DECEPTIVE SIMPLICITY
Автор: Юрий Авербах, на английском языке.

Today we start education program "Improve your chess now!" All course will consist of 12 lectures about diffeent problems of the openings, middlegames and endings. We sincerely hope that this course will help you to play better. First lecture is about the pawn ending.

Deceptive simplicity -this as a whole is how one can characterize the pawn endings. Indeed, behinde the apparent simplicity of such endings even with minimum of pawns, extraordinary depth is often concealed. Many years ago, when I was a boy, I was fortunated once to listen a lecture by the great endgame expert Nikolai grigoriev. It made an unforgetable impression on me. When Grigoriev explained his pawn studies, moving the pieces on the demonstration board with his thin artistic fingers, I sensed, rather then understood the great depth and beauty of chess. And I can only dream that you will get the same impression from my lecture.

Let us start from very simple position:

At first glance it seems that Black can defend successfully. If 1.Kc5 then 1...Kc7, while if 1.Kd6 then 1...Kd8. Here we have a case of so called corresponding squares. Black's c7 corresponds to White's c5, d8 - d6, c8-d5. We can say, that Black is able to mantain the correspondence of squares close to the pawn. But what about other squares ? Let us try retreating the King - say 1.Kd4. Will Black then be able to find a corresponding square for his King ? Obviously, Black cannot reply 1... Kc7, as White's King breacks through to b6 after 2.Kc5. That means black must play either 1...Kd8 or 1...Kb8. But what will happen if we make another waiting move - 2.Kc4 - what then ? It is not hard to hard satisfy oneself that the balance cannot be preserved in that case. After 2...Kc8 there follows 3.Kd5! Kd8 4.Kd6 Kc8 5. d7 We have examined here one the simplest cases of the applications of corresponding squares, the so called "triangulation". By manoeuvring his King in a triangle (d5,d4 and c4 squares) White succeeds in disturbing the correspondence in his favour. In order to make two steps forward the white

King takes a step back.

I should like to draw your attention to an interesting feature of pawn endings: when you play through practical examples, you cannot being staggered at the number of mistakes which masters and even grandmasters make in these apparenttly such simple endings.

Just one example from international practice.

This position occured in a game Yates-Tarkatover, Bad-Homburg, 1927, Black throught that he would win here - 1.Kb2 Kc4 2.Ka3! b2 but in replay came unforseen 3.Ka2! K:b4 4.Kb2 withdraw.

Folowing position shows certain characteristic features of the geometry of the chessboard. It is taken from a game Schlage-Ahues, Berlin, 1921.

It is easy to see that black pawn is undefendable. For Black to save the game his King must succeed in reaching square c7 the moment White takes the pawn. Only in this case the draw will be secured. So the game ended in prosaic way after 1.Ke6 Kc3 2.Kd6 Kd4 3.Kc6 Ke5 4.Kb7 Kd6 5.K:a7 Kc7. and a draw was agreed. The valid question then arises: could not the white King both move toward the pawn and at the same time obstruct the progress of Black's King to c7? It turns out that such combination of tasks can be carried out. By continuing 1.Ke6 Kc3 2.Kd5!, the white King, as it were, shoulders off the black King. The latter is forced to give way and can no longer get through in time, for example, 2...Kb4 3.Kc6 Ka5 4.Kb7 Kb5 5.K:a7 Kc6 6.Kb8, and White wins. As you can see, the white King could approach the enemy pawn by various routes in the same number of moves from direct route - e7,d7,c7,b7,a7 – till indirect route like - e6,d5,c6,b7,a7 - and White chooses indirect route. And it is important that both of them are equal! This is typical for the geometry of the chessboard.

The same theme is well expressed in the following study by Grigoriev.

Grigoriev,1931

White should lose his pawn. The attempt to break through to c7 - does not prove successful : in the same 5 moves the black king reaches a6.For instance - 1.Kg4 Kc2 2.Kf5 Kc3 3.Ke6 Kc4 4.Kd6 Kb5 5.Kc7 Ka6.But if this is so, the route of the white King must change: in reply to the capture of the b6 pawn White must be able to reach b4 - in this case it will be draw.But moving directly towards the b4 square leads to default: 1.Kg4 Kc2 2.Kf4 Kd3! and the black King shoulders off the white King. White saves the games by a subtle maneuver, enabling him to avoid an unpleasant encounter with the opponent's King: 1.Kc3! Kc2 2.Kf2! Kd3 3.Ke1! Kc4 4.Kd2 Kb5 5.Kc3 K:b6 6.Kb4. Draw.

It is very important to know this "shoulder-charging" mechanism and ways of avoiding it.

In conclusion we give a couple of position, in which the theme of the play is King maneuvering with a double aim. Here such maneuvering comprises the entire strategy of the play. At first - a famous study of Reti,1921, in which this idea was first expressed in striking form.

R.Reti

White's King is hopelessly behind the opponent's pawn here, whereas its black opponent is ready to eliminate the white pawn. At first sight the task to make draw seems impracticable, but nevertheless..

1.Kg7 For the moment the King does not appear to the threatening anything, so black has a choice:

a) 1...Kb6 2.Kf6 h4 3.Ke5 (threatening 4.Kf4) 3...h3 4.Kd6 The King has unexpectedly ended up besides the pawn.4...h2 5.c7 Kb7 6.Kd7, and draw is obvious.

b) 1...h4 2.Kf6 h3 The pawn has escaped, but...3.Ke7 (e6) h2 4.c7 Kb7 5.Kd7 with a draw. Reti's original idea, which later was called "chasing two birds", made a strong impression in its time and considerably enriched chess theory.

In conclusion, as a homework, I can give you following study on the same theme.

Try to solve it.

---

 OnLine игра на нашем сайте