the queen with axb4. So Bishop somewhere (2...Be7). Now can we trap that queen or something? 3.Rb5 queen a6 is only open square which allows Rook discovery...but I don't see a win here. hmmm, 4.Rc5 Qb7 (4...b5!?) 5.Rc7 Qb8 6.Bg3!?

> Okay this line is total junk as pointed out in comments and the answer is far simpler. Black has problems with the unprotected Rook on a8 and it can't find a home on b8 because Bg3.
> -1 votes

---
Tags: analysis
---


# Question
Title: Can a knight move through all squares from its original position?
I'm so confused about this. I googled it and read about knight's tours, however they all start from illegitimate positions. I want to know if a knight can move through all squares from its original position (e.g. b8, g8, b1, and g1).

# Answer
**Yes, it can**

This particular knight's tour is closed, meaning that it starts and finishes in the same square. Therefore, the knight can start at any square on the board and finish on the same square, since it just starts at a different point along the cycle.
> 58 votes

---
Tags: analysis, knights
---


title: What are the strategies of Alphazero?

text:
# Question
Title: What are the strategies of Alphazero?
Alphazero is an amazing chess engine, one of the best in the world. It also has a more "human" playing style than other engines. Furthermore, understanding this engine might be vital to improving the way we play chess. Of course, one might argue that engines play the best move using brute force calculations and combinations. Human just can't do that. However, I argue that there are some clear strategies of alphazero. These are just some of them.

1. fianchettoing bishops
2. controlling space and giving opponents no moves(pawns)
3. forcing the opponent to create creating weaknesses (checkmate threats) and taking over the holes in the position. (when pawn g6 is played to stop mate, the dark squares are a weakness.

There are much more than these strategies. I have not yet seen how Alphazero defends, for example. Also, I would request u to go to this link (https://www.chess.com/forum/view/general/alpha-zero-vs-alpha-zero-10-lesser-known-alpha-zero-lines). This link shows the openings when alphazero plays both white and black. It would be nice if somebody could add understanding of it.

I know this post seems outdated, but Alphazero is so ahead of its time. It is still the best engine! I think we should understand it and help the chess community.

# Answer
> 1 votes
I don't think there are any "strategies" in the human definition of "strategy".

When you use the "common" computer engine (basically, min/max tree search), you can always check how and why the engine arrived to some particular position evaluation, but still, this is usually limited to 10-12 half-moves, beyond that it's still hard for people to grasp what was the threat, or what is the forced mate or why this particular line evaluated higher than another line: "Mate in 20?" -- "Yeah, I saw that one a few moves back" =)

When you talk about AZ or any similar NN-based software, it becomes practically impossible to reason about the moves. Once the training is over, all you get is the bunch of multi-dimensional matrices, which, once multiplied/added, give you some answer that leads to some policy chosen in this particular position.

And this behaviour is not specific to chess only. Same things happen in image recognition, pattern analysis, language processing or any area where NN are in favour last few years. You get the results, but not the explanation.

So, right now, I would not recommend to blindly follow any of the AZ patterns, because no one has a clue, er... clear understanding, why and when those patterns should be followed. It might be as minor as "if black pawn is on h6, fianchetto bishop on b2 (or g2, or both)" -- we'll never know. Not in the nearest future, at least.

---
Tags: engines, analysis, strategy, alphazero
---


# Question
Title: Multimove variant rules with queen that does two moves in one
I recall playing a multimove variant special rules chess game where one player (say black) has all the usual pieces, while the other player has just a queen that can do two moves in one.

So the queen can strike one of black's pieces and return to its position as if nothing happened -- "action at a distance"!

It was such that if one player Alice was a bit more skilled than another Bob, then Alice could beat Bob whether playing white or black.

Anybody know of rules like these?

# Answer
A variant that I have played for a while years ago is: white has just the **king and the four central pawns** (cdef), but is allowed two moves per turn. All usual rules, including en passant and promotion, apply. Check and checkmate are defined via "the player that takes the opposing king wins". The variant is surprisingly balanced, with black probably at a slight advantage (but with a lot more possibilities for blunders).

Given that this variant is playable as it is, I suppose that anything involving a double-moving queen would be ridiculously overpowered for its side.

The white king in this variant can 'make a nearby piece disappear' as you mentioned. It takes a few games to understand the strategies for the two sides: against someone of comparable level who has never played this variant, a player with some experience can often ask them to pick a side, beat them, propose a rematch with sides switched, and then proceed to beat them again. :)
> 3 votes

# Answer
If this variant did exist, the original position is won by white: 1. Qxd7+ Qxe8.

```

[FEN "rnbqQbnr/ppp1pppp/8/8/8/8/8/8 w KQkq - 0 1"]

```
> 1 votes

---
Tags: rules, chess-variants, queens
---


# Question
Title: Aggressive Attacking Lines for Black in the French Defence Exchange Variation
I have recently taken a liking to the French Defence as black because I enjoy the counter-attacking options that black has to undermine white's center in the Tarrasch, Advance, and `3. Nc3` variations. However, when met with the exchange variation I'm not sure what the best plan of attack because I find the position rather dull due to the relieved central tension. My preferred line at the moment is `1. e4 e6 2. d4 d5 3. exd5 exd5 4. Nf3 Nf6 5. Bd3 c5` to immediately get some queen-side counter-play but I would like to know if there are any other lines that give black aggressive attacking options.

```
[FEN ""]

1. e4 e6 2. d4 d5 3. exd5 exd5 4. Nf3 Nf6 5. Bd3 c5

```

# Answer
> 4 votes
Unfortunately, there is nothing you can do. You will have to adapt to White's play and that is it. Only White can sharpen the game, by entering the line with isolated pawn ( by playing `c4` at some point ).

The line you chose gives White minimal advantage, according to *ECO C ( 2006 )*, so I would stay away from it. The position is symmetrical, White is slightly ahead in development, **e-file is open**, and White has no weaknesses whatsoever. Meanwhile, you are behind in development, **you will not castle soon**, and now you create isolated pawn without reasonable compensation ( isolated pawn gives you free development, but you are not cramped here so you do not need this! ) which will put you in a long defense.

I hate being "passive" in this line as much as you do, since I play the French and QGD, but reality will not change -\> White has a pleasant situation where he can win or draw, if he doesn't blunder, while for Black the only reasonable result is a draw, providing he plays accurately.

You must use your creativity in this line, to outplay the opponent. Set him difficult choices to solve, something along these lines:

* Offer him exchanges that are bad for him ( offer your bad piece for his good one );
* Offer him to enter into endgame, but try to trick him so the endgame is better for you;
* Try to generate mating attack with pieces ( `f4` square is very useful for this );

The point is that heavy pieces will be exchanged on the `e-file` so the only option is endgame. You could exchange only one pair of rooks and try for mate with `Qf4 + Ng4` setup, but that requires a lot of maneuvering. Still, it is a thought... The point is to keep trying to invent a plan, don't just fall into stereotypical "exchange all and draw" mindset.

Finally, instead of the line you listed, I would rather go with something like this:

```
[Title "French defense, Exchange line"]
[fen ""]

1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.exd5 exd5 4.Nf3 Bd6!

```

This will prevent `Bf4` so White will have slightly passive position. This is a thematic idea for both sides ( remember that in symmetric positions **everything counts** ). If he responds with `c4` you have your sharp position ( according to *ECO* ), but if he goes for the same idea of stopping `...Bf5` then you play `...Nge7!` so you can still get `...Bf5`. This way you get free development and active position. This is the best you can do in this line. Now is the time to give you the full lines:

```
[Title "French defense, Exchange line"]
[fen ""]

1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.exd5 exd5 4.Nf3 ( 4.c4 $13 ) 4...Bd6! 5.c4 ( 5.Bd3 Ne7! 6.O-O O-O 7.Bg5 f6! 8.Bh4 Bf5 9.Bg3 Bxg3 10.hxg3 Nbc6 11.Nc3 Qd7 12.Ne2 Bxd3= ) 5...Nf6 6.Nc3 c6 7.c5 Be7 8.Bd3 b6 9.cxb6 axb6 10.O-O Ba6 11.Bxa6 Rxa6 12.Qd3 O-O $13

```

You can still outplay the opponent in this position... If you need help or you have further questions leave a comment. Best regards.

# Answer
> 4 votes
Former World Champion Jose R Capablanca felt that 3... Qxd5 was superior to 3... exd5. It once led to a sharp, complicated game which he lost (as White).

If White plays 4. Nc3, then 4... Bb5. If White tries to chase the B with 5. a3, then 5... Qa5 pins the a pawn. Note that with the Q off the diagonal, White cannot pin a N on f6 with Bg5 (nor can he play it without e.g. a preparatory Nf3).

# Answer
> 3 votes
Black can play for a win against the Exchange French by aiming to castle queenside. After 1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.exd5 exd5 4.Bd3 Nc6!? 5.c3 Black has a high class 'waiting' move that actually develops a piece. 5...Bd6! Now if White plays 6.Nf3 Black has 6...Bg4 with castling queenside to follow, whereas 6.Ne2 can be met by the pestilential 6...Qh4! with dynamic equality.

But what to do if White plays 4.Nf3 instead? An interesting idea would be to try 4...Bg4, still aiming to castle on opposite sides. If White develops his light squared bishop now you can proceed with ...Nc6, similar to the lines above.

The critical test is 5.h3 and if Black plays 5...Bh5 then 6.Qe2+ with Qb5+ and pawn snatching a possibility. However, against the kind of players who would play the Exchange French I'd be very comfortable in such a wild, gambit line and it's in any case a fairly sound one where the development compensation is pretty clear. The whole line scores okay for Black in actual play.

Anyway, you wanted something that unbalances the position and isn't boring and this way of playing certainly achieves that without conceding too much of an edge.

---
Tags: opening, french-defense, aggressive-play, attack
---


# Question
Title: Why do engines run faster if you only have one line of analysis open?
When I load up an engine (like Stockfish), it reaches a higher depth quicker if I only leave one line of analysis open. If I leave multiple lines open, it runs slower. Why is this?

# Answer
That's normal, commonly known as multiPV analysis.

Without getting into too much technical details, analysing N number of principal variations require running the engine N times, one for each PV. We need to do that so we can estimate a precise score for each PV.
> 4 votes

# Answer
With only one line of analysis open, engines are able to prune the other sub-par lines (since you don't want to know anything about them). By leaving multiple lines of analysis open, the engine must fully evaluate each of them, and can't prune any of them (even if they're guaranteed to be worse than the best line showed at the #1 spot).
> 3 votes

---
Tags: engines, analysis, calculation
---


# Question
Title: When and why was the notation changed from descriptive to algebraic?
When I was young I used to play chess with the the old form of notation KB\<number\> (King Bishop square number), even books used to have the same notation, then later found that everyone was using algebraic, is descriptive notation dead? Why?

# Answer
> 18 votes
Though the previous answers have made some solid points, I think they have not yet given the main reason why algebraic notation has generally come to be preferred over descriptive notation: it is more *absolute*, less relative, than descriptive notation. What I mean is just this: in algebraic notation each square on the chessboard receives only one name, while in descriptive notation each square receives a different name depending on whether a move by white is being notated or a move by black. This alone makes algebraic notation more transparent, because things aren't relative to which side is on the move.

Consider, say, the g4 square (in algebraic notation). When white moves a piece there, descriptive notation says it is headed to KN4. But if black is moving a piece there, it is headed to KN5. There is just no need to have two names for this square, and it serves only to sow possible confusion in a way that algebraic notation does not.

# Answer
> 16 votes
The two forms of notation you are referring to are called Descriptive Notation and Algebraic Notation respectively. Descriptive notation was the most used form from recent antiquity up until about 1970 in English speaking countries. Algebraic notation has been around since the 19th century, but didn't rise to its current prominence until the 20th century. These days, descriptive notation is considered obsolete, though it is still permitted in tournament play in the FIDE. There are a minority of players that exercise this choice, though. Primarily, descriptive notation is learned and used for reading older chess books which were authored that way.

There are also some other interesting notations in use around the world. Hope that helps clear things up.

# Answer
> 7 votes
To answer your question if descriptive notation is dead, I would say YES. Even though it maybe more descriptive, it can be more confusing for newer players and the algebraic notation is so much more intuitive and simpler to understand. I have read books with the descriptive notation and sometimes I scratch my head.

# Answer
> 2 votes
I used to read chess books in the 1960's. Then DN was the only commonly understood system. I didn't go looking for chess books again until this year 2018. Now everything is in AN. I have a book published in the 1970's bought recently second hand it actually uses both. I recently found some chess magazines in Spanish from the 1990's they all use AN.

For me DN is much more intuitive...not really intuitive ...just common sense. There are two people sitting at the board, so there really ARE two perspectives.

WW

---
Tags: rules, history, pgn, notation
---


# Question
Title: What happens if I realize that I made an illegal move?
Say I somehow make an illegal move, what happens? If I realize, can I then take it back, and make it legal? If so, how?

# Answer
> 4 votes
It is possible for a position to change in such a way that an illegal move becomes legal. As one example, if a move would result in your king being in check, then it is illegal, but if you make one (or more) move(s) so that later the same move would not result in check, then it becomes legal. The following diagram presents one such situation:

```
[FEN "q1k5/8/8/8/8/8/1Q6/1K6 w - - 0 1"]
[StartFlipped "0"]

1.Qa2 Kb7 2.Ka1

```

In the beginning position of the above construction, the white king cannot move to a1, since that would be check. However, if white first moved their queen onto a2, then they would be able to move their king to a1 later.

# Answer
> 3 votes
In blitz I believe if you make an illegal move and your opponent doesn't notice it, and then completes their move, the position stands as valid.

---
Tags: illegal-move
---


# Question
Title: Blind and Visually Impaired Chess Players
Answering this question, I was wondering how visually impaired or blind a player should be to participate at the IBCA Chess Olympiad for Blind and Visually Impaired Chess Players.

# Answer
Searching the web, I haven't found anything directly answering your question. However, the rules supplements for blind chess apply to games between a sighted player and one who is legally blind. Thus it seems a safe inference that one would need to be legally blind to participate in IBCA events.
> 1 votes

---
Tags: chess-olympiad
---


title: How should I continue?

text:
# Question
Title: How should I continue?
I have reached 2000 rating in rapid at lichess. I am a student, so I have to keep up with my schoolwork. I get around 1/2 to 1 hour on chess on each weekdays and 2hrs on weekends. My question is, if I want to get better, do I have enough time to get a higher rating or it's unlikely for me to improve?

# Answer
**You are young** and with your skill, **you may reach a master title** in some years if you have talent and **you study a bit in an efficient way**. That can be good for your cv and good for your life and satisfaction.

You must know the difficulty to climb from 1800 to 2000 may be as hard as from 2000 to 2100, or from 2100 to 2150, or from 2275 to Fide Master etc. It is so hard because imagine you play 5 games with 2200 ELO against 5 players rated 2000, you draw 4 and you win 1; you are gonna lose some of your points!

**Players that plan to reach FM title use to study with the assistant of a good trainer on a club**. That doesn't mean to study more than the 5/10 hours/week you are currently spending on it, but to **planify correctly what to study** -benefitial opennings, weakness, ...-. And you will need to play federated games, of course, so if you gonna seriously for a performance of your ELO, chess will take most of your afternoons on weekends -game plus some time to prepare it against specific opponents-.

---

If you plan to do a maths degree, it migth be valuable to have a high level and play for your university and study there. You will also meet people wich is always nice when you are new on a site.

If this is not going to happen soon, you can continue studing a bit, *books as "My system" of Nimzhovic*, *do some tactics*, *play some correspondance* and not only rapid games, *analyze your mouvements* when the game is finished, *watch videos* of your favorite opennings, try new ones,....

---

I haven't seen you playing, but if you were going for GM/professional skill, you should be trained by a master and take some more of your valious time spent studing your lovely mathematics, and I guess that is not what you have on mind.

You can take as an example about how hard is the best chess player of my little spanish region ever. He did 3rd on national spanish championship on 2016, but he has not reached GM -he has been very close, but unfortunately he has still not got it-.

I followed his facebook profile while playing an international open. He was rated 2480 if I remember well -and I think he has yet the normes, he just needed 20 points to get the title-. He complained, after drawing against a 18 years old russian rated 2250, something like:

> "***Today I played against a 18 years old russian. He played 30 consecutive book moves of a line I knew well, where there is only a chance for black to draw it.***"
> 5 votes

# Answer
With the time you say you have to spend on chess, of course it's possible to improve. You should remember that chess should never come first though, and it's just a game you enjoy. If you're not aiming to be a professional, don't spend hours on end every day studying it.

Here's a list of chess literature I think would benefit you, at your skill level:

* Grandmaster Preparation series by Jacob Aagard. If you can work through all the books in it (I believe there are 5) you'll definitely improve.
* My Great Predecessor series by Garry Kasparov. He annotates games of all the world champions (as well as many other strong players), and it's incredibly instructive. I also learned a huge amount of chess history from the series.

Other than that, it's good to continue playing online and doing tactics training. Even if you did only 1/2 hours per day of reading/playing/tactics, you'll start to see improvement. Also, since school should come first, I'd recommend not exceeding 1/2 hours per day, unless you're absolutely set on becoming a GM / professional (which I don't recommend).
> 6 votes

# Answer
You have plenty of time, but, please, concentrate on your study first, chess comes the second.

I have a few friends, well... people I know, like you. They all heavily invest their time in their education and possible employment opportunities. They all still play quite strong, but don't consider chess anything but hobby.
> 5 votes

# Answer
Go find a club and quit making excuses.

Being 2100 on lichess without a FIDE rating is like saying you're division 1 in FIFA 18 without ever having played for a real-life team. Go find a club, because no one cares about lichess.

Once you start playing at a club, your chess will improve at a speed you couldn't imagine, and you will make a lot of friends.

You will grow as a person and learn about yourself.

Good luck.
> 3 votes

---
Tags: learning
---


# Question
Title: Is it possible to give two more checks here?
If the knight moves then is it possible to give check mate? I have already given one check. I was playing a game of "3 check". How can I get two more checks? Is it not possible?

*3 check is a mode in chess where you have to give 3 checks. Here in this game I gave one check before. At move 16 the black side made a mistake. Would it have been possible to give two more checks if the black side hadn't made that mistake? Black also has two checks left.*

https://www.chess.com/live/game/3016880533

```
[FEN ""]
[Event "Live Chess - Three-Check"]
[Site "Chess.com"]
[Date "2018.08.19"]
[White "RuhanUR"]
[Black "PAM_Andrei"]
[Result "1-0"]
[ECO "A00"]
[WhiteElo "1060"]
[BlackElo "794"]
[TimeControl "300"]
[EndTime "8:26:19 PDT"]
[Termination "RuhanUR won by checking the opponent king for the 3rd time"]
[Variant "Three-Check"]
[CurrentPosition "r2q1r1k/pp2b2Q/8/2p1p3/6bP/1P4Pn/P1P2P2/R1B2R1K b - - 0 21 +3+1"]

1.Nc3 {[%clk 0:04:56]} e6 {[%clk 0:04:57]} 2.Ne4 {[%clk 0:04:44]} c5 {[%clk 0:04:54]} 3.Nd6+ {[%clk 0:04:43]} Bxd6 {[%clk 0:04:51]} 4.g3 {[%clk 0:04:35]} Nc6 {[%clk 0:04:46]} 5.Bh3 {[%clk 0:04:34]} Nf6 {[%clk 0:04:43]} 6.d3 {[%clk 0:04:18]} O-O {[%clk 0:04:41]} 7.Nf3 {[%clk 0:04:01]} e5 {[%clk 0:04:26]} 8.Bf5 {[%clk 0:03:51]} g6 {[%clk 0:04:22]} 9.Bxg6 {[%clk 0:03:26]} fxg6 {[%clk 0:04:18]} 10.Ng5 {[%clk 0:03:18]} Nd4 {[%clk 0:04:05]} 11.O-O {[%clk 0:02:56]} Be7 {[%clk 0:03:59]} 12.e3 {[%clk 0:02:51]} Ne6 {[%clk 0:03:54]} 13.Nxh7 {[%clk 0:02:49]} Nxh7 {[%clk 0:03:51]} 14.e4 {[%clk 0:02:38]} Neg5 {[%clk 0:03:47]} 15.b3 {[%clk 0:02:16]} d5 {[%clk 0:03:45]} 16.h4 {[%clk 0:01:56]} Nh3+ {[%clk 0:03:31]} 17.Kg2 {[%clk 0:01:38]} dxe4 {[%clk 0:03:29]} 18.Kh1 {[%clk 0:01:08]} exd3 {[%clk 0:03:24]} 19.Qxd3 {[%clk 0:01:04]} Bg4 {[%clk 0:03:06]} 20.Qxg6+ {[%clk 0:00:54]} Kh8 {[%clk 0:03:00]} 21.Qxh7+ {[%clk 0:00:47]}  1-0

```

*Go to move 16. What if my opponent hadn't made a mistake, then how could I have won?*

# Answer
> 3 votes
Black's decisive mistake was 19...Bg4, up to there he was winning. You can analyze three-check chess games online on lichess, or using multi-variant Stockfish offline with a GUI supporting chess variants (e.g., WinBoard/XBoard, PyChess, CuteChess, etc.).

I imported your game to lichess and triggered the automatic analysis, see https://lichess.org/uUVDe8ei#38.

# Answer
> 2 votes
After 16. h4, there is no way for you to win this position, as black has a forced win in 4 moves.

16. ..Nh3+ is not a mistake by black, in fact it is winning. After your move 17. Kg2, black wins the game with 17. ..Rf2+ 18. Rxf2 Nf4+ 0-1.

If you look at Fabian's link, you can see that black has a forced win in 5 as early as move 15.

So, to answer your question: No, it is not possible for you to give 2 more checks.

---
Tags: checkmate, chess-variants
---


# Question
Title: Chess960 vs. Chess480 castling moves? Which is better?
In the chess variants Chess960 (aka Fischer Random Chess) and Chess480 the castling moves are radically different.

Do the castling rules in Chess960 favor established FIDE Chess players more than the castling rules in Chess480 and if so why?

What are other reasons to favor one castling system over the other?

# Answer
I believe the premise of the question is rather unclear! If you're already saying that there are a set of FIDE rules for castling, then the comparison between other types of chess should be straightforward, wouldn't you say? Either they follow the rules or they don't, whereas you seem to be asking for a crude-subjective-qualitative comparison here (you use words like "which is better" or "favored"...), which is kinda impossible because castling in standard chess has well defined rules.

First off, unlike the well-known chess960 mode, chess480 still lacks a coherent definition as many different types of it exists apparently(one where queen has to be restricted to appear on the left of the king, other where the king has to be on dark squares etc.) so as long as there's not a coherent and consistent description of the game, it remains very difficult to do any comparison (unless e.g. you ask for a specific scenario).

But anyway, all that differs, is basically the positions of rook/king after castling, in chess480 in certain scenarios, if possible, unlike Chess960, the final position after castling will not be the same as the final position of a castling move in traditional chess. Quote and image from Wikipedia:

> the king is transferred from its original square two squares towards (or over) the rook, then that rook is transferred to the square the king has just crossed (if it is not already there). If the king and rook are adjacent in a corner and the king cannot move two spaces over the rook, then the king and rook exchange squares.

In chess480:

In chess960:

So as far as traditional castling rules are concerned, they are both equally undermining, as for one thing in either mode, the kings can be found on squares other than e-square in the initial setup and still be castled...

Maybe you could further clarify, as to what exactly you intend to achieve with such comparison. (and if you do, then I will edit my reply accordingly.)
> 2 votes

# Answer
I believe the question is quite subjective, but nonetheless, I think that both castling rules were designed to favor "classical" chess players.

When you think about a chess variant that permutes the starting position of the pieces but that also wants to allow castling, you immediately face the problem that in the "classical" chess both the final position of the rook and king and the number of squares the king and rook have been moved is perfectly clear when castling on either side (since the starting position is always the same), but this is obviously not possible for your variant. (This is also an important point of discussion in Cylinder Chess, although here the starting position is fixed.)

In our variation, you may only accept one of those premises: either the rook's and king's final position is the same as in "classical" chess (as is chosen in Chess960) or they move the same amount of squares as in "classical" chess (as is chosen in Chess480). That is, the standard rules are being split into two different branches.

As a FIDE chess player, I feel it is way more comfortable to know where my rook and king are going to be when they castle (that is, I will know where will I have to defend) that not, so I think Chess960 castling rules suit FIDE chess players best. An important argument for those novice to chess not being comfortable with this variation is that the final position of king and rook may look completely arbitrary, and understandably not appealing. More on this subject can be found on this article.
> 2 votes

# Answer
I believe, perhaps naively, that Chess960 will become more popular over time and eventually become the successor to classic chess. Perhaps not in our lifetimes.

I look at the rules of castling in Chess960 just as I look at the rule of en passant.

When the game of chess evolved, and players began moving pawns two squares instead of one, it changed the texture of the game... or it would have, had it not been for the en passant rule.

The same is true of Chess960's castling rules. It preserves the inherent texture of the game.

If you look at a middlegame of Chess960, it is usually indistinguishable from a position that might have come from classic chess.

This is one of the genius parts of Fischer's invention... it does not change the game. It merely removes one of the most onerous aspects of the game (rote memorization). The essence is the same.
> 2 votes

---
Tags: castling, chess960
---


# Question
Title: What is the status for seven man end game table bases?
There are complete (or nearly complete) six man end game table bases available for download, and even online.

What is the status of seven man table bases? Is there still active development in this area? How much progress has been made? Is there any estimated time for when it will be completed, or at least complete enough to cover all the common seven man positions that occur in real games?

# Answer
Seven man end game table bases are already available online:

http://chessok.com/?p=28049

By the end of 2013 they should be available off line as well. The size is 140 000 gigabytes so there is an obvious problem with copying them. They did not compute 6 white pieces versus 1 king since they decided it was pointless.

Interesting fact- the longest forced checkmate is 549 moves!
> 22 votes

# Answer
In the second link from Wes' answer, the joint work of Yakov Konoval and Marc Bourzutschky is mentioned in passing, though not described at all, so I thought I'd give them a shout out here, as they have done a lot of work in particular 7-man endgames. This includes impressive work on pawnless endings, such as showing that in this position, where it is Black to move, White wins in 330 moves with best play:

```
[FEN "1k6/1b5q/N7/8/8/1Q6/8/B1K5 b - - 0 1"]

1...Ka8 2.Nb4! Qh1+ 3.Kb2! Qg1 4.Qa4+! Qa7 5.Qe8+! Qb8 6.Qe1 Bf3 7.Kb1! Qf4 8.Qe8+! Qb8 9.Qe7 Qf4 10.Qd8+ Qb8 11.Qd2 Be4+ 12.Kc1! Qg3 13.Qd4! Qf4+ 14.Kb2! Qf3 15.Qd8+ Kb7 16.Qe7+! Ka8 17.Qe8+ Ka7 18.Qe5 Kb6 19.Ka2! Qf7+ 20.Ka3 Qa7+ 21.Kb2 Bh7 22.Qf6+! Kb5 23.Nd5! Ka5 24.Qc3+ Kb5 25.Nc7+ Kb6 26.Ne6 Qa5 27.Qe3+! Kb5 28.Nd4+ Kc4 29.Nb3! Qd5 30.Qc3+ Kb5 31.Qa5+! Kc6 32.Qa8+! Kd6 33.Qf8+ Kc7 34.Qg7+ Qd7 35.Qg1 Qe7 36.Ka2! Qe2+ 37.Bb2! Qa6+ 38.Ba3! Qe2+ 39.Ka1 Qd3 40.Qc1+! Kd8 41.Nc5! Qd5 42.Na4! Qd4+ 43.Nc3! Kd7 44.Qe1! Bg8 45.Qe7+! Kc6 46.Bb2 Bc4 47.Nb1! Qd6 48.Qe4+ Qd5 49.Qe8+! Qd7 50.Qe1 Qd3 51.Qh1+ Bd5 52.Qh6+! Kd7 53.Qg7+! Kc6 54.Qf6+ Kb7 55.Qe7+ Kc6 56.Bc3 Be4 57.Qe6+ Kc5 58.Qc8+ Kb6 59.Nd2 Bf5 60.Qb8+! Kc6 61.Qa8+! Kc5 62.Qa7+ Kc6 63.Qa4+ Qb5 64.Qa8+ Kd7 65.Qf3 Qa4+ 66.Kb2 Qc2+ 67.Ka3! Be6 68.Qb7+! Ke8 69.Qa8+ Kf7 70.Qf3+ Ke8 71.Qe3 Qa2+ 72.Kb4 Qd5 73.Be5! Qc6 74.Bd4 Kd7 75.Bc5! Qd5 76.Kc3! Qa2 77.Qe4 Qa5+ 78.Bb4! Qd5 79.Qh7+ Bf7 80.Qg7 Qa2 81.Qd4+ Qd5 82.Qa7+ Kc8 83.Qa6+ Kc7 84.Ba5+ Kb8 85.Qb6+ Ka8 86.Qc7 Qb7 87.Qc5 Bd5 88.Qf8+ Qb8 89.Qf5 Qd6 90.Bb4 Qc6+ 91.Kb2 Be6 92.Qa5+ Kb7 93.Bc5 Qa6 94.Qc3 Qc6 95.Qb4+ Ka6 96.Qa3+ Kb7 97.Bg1 Kc7 98.Qe7+ Qd7 99.Qb4 Qd5 100.Kc1 Qc6+ 101.Kd1! Kd7 102.Qd4+ Qd5 103.Qa7+ Kc8 104.Qa4 Qe5 105.Bb6 Qh5+ 106.Kc1 Qe5 107.Bf2 Bd5 108.Qa6+ Kd8 109.Qa3 Kd7 110.Qd3 Qc7+ 111.Kd1 Qd6 112.Bg3 Qc6 113.Qd4 Ke6 114.Bf4 Kf7 115.Be5 Ke6 116.Bh8 Ke7 117.Qb4+ Ke8 118.Be5 Qb7 119.Qc5 Qc6 120.Qa3 Qh6 121.Bc3 Qc6 122.Qa5 Kd7 123.Kc1 Be6 124.Qe5 Qh1+ 125.Kc2 Qd5 126.Qg7+ Bf7 127.Qg3 Qd6 128.Qe3 Bd5 129.Kd1 Qe6 130.Qd4 Kc8 131.Qh8+ Qg8 132.Qf6 Qg4+ 133.Kc1 Qe6 134.Qf8+ Kb7 135.Nf1 Qe4 136.Qc5 Qc4 137.Qe7+! Qc7 138.Qb4+ Qb6 139.Qf8 Qg1 140.Qe7+ Kc6 141.Qf6+ Kd7 142.Kc2 Qg2+ 143.Nd2 Be6 144.Qh6 Qd5 145.Kd1 Qc5 146.Qg7+ Ke8 147.Kc2 Qf5+ 148.Kc1 Qc5 149.Qg6+ Kd7 150.Qd3+ Qd6 151.Qe4 Qa3+ 152.Kc2! Qa2+ 153.Kd1 Qd5 154.Qe3 Qd6 155.Qa7+ Qc7 156.Qd4+ Qd6 157.Qg7+ Qe7 158.Qg1 Kc8 159.Qg6 Qd6 160.Qg7 Qf4 161.Kc1 Qe3 162.Qf6 Kd7 163.Bb4 Kc8 164.Kc2 Kb7 165.Bc3 Bd5 166.Be5 Qc5+ 167.Kd1 Kc8 168.Qf5+ Kd8 169.Nf1 Qg1 170.Bf6+ Kc7 171.Kd2! Qg2+ 172.Ke3! Bc6 173.Nd2! Qg3+ 174.Ke2 Qh2+ 175.Kd1 Qh1+ 176.Kc2 Qd5 177.Qf4+ Kc8 178.Bd4 Qe6 179.Kd1 Bd5 180.Be5 Qb6 181.Qf5+ Qe6 182.Qg5 Qg8 183.Qf4 Qg1+ 184.Ke2 Qg2+ 185.Kd3 Qg6+ 186.Kd4 Bf7 187.Ne4 Qg1+ 188.Kd3 Qd1+ 189.Ke3 Qe1+ 190.Kf3 Qf1+ 191.Nf2! Qc4 192.Qf6 Qe6 193.Qh8+! Qe8 194.Qg7 Qd8 195.Ke2! Qe7 196.Qh8+ Qe8 197.Qh3+ Qe6 198.Qe3! Qb3 199.Qc5+! Kb7 200.Qe7+! Ka6 201.Kd2! Bg6 202.Qc5 Qb6 203.Qc4+! Qb5 204.Qc8+ Qb7 205.Qc3 Qd5+ 206.Ke3! Kb5 207.Qb2+! Kc6 208.Kf4! Qc4+ 209.Kg3! Bc2 210.Kh2 Kd7 211.Qb7+ Ke6 212.Bg3! Bf5 213.Qg7! Qc8 214.Bh4 Qb8+ 215.Kg1 Qe5 216.Qe7+ Kd5 217.Qf7+ Kc6 218.Qb3 Qd4 219.Bg3 Bd7 220.Qb1 Be6 221.Qg6 Kd7 222.Qh7+ Kc6 223.Qc7+ Kb5 224.Qb7+! Qb6 225.Qe4 Bb3 226.Bf4 Qc6 227.Qh7 Qf3 228.Qd7+! Qc6 229.Qg7 Qc5 230.Kg2 Be6 231.Qb2+ Kc6 232.Qe2 Bf5 233.Qe8+ Kb7 234.Kg3 Qc3+ 235.Kh2! Qf6 236.Qb8+ Kc6 237.Qc7+ Kd5 238.Kg1! Qg6+ 239.Bg3! Qf6 240.Qc1 Qd4 241.Qh6 Bd7 242.Qa6 Bc6 243.Qe2 Kc5 244.Be5 Qc4 245.Nd3+! Kb5 246.Qb2+! Ka4 247.Nf4 Qb3 248.Qd4+ Qb4 249.Qa1+ Qa3 250.Qe1 Qf3 251.Kh2! Bb7 252.Qd2 Kb5 253.Bf6 Ka6 254.Be7 Bc6 255.Bc5 Kb7 256.Qb2+ Kc8 257.Qf6 Kb7 258.Qe7+ Kc8 259.Qd6 Kb7 260.Bd4 Ka6 261.Qc7 Kb5 262.Qb6+ Kc4 263.Be3 Kc3 264.Qd4+ Kb3 265.Qd3+ Ka4 266.Qc4+ Ka5 267.Bc5 Qe4 268.Qc3+ Kb5 269.Bd6 Qc4 270.Qe3 Bd7 271.Qd2 Bc6 272.Kh3 Ka6 273.Be5 Bb5 274.Bd4 Qf7 275.Kg3 Qg8+ 276.Kf3 Qb3+ 277.Be3 Kb7 278.Kf2 Kc8 279.Qd6 Qa2+ 280.Kf3 Qc4 281.Qf8+ Kb7 282.Kg3 Qc7 283.Qh8 Qe7 284.Qd4 Qg5+ 285.Kf3 Qf5 286.Qb6+ Kc8 287.Bd4 Qd7 288.Kg3 Qc6 289.Qa7 Qb7 290.Qc5+ Qc6 291.Qf5+ Qd7 292.Qe5 Qe8 293.Ne6 Qg6+ 294.Kf3 Qd3+ 295.Kf4 Qd2+ 296.Kg3! Qd3+ 297.Be3 Qg6+ 298.Ng5 Qe8 299.Qd4 Qd7 300.Qb4 Qd5 301.Bf4 Bc6 302.Qf8+ Kd7 303.Qg7+ Ke8 304.Qc7 Qg2+ 305.Kh4 Qh1+ 306.Bh2 Qd5 307.Kh5 Bd7 308.Bd6 Qh1+ 309.Kg6 Qc6 310. Qb8+! Bc8 311.Qb4! Qd5 312.Qb6 Qf5+ 313.Kh5! Qg4+ 314.Kh6 Qh4+ 315.Kg6! Qc4 316.Kf6 Qf1+ 317.Kg7! Qf5 318.Qe3+! Kd7 319.Nf7 Kc6 320.Qc1+ Kb5 321.Ne5 Be6 322.Qc6+ Ka5 323.Qa8+ Kb6 324.Qb8+ Ka6 325.Bc7 Qg5+ 326.Ng6! Qe3 327.Qa8+ Kb5 328.Qe8+ Ka6 329.Kf6 Qc3+ 330.Be5!

```

I'm sure that appears complicated enough, but to really get a sense as to how complicated the optimal play is from the initial position, note that every move annotated with ! above is an only-winning move, i.e. any other move would allow a draw against best play from Black.

They later showed that this position - again with Black to move and with ! indicating an only-winning move - is a win for White in 517 moves:

```
[FEN "8/1r6/8/6n1/5k2/1b6/3K3N/7Q b - - 0 1"]

1...Rd7+ 2.Kc3! Bd1 3.Qf1+! Bf3 4.Qc1+! Kf5 5.Kb2! Rb7+ 6.Ka3 Ra7+ 7.Kb4 Rb7+ 8.Ka5 Ra7+ 9.Kb6 Rb7+ 10.Ka6 Re7 11.Qf1 Re6+ 12.Ka7 Re7+ 13.Kb8 Re8+ 14.Kc7 Re3 15.Kc8 Rc3+ 16.Kb8! Kf4 17.Qg1! Ne4 18.Nf1! Rb3+ 19.Ka7! Rd3 20.Qh2+! Kf5 21.Kb8 Nf6 22.Nd2! Bd5 23.Qf2+! Ke5 24.Qe2+ Kd4 25.Ka7 Nd7 26.Qg4+! Kc5 27.Qg1+! Kb4 28.Qb1+! Kc3 29.Qc1+ Kd4 30.Qb2+ Kc5 31.Qc2+! Kd4 32.Qa4+ Kc5 33.Qa5+ Kd4 34.Qb4+ Ke5 35.Ka6 Kf5 36.Qb1 Ne5 37.Kb5! Bc6+ 38.Kb4! Bd5 39.Qf1+ Kg6 40.Qe2 Kf6 41.Qh5 Ke6 42.Qg5 Nc6+ 43.Kb5 Ne5 44.Qh6+ Kf5 45.Nf1 Bc6+ 46.Kb4 Rd4+ 47.Kb3 Rd3+ 48.Ka2 Bd5+ 49.Kb1! Nc4 50.Qh5+! Kf6 51.Qh4+ Ke6 52.Ng3! Rb3+ 53.Kc1! Rc3+ 54.Kd1 Re3 55.Nf1! Ra3 56.Qf4 Kd7 57.Ke1 Kc6 58.Qh6+ Kc5 59.Kf2 Rb3 60.Qh8 Ra3 61.Qb8 Kc6 62.Qb1 Rc3 63.Kg1 Ra3 64.Qc2 Kb6 65.Qf5 Kc5 66.Qf8+ Kb5 67.Qe8+ Kc5 68.Qe2 Rf3 69.Qe7+ Kd4 70.Qg7+ Kc5 71.Qg5 Kc6 72.Qh4 Kb5 73.Qe7 Kb6 74.Qb4+ Kc6 75.Qe1 Ra3 76.Qf2 Rf3 77.Qd4 Kd6 78.Qh4 Kc5 79.Nh2 Ra3 80.Ng4 Ra1+ 81.Kf2! Ra2+ 82.Kg3! Ra3+ 83.Kf4 Rf3+ 84.Kg5 Be6 85.Nf6! Ne5 86.Nh5 Rf5+ 87.Kh6 Ng4+ 88.Kg6! Ne5+ 89.Kh7 Rf7+ 90.Kh6! Ng4+ 91.Kg5 Ne5 92.Qa4 Rf5+ 93.Kh6! Bc4 94.Qa5+ Kd4 95.Qb6+ Kd5 96.Qd8+ Ke4 97.Qd1 Ke3 98.Qc1+ Kd4 99.Ng3 Rf6+ 100.Kh5 Kd5 101.Kh4 Rg6 102.Kh3 Bd3 103.Qf4 Rg8 104.Qb4 Bc4 105.Qd2+ Ke6 106.Qh6+ Kd5 107.Qh7 Kc5 108.Kh2 Rg6 109.Qe7+ Kd5 110.Qd8+ Ke6 111.Qf8 Kd5 112.Kh3 Bb5 113.Qa3 Bc6 114.Kg2 Rf6 115.Kh2 Nf3+ 116.Kh3 Rh6+ 117.Kg2! Nd4 118.Qe7 Kc4+ 119.Kg1! Rg6 120.Qf7+ Re6 121.Qf4 Kd3 122.Qf1+ Kc3 123.Qc1+ Kb4 124.Kh2 Rf6 125.Kh3 Bd7+ 126.Kg2! Bc6+ 127.Kh2 Rf3 128.Qd1 Kc5 129.Nh5 Kd5 130.Qh1 Ke6 131.Qg1 Ke5 132.Qg7+ Ke4 133.Qc7 Kd5 134.Nf4+ Kc4 135.Qb8 Rc3 136.Qa7 Be4 137.Qb6 Bc6 138.Qa6+ Kc5 139.Nd3+ Kd6 140.Nb2 Rb3 141.Nd1 Nf3+ 142.Kg3 Nd4+ 143.Kf2 Rf3+ 144.Ke1 Kd5 145.Qb6 Kc4 146.Qa7 Bb5 147.Nf2 Nc2+ 148.Kf1 Bc6 149.Qa6+ Kc5 150.Qa2 Nd4 151.Kg1! Rf5 152.Kh2 Rh5+ 153.Kg3! Rg5+ 154.Kf4! Rf5+ 155.Kg4 Bf3+ 156.Kh4 Rh5+ 157.Kg3 Rg5+ 158.Kf4 Rf5+ 159.Ke3! Re5+ 160.Kd3 Be2+ 161.Kd2! Kb4 162.Qg8 Bb5 163.Qg4 Re2+ 164.Kc1! Kc4 165.Nd1! Rc2+ 166.Kb1 Rd2 167.Qc8+ Bc6 168.Qg8+! Kb4 169.Nb2 Be4+ 170.Ka2! Nb5 171.Qb3+! Ka5 172.Ka1! Bd5 173.Qa4+! Kb6 174.Qb4! Rd4 175.Qe1 Be4 176.Nd1 Rc4 177.Qe3+ Kc6 178.Kb2 Rc2+ 179.Kb3 Nd6 180.Qh6 Rc5 181.Nc3 Bd5+ 182.Kc2 Kd7 183.Qg7+ Kc6 184.Kd1 Bf7 185.Kd2 Bc4 186.Ke1 Ra5 187.Qf6 Rf5 188.Qg6 Kc7 189.Qg7+ Rf7 190.Qg3 Kc6 191.Qg2+ Kc7 192.Qh2 Kc6 193.Qh1+ Kc5 194.Qh8 Re7+ 195.Kd1! Re8 196.Qh2 Re3 197.Kc2 Rd3 198.Qe5+ Kc6 199.Qh5 Rg3 200.Qa5 Rh3 201.Kd2 Rh2+ 202.Ke3 Rh3+ 203.Kf4 Rd3 204.Na4 Rd4+ 205.Kf3 Rd3+ 206.Kg4 Rd4+ 207.Kh3 Ne4 208.Qa7 Be6+ 209.Kg2! Rb4 210.Qa6+! Kd5 211.Kf3 Kd4 212.Qe2 Kd5 213.Ke3 Bd7 214.Nb2 Bb5 215.Qh5+ Ke6 216.Nd1 Nf6 217.Qh3+ Kf7 218.Kd2 Rd4+ 219.Kc1 Rc4+ 220.Kb2 Rb4+ 221.Ka3 Ra4+ 222.Kb3 Rd4 223.Nc3 Bc4+ 224.Kc2! Be6 225.Qe3 Rh4 226.Qa7+ Kg6 227.Ne2 Rb4 228.Kc1 Rc4+ 229.Kb2 Rb4+ 230.Ka3 Rb3+ 231.Ka4! Rf3 232.Qd4 Bd7+ 233.Kb4 Be6 234.Qc5 Bd7 235.Qd6 Bg4 236.Nd4 Rd3 237.Kc4 Re3 238.Nc6 Bc8 239.Qh2 Re4+ 240.Kc5 Bb7 241.Qg1+ Kh7 242.Na7 Rg4 243.Qh2+ Kg6 244.Nb5 Rg2 245.Qh3 Rg5+ 246.Kb4 Bg2 247.Qh2 Bd5 248.Nd6 Ne4 249.Nc8 Nf6 250.Qd6 Rh5 251.Qc7 Kg5 252.Qe5+ Kg6 253.Qe3 Kh7 254.Qd3+ Kg7 255.Nd6 Rg5 256.Ka4 Rh5 257.Qg3+ Kh7 258.Kb4 Kh6 259.Ka3 Rg5 260.Qc3 Kg6 261.Qc2+ Kh6 262.Nf5+ Kh5 263.Qd3 Kg6 264.Ng3+ Kf7 265.Qe3 Rg8 266.Nf5 Ra8+ 267.Kb2! Ra2+ 268.Kb1 Ra6 269.Qe7+ Kg6 270.Nd6 Rb6+ 271.Kc2 Rb3 272.Qe5 Rf3 273.Kd2 Bc6 274.Nc4 Bd5 275.Ne3 Be4 276.Ng4 Bb7 277.Qe6 Kg5 278.Ne5 Rf2+ 279.Kc3 Rf4 280.Nf7+ Kg6 281.Nd6 Be4 282.Kd2 Rf2+ 283.Ke1 Rf4 284.Qc4 Kg5 285.Qe2 Bg6 286.Qe5+ Kg4 287.Ke2 Bf5 288.Qa1 Nh5 289.Ke3 Bc2 290.Qa8 Bg6 291.Qd5 Ng3 292.Nc4 Nf5+ 293.Ke2! Ng3+ 294.Kd2 Kh3 295.Qc6 Re4 296.Qa6 Re2+ 297.Kc3 Be4 298.Qd6 Kg2 299.Kb4 Bf3 300.Ka5 Nf5 301.Qc5 Be4 302.Kb6 Rc2 303.Qb4 Kf2 304.Ne5 Ke3 305.Nd7 Nd4 306.Qa3+ Ke2 307.Ne5 Nf5 308.Qa6+ Kf2 309.Qa4 Ng3 310.Qb4 Ke3 311.Nc4+ Kd3 312.Nd6 Ke3 313.Ka7 Bd3 314.Qb6+ Kf3 315.Qd4 Be4 316.Kb8 Re2 317.Nf7 Bf5 318.Ng5+ Kg2 319.Qd5+ Be4 320.Qb3 Bf5 321.Qf3+ Kh2 322.Qb7 Re8+ 323.Ka7! Re2 324.Qd5 Rf2 325.Nf3+ Kg2 326.Nd2+ Kh3 327.Qc6 Kg4 328.Qc3 Rf4 329.Nc4 Re4 330.Ne3+ Kg5 331.Qc5 Re6 332.Kb8 Re8+ 333.Kb7 Re6 334.Kc7 Re4 335.Kc6 Re8 336.Kb6 Re4 337.Ka5 Re6 338.Kb5 Re4 339.Nd5 Nh5 340.Ne7 Ng3 341.Qc1+ Kh4 342.Qh6+ Kg4 343.Nd5 Kf3 344.Qf6 Kg4 345.Qg7+ Kf3 346.Qc3+ Kf2 347.Qc5+ Kf3 348.Ka5 Bg4 349.Nf6 Rf4 350.Qc6+ Kf2 351.Nd5 Re4 352.Qf6+ Bf3 353.Nf4 Ne2 354.Nd3+ Ke3 355.Ne5 Rf4 356.Qb6+ Nd4 357.Kb4 Ke4 358.Nc4 Kf5 359.Qh6 Be2 360.Ne3+ Ke5 361.Qh8+ Ke4 362.Qe8+! Kf3 363.Nd5! Re4 364.Qf7+ Kg3 365.Qg6+ Kf3 366.Nf6 Rf4 367.Qh5+ Kg3 368.Qg5+ Kf3 369.Kc3 Nb5+ 370.Kb3! Rc4 371.Nd5 Nd4+ 372.Kb2 Rc2+ 373.Kb1 Ke4 374.Nf6+ Kd3 375.Nd7 Bf3 376.Ne5+ Ke2 377.Qh4 Rd2 378.Nc4! Rd1+ 379.Kb2! Rd3 380.Qg5 Rb3+ 381.Ka2! Rd3 382.Qe5+ Kf2 383.Nb2 Rd2 384.Qf4 Ke2 385.Kb1 Bg2 386.Nc4 Rd3 387.Qh2 Kf1 388.Qh7 Rc3 389.Kb2 Rc2+ 390.Ka3 Rc3+ 391.Kb4 Ne2 392.Ne5 Rh3 393.Qf5+ Ke1 394.Nd3+ Kd2 395.Nc5 Rg3 396.Qh7 Ke3 397.Qd3+ Kf2 398.Qc4 Rc3 399.Qh4+ Rg3 400.Ka5 Kg1 401.Qe7 Kf2 402.Qf6+ Ke1 403.Qh4 Kf1 404.Qd8 Ke1 405.Nd3+ Kd2 406.Nb4+ Kc1 407.Qe7 Kd2 408.Qd6+ Ke3 409.Nc2+ Kf2 410.Qe7 Rf3 411.Qh4+ Rg3 412.Ka6 Bh3 413.Qf6+ Rf3 414.Qa1 Rd3 415.Qe1+ Kf3 416.Qb4 Kg3 417.Qe7 Kf2 418.Ka5 Rc3 419.Qf8+ Rf3 420.Qb4 Rc3 421.Qb6+ Kg3 422.Ne3 Nf4 423.Nc4 Rf3 424.Qc7 Rf2 425.Qg7+ Kh2 426.Qe5 Kg3 427.Qg5+ Kh2 428.Kb6 Bg2 429.Ne3 Bh3 430.Qe5 Kg3 431.Nd5 Kg4 432.Qd4 Kg3 433.Qe3+ Rf3 434.Qe5 Kg4 435.Nf6+ Kg3 436.Ne4+ Kg2 437.Qc5 Ne2 438.Qc4 Nf4 439.Qc2+ Kh1 440.Qc5 Bg2 441.Nf2+ Kh2 442.Ng4+ Kh3 443.Qg5 Rb3+ 444.Ka5 Ra3+ 445.Kb4 Rf3 446.Ne5 Nd5+ 447.Kb5 Rf4 448.Kc5 Be4 449.Nc6 Rh4 450.Qd2 Kg4 451.Qe1 Bg2 452.Qe6+ Kg3 453.Nd4 Nf4 454.Qb3+ Kh2 455.Qe3 Rh5+ 456.Kd6! Rd5+ 457.Ke7! Nh3 458.Qd2 Kg3 459.Qc3+ Kh2 460.Qe3 Rg5 461.Qe2 Nf4 462.Qf2 Rg4 463.Nf5 Nd5+ 464.Ke6 Rg6+ 465.Kd7 Rg4 466.Qe1 Nf6+ 467.Kc7 Ne4 468.Qc1 Rg5 469.Qf4+! Kg1 470.Ne3 Rg7+ 471.Kb6 Rg6+ 472.Ka5 Rg5+ 473.Kb4 Rg6 474.Qe5 Bf3 475.Qa1+ Kh2 476.Qb2+ Kh1 477.Qc1+ Rg1 478.Qc8 Rg3 479.Qh8+ Kg1 480.Qa1+ Kf2 481.Qd4 Rg5 482.Nf5+ Kg2 483.Qb2+ Kh3 484.Ne3 Rh5 485.Nf1 Kg4 486.Qg7+ Kh3 487.Qg1 Rh4 488.Ka3 Rf4 489.Qh2+ Kg4 490.Ne3+ Kg5 491.Nd5 Rf7 492.Qe5+ Kh4 493.Ne7 Ng5 494.Ng8 Ne4 495.Nh6 Rf6 496.Nf5+ Kg4 497.Ne3+ Kh4 498.Kb4 Rb6+ 499.Ka5 Rf6 500.Qh2+ Kg5 501.Qh7 Ng3 502.Qg7+ Rg6 503.Qe5+ Kh6 504.Qf4+ Rg5+ 505.Kb6 Be2 506.Qf8+ Kh7 507.Nd5 Bc4 508.Nf6+ Kg6 509.Nd7 Nh5 510.Qd6+ Kh7 511.Qe7+ Kh6 512.Qe3 Be6 513.Ne5 Bd5 514.Qd4 Bg8 515.Qd2 Nf6 516.Nf3 Nd5+ 517.Kb7 Kg7 518.Qxg5+

```

Note: "win for white in X moves" here means that, assuming perfect play, it will take X moves *for white to reduce the position to a won 6 piece endgame* (for which there are complete tablebases available). It doesn't mean it's X moves until mate. So in the longer example here, for instance, no capture is made until exactly move 517, when a winning 6 piece endgame is reached.

In a post from 2006, Bourzutschky himself gives an account of some of their work involving 7-man endings with pawns.
> 18 votes

# Answer
I researched this some last summer, and found this post, which was inspiring because it was dated recently at the time.

The threads related saw a bit of activity and died off:

In short, I don't think we have any working 7-piece tablebases (complete ones, anyway), yet. They're going to be quite large and the current programs need to be rewritten to support these new larger files. APIs need to be rewritten as well.
> 10 votes

# Answer
7-men Syzygy tables are available for download: ftp://ftp.chessdb.cn/pub/syzygy/

Mirrors:

As of August 2018, only latest development Stockfish (and some of its derivatives) supports them.
> 6 votes

---
Tags: engines, endgame, tablebases
---


# Question
Title: Can an Optimal Stopping strategy be applied to search functions?
Can the solution to the famous Secretary Problem be applied to the search function of a chess engine? Rejecting the first 37% moves and choosing the best one after that,or maybe even just checking the first 63% of the moves and choosing the best one so far?

# Answer
The secretary problem is very different from chess move evaluation for several reasons. First and foremost, the number of chess moves in a given position is finite and usually fairly small (~30 moves in a position). The second reason is that the cost of choosing a sub-optimal employee is quantifiable and the second best secretary is okay. In many chess positions there is only one move that is at all reasonable, every alternative will lose the game immediately.

In many chess engines, the most computationally expensive part of determining the best move is generating legal moves. In the secretary problem, the number of applicants is known. In chess, once we know the number of legal moves, we have already done some of the heaviest lifting.

Finally, chess engines already prioritize candidate moves very quickly, the real strength of the engine is selecting the best move out of 2 or 3 moves that have risen to the top of the list. Chess engines will continue to evaluate all of the legal moves in a position, but they might only go 2 or 3 ply deep for the moves that are less likely to be good moves while searching 40+ ply deep for the moves that are under active consideration. This is called pruning and its development is one of the main improvements in newer chess engines over the earliest chess engines.
> 1 votes

# Answer
No. What if recapturing your queen for an exchange is your first candidate move?
> 1 votes

---
Tags: engines, programming, statistics
---


title: Is there a Kriegspiel android app?

text:
# Question
Title: Is there a Kriegspiel android app?
I'm looking for an android app for a variant of chess which is called Kriegspiel. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kriegspiel\_(chess))

I don't expect any PvP app but I'd satisfied with PvC app. (OK; I know it's harder to make PvC)

And if somebody knows fairly good computer software for Kriegspiel please recommend it to me. I know one software, http://www.kriegspiel.co.uk/ but just in case if there is a better software.

# Answer
There is an app called Dark Chess: Dark Chess for Android

I know it's not exactly the variation you asked for, but I thought it could be useful in some way.
> 2 votes

---
Tags: chess-variants
---


# Question
Title: Is there a free downloadable mini-chess program or 'chess engine'?
The fascinating miniature chess or mini-chess ' that is chess on a 6 by 6 board. I know there are tons of decent chess programs but has anyone written a decent chess program for mini-chess. Is there a free downloadable mini-chess program or 'chess engine'?

# Answer
Zillions of Games isn't free, but it plays Los Alamos chess. ChessV plays 50 chess variants. I believe Sjaak plays microchess.

ChessV http://samiam.org/chessv/

Sjaak http://www.eglebbk.dds.nl/program/chess-index.html
> 3 votes

# Answer
In case you're interested, there is an Android app for that and you can play with the engine: Mini Chess
> 1 votes

---
Tags: engines, chess-variants, programming
---


# Question
Title: Why does it seem that one drops more rating points when losing than gaining when winning?
It seems that when one loses a game against a compatibly rated opponent, the (USCF) rating point decrease is more significant than when one scores a win.

For example, between two 'C' players, losing an over-the-board game may cost a player 12 points, whereas wining, the increase in rating is 7 points.

This is an odd phenomenon in the Elo system. Is there an explanation?

# Answer
I suspect it's a result of you not really knowing the rating of the player you're playing. Posted rating for a player in a tournament is typically already out of date. You can see it in more detail by checking the actual rating report of the event you played in (http://www.uschess.org/datapage/event-search.php) and you can see what the *real* rating of the player you played was at the start of the event. Keep in mind it changes with every round.
> 6 votes

# Answer
How much rating you lose or gain depend (besides your and your opponents rating) on the K-factor. If your opponent has a different K-factor than you do, the gain/loss of rating can be asymmetrical.

In the Fide Elo system the K-factor depends on rating and age. Apparently the USCF has a K-factor that is dependent on the number of games played overall and in the current tournament.

So, that is probably the reason for the discrepancies you noticed. But it has nothing to do with asymmetry between winning and losing.
> 3 votes

# Answer
ELO ratings is all about statistics. When you win against a weaker player you gain less points then you lose when you lose against that player. You can also lose points when you draw against a weaker player.
> -2 votes

# Answer
Due to the huge upsurge in rated players, and the lesser skill level required to become one, we see a player becoming rated every other day. If USCF did not implement this imbalance, Fabiano Caruana might get rated at 3000+ as rating is being 'added' into the system for every new rated. This imbalance 'subtracts' rating from the system to keep it more or less even.

---

So if a new player gets rated at say 1800, due to less of rating the 1800 he has added to USCF will eventually drain out.
> -2 votes

---
Tags: rating, elo, uscf
---


title: Fritz Online will not finish game?

text:
# Question
Title: Fritz Online will not finish game?
Fritz Online will play all the way to the point where there's mate in one move. In other words, if you are white and Fritz is black it will stop playing (moving) at the point any black move will be followed by mate on the part of while.

This is fine, I can read the Fritz console in the lower right and it will say something like "White mates".

The problem is that I want my kids to play with Fritz Online and this modality is disorienting to them. They want to see the game play through to the actual end and get the satisfaction of completing the mate.

Is there a setting that will cause Fritz Online to play through to the end just like any regular chess program?

# Answer
> 1 votes
Just tested it and it may have been fixed. It let me complete the mating move.

Just in case, the site is https://fritz.chessbase.com/

---
Tags: fritz
---


# Question
Title: What are some of the chess sites that allow Round Robin or Swiss Tournament to be organized?
I have been experimenting with the Team feature and tournament features in Lichess, but I just learned that it's not possible to have swiss, round robin or manual pairing in Lichess. A couple of months ago, I organized a rapid league in my chess club and it went really well, but after a few months, we stopped it due to financial problems. There were three leagues, A, B and C with one round-robin tournament each month (For A and B) while C had a swiss tournament. After each tournament, the top and bottom two shift groups and the winners of the Swiss get a place in B group. Learned so much from running the league. Recently I checked Lichess and fell in love with the beautiful interface (but sad at the lack of features for Swiss/RR tournaments), so, I wanted to ask if there's a good place to organize such a league online? I checked chess.com but it wants me to pay. Still researching!

# Answer
> 0 votes
This is an online option:

https://chess.swips.eu/

But beware that the free version has the following limitations: up to 20 players in only one category, up to 5 rounds with only one tiebreak method.

---
Tags: tournament, online
---


title: Swiss Pairing Algorithm

text:
# Question
Title: Swiss Pairing Algorithm
I am building a simple Android application for hosting Chess tournaments, I am having some difficulty implementing a Swiss paring algorithm, I need link to an article or a paper that explains how I can achieve that.

I would also like to know any ideas that can help me. I am following the rules in this Article Swiss Pairing Rules

I am particularly having problem ensuring that

1. For each player the difference between the number of black and the number of white games shall not be greater than 2 or less than –2. Each system may have exceptions to this rule in the last round of a tournament.
2. No player shall receive the same colour three times in a row. Each system may have exceptions to this rule in the last round of a tournament.
3. In general, a player is given the colour with which he played less games.

If colours are already balanced, then, in general, the player is given the colour that alternates from the last one with which he played.

# Answer
Jeremy Bierema has written a Swiss pairing program and put it on Github. You could look at the code there which is in C++.

At any stage in the tournament you have to have a list of forbidden pairings.

The first, obvious entries are pairings that have occurred previously. The second, banning 3 whites in a row, is ww v ww since one of them will have to be white giving www. Similarly bb v bb is forbidden. Then the white/black imbalance, so 2 v 2 and -2 v -2 are forbidden since in each case one player will end up with a 3 or -3 imbalance.

So, for each player you need to keep track of previous opponents, colour sequence and colour imbalance. This gives you the information to know which pairings are forbidden. In the last round you should also perform the forbidden pairing check for colours and pair with this in mind if possible. If not then you can ignore colour restrictions in the last round only.

The "previous opponent" forbidden pairings are cumulative. The "colour" forbidden pairings change from round to round as the players' colour sequences and imbalances change.
> 2 votes

# Answer
There's a Python library called **PyPair**, that allows to easily generate the pairings, a short example:

```
Players = { 1:"Tim",
            2:"Jeff",
            3:"Kristi",
            4:"Jacob",
            5:"Doug",
            6:"Karen",
            7:"David"}

to = Tournament()

for player in Players:
    to.addPlayer( player, Players[player] )

pairings1 = to.pairRound()

print pairings1

```

Yields the output:

```
{1: [1, 7], 2: [2, 6], 3: [3, 5]}

```

You may check PyPair: A Python Library for Pairing Swiss Tournaments -- the blog post, or deep dive into the github page.

The more complex example is available here.
> 1 votes

---
Tags: chess-algorithms, swiss-pairing
---


title: Why was this game drawn on Lichess?

text:
# Question
Title: Why was this game drawn on Lichess?
https://lichess.org/qgvWa0ly

I (Black) was losing and ready to resign soon. As far as I can tell, there should be no stalemate or 50 move rule applicable. I had offered a draw earlier, but it was declined. Can the opponent accept the draw later after first declining? That wouldn't be fair.

```
[FEN ""]
[Event "Rated Rapid game"]
[Site "https://lichess.org/qgvWa0ly"]
[Date "2018.08.25"]
[White "Tigerov"]
[Black "JordanRieger"]
[Result "1/2-1/2"]
[UTCDate "2018.08.25"]
[UTCTime "00:43:31"]
[WhiteElo "2216"]
[BlackElo "1969"]
[WhiteRatingDiff "-14"]
[BlackRatingDiff "+6"]
[Variant "Standard"]
[TimeControl "600+0"]
[ECO "C47"]
[Opening "Four Knights Game: Scotch Variation Accepted"]
[Termination "Normal"]

1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nf6 3. Nc3 Nc6 4. d4 exd4 5. Nxd4 Nxd4 6. Qxd4 d6 7. Bg5 Be7 8. O-O-O O-O 9. e5 dxe5 10. Qxe5 Bd7 11. Bd3 Re8 12. Rhe1 Bd6 13. Qd4 h6 14. Bh4 Be7 15. Ne4 Nxe4 16. Qxe4 Bg5+ 17. Bxg5 Rxe4 18. Bxd8 Rxe1 19. Rxe1 Rxd8 20. Bc4 Re8 21. Rxe8+ Bxe8 22. Kd2 Bc6 23. g3 Kf8 24. Ke3 Ke7 25. Kd4 b6 26. b4 f6 27. h4 b5 28. Bb3 Kd6 29. c3 a6 30. f4 Bf3 31. c4 Be2 32. c5+ Kd7 33. Bd5 c6 34. Be4 Bc4 35. a3 Be2 36. Bg2 Bc4 37. Bf3 Be6 38. Bd1 Bc4 39. g4 Be6 40. g5 fxg5 41. fxg5 hxg5 42. hxg5 Bf5 43. Ke5 g6 44. Bb3 Ke7 45. Bd1 Bh3 46. Bf3 Bd7 47. Be4 Kf7 48. Kd6 Be8 49. Bxc6 Kf8 50. Bxe8 Kxe8 51. c6 Kd8 52. Kd5 Kc8 53. Kd6 Kd8 54. Kc5 Kc7 55. Kd5 Kc8 56. Kd6 Kd8 1/2-1/2

```

# Answer
In a chess there's a 3-fold repetition rule, if the same position appears 3 times, a player can call a draw. Your opponent allowed a 3-fold repetition, hence, the game was drawn.

```
3k4/8/p1PK2p1/1p4P1/1P6/P7/8/8 w - - 11 57

```

**Edit: clarifying in light of comments:**

Note that the draw does not happen until claimed by a player, and since you didn't claim it, your opponent must have. Why would they claim a draw in a winning position where they had more time on their clock? On lichess.org, you can control the "claim draw on threefold repetition automatically" setting. Yours is set to "when time remaining \<30 seconds", but the opponent's must have been set to "Always". Players who normally play under faster time controls sometimes use the "Always" setting to ensure predictable draws under time pressure. You got lucky in this situation because your opponent didn't recognize the 3-fold repetition, and their winning chances were undone by their settings.
> 14 votes

---
Tags: draw, lichess
---


# Question
Title: Why is 5.c4 playable vs. Sicilian Kan, but hardly seen vs. Sicilian Taimanov?
Why is 5.c4 considered playable against the Sicilian Kan,

i.e. after 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 e6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 a6 5.c4,

but hardly seen against the Sicilian Taimanov?

i.e. after 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 e6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nc6 5.c4?!

# Answer
As the knight is already developed on c6, black can immediately create counterplay in the center: 4....Nc6 5.c4 Nf6 6.Nc3 Bb4.

Clearly, 7.Bd3 (the mainline after 4....a6 5.c4 Nf6 6.Nc3 Bb4) is not possible now, as black wins a piece by 7....Nxd4. Instead, white has to defend the pawn on e4 in another way. Both after 7.f3 and 7.Qd3, black has the strong reply 7....d5, after which white has to be careful to maintain equality.

The best move is probably 7.Nxc6, which has been played by several grandmasters. However, this is already a slight concession by white and black should be fine after both 7....bxc6 (e.g. Kramnik-Kasparov, Karjakin-Grischuk) or 7....dxc6 (e.g. Dubov-Radjabov).

Note that the position often arises via the English opening: 1.c4 c5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 e6 6.e4.

```

      [StartPly "7"]

      [FEN ""]
      1.e4 (1.c4 c5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 e6 6.e4) c5 2.Nf3 e6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nc6 (4...a6 5.c4 Nf6 6.Nc3 Bb4 7.Bd3) 5.c4 Nf6 6.Nc3 Bb4 7.Nxc6 (7.Bd3 Nxd4)(7.f3 d5)(7.Qd3 d5) bxc6 (7...dxc6)

```
> 6 votes

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


# Question
Title: Are there any free chess engines that can be used to analyze online or in a mobile phone?
I want to analyze chess games. Is there any reliable chess engine that is free

# Answer
Please specify your mobile platform in your question.

On the iOS platform, I recommend my own apps for doing that. www.smallchess.com.

Otherwise, there're lots of possibilities. If you can narrow your focus, I'll edit my answer.
> 0 votes

---
Tags: engines
---


# Question
Title: Why increment isn't popular online blitz?
I find it strange that the dominant time controls for online blitz is 3 min and 5 min instead of something with delay like 3 increment 2. Fide blitz tournaments have increment too. Any insight on this trend?

# Answer
> 4 votes
The main reason, I think, for online blitz sessions not including increment/delay is the possibility of premoving. You can't premove in OTB chess, so you will use the increment for the 'motion' time.

Personally, I feel 3+0, where you have to keep good track of your clock, is more challenging than 3+2, where you just have to liquidate to a winning endgame using your time more freely and then play on the increment until checkmate. In sudden death games, you can flag your opponent if you are losing, so once they get a winning position it is not game over :)

# Answer
> 1 votes
A possible reason is cheating. Easier to manually cheat on increment time than in a short time. I have been playing a lot of online games lately and I have seen this.

You play on your computer and use a secondary device (phone) to cheat. Increment makes it easier in shorter time control. One way to tell is to observe sudden rating increase for the offending player if you check their profile (ie, I use lichess).

# Answer
> 1 votes
Online chess without increment is more popular because it's quicker to finish. It's also much more exciting as anything can happen as time goes to zero.

---
Tags: online
---


title: Average income for titled chess players

text:
# Question
Title: Average income for titled chess players
What is the average income for an IM? What about for a super GM? Is there an online site/resource that has these average incomes?

Also only the ones that come from chess or chess-related activities(Sponsorships, Commentary, Tournament Organisation, etc)

# Answer
This article may answer your question.

If you want it short:

On average, according to Natalia Pogonina (WGM), the top-3 players in the world earn 1 million / year, top 10 - over 200 000$, top 50 - over 100 000$.

If you want more information, try looking around this thread.
> 13 votes

# Answer
Chessbase has covered this topic extensively,

Chess Cash Kings 2013

Live rating list of chess players earnings?
> 5 votes

# Answer
Top chess players have various sources of income, but if you are interested in prize money only there is a website tracking this:

How much do top chess players make in prize money?
> 3 votes

---
Tags: grandmaster
---