Tough Choices

Reading is central to my life. Last night, I finished John Steinbeck, Tortilla Flat (1935) and placed an order for In Dubious Battle (1936). I am working through all of Steinbeck's books in order of publication. Herman Melville, The Confidence-Man: His Masquerade (1857), which I started appropriately on 1 April, is slower going.

I also read chess books and usually more than one at a time. I bought the first edition of Dvoretsky's Endgame Manual (2003) within a year of its first publication and later acquired the second edition on my Kindle app, a second copy of the first edition in Chessbase format, and the fifth edition. Dvoretsky's book has served as an indispensable endgame resource and frequently the first of my many endgame books that I open when I want to understand something. As I wrote in late-April, the chapter on rook endings is part of my regular work at present (see "Working through Dvoretsky").

After racing through 300 Most Important Chess Positions (2018) in 74 days from December to March, the sequel, 300 Most Important Tactical Chess Positions (2020) has on a table in the living room, on my desk, or in a chess bag as I am beginning a slower process of working through it.

Some newer books are offering me tough choices or distractions from focus.

Think Like a Super-GM (2022) by Michael Adams and Philip Hurtado joined my chess book collection on 1 May. I took it with me on a trip that weekend (see "Think Like a Super-GM"). When I returned home, I set up the second position on the dining room table, looked at it some with neither a note pad nor discipline and focus. I had to remove it from the table in preparation for hosting a family get together on Mother's Day.

I remain a subscriber and occasional reader of Chess Informant, which now serves class players as well as it served masters in the days before ready access to recent games that came with the internet. I referenced an opening article from CI 162 in "When preparation meets opportunity", showing a game where I beat a player gambling with the Budapest.

At Spring Break Chess Camp, Jim Maki was using a lot of challenging checkmate problems with the young players. In a conversation about sources for such exercises after one of the sessions, I immediately remembered Anthology of Chess Problems, 2nd ed. (2021), a reissue of the anthology published in the 1990s by Milan Velimirovic and Marjan Kovacevic. I took it to camp the next day to show Maki, and brought it again to the youth tournament that Saturday when Maki and I were working the analysis table. It was with me during chess lessons with young players the following week. The mate in twos that begin the book are challenging enough to keep me busy far longer than I am likely to invest in the effort.

Two days ago, another book arrived that I bought not only because the topic is interesting, but also because I really liked the cover art by Kallia Kleisarchaki.

Cyrus Lakdawala takes on the task of ranking chess players past and present in The Greatest (2025). No one will agree with his rankings, of course, because the topic remains more interesting so long as chess enthusiasts enjoy arguing with any and every list ever constructed.

Naturally, I immediately found fault with his chronology that begins with Philidor. Giulio Cesare Polerio's innovations and Gioachino Greco's improvements on those innovations remain underappreciated in chess history. Nonetheless, I find no fault either with his top four, nor with the sequence he offers. I also find his defense of the arrangement logical and compelling. Numbers five and six were the focus of Chess Skills for two months in 2021. 

After his "Classical Era Top Tier List", Lakdawala lists twenty criteria that informed his list. The Greatest will be earning more of my attention in the coming days and weeks and I work through at least some of the 80 games that Lakdawala selected to develop the theme of chess greatness.

From time to time, I am still also working through P.H. Clarke, 100 Soviet Chess Miniatures (1963). It might be how I take my coffee in the morning if not for always playing at least two words games with my wife on our iPads--Scrabble and Words with Friends.

Clumsy

In an online game yesterday, I managed to trap my own queen. Nonetheless, I had compensation until I missed some things that should have been clear. Later, I dodged my opponent's forced draw with a losing move. Trouble begins at move 24.

Black to move

24...Rab8?

This move surrenders most of my advantage.

24...Qxd2+ 25.Kxd2 Bc6+-+

That I have been looking at discoveries in Thomas Engqvist, 300 Most Important Tactical Chess Positions (2020) makes this oversight even more distressing.

25.Qxa7 Ne5?

25...Rxb2! 26.Rxd3 exd3 27.Qa3 Rc2 was a little more difficult to see, but I could have done more to find ways to use my greater piece activity and the vulnerability of the White king.

26.Rxd3 Nxd3+

White to move

27.Ke2?!

27.Kf1 Rxb2 is equal. White's apparent material superiority includes a rook with near zero prospects of deployment.

27...Rxb2 28.Kd1

28...Kf1 is better.

28...Nxf2+ 29.Kc1 30.Kd1-+

Black has a bishop and rook for the queen. White's rook remains on its starting square.

Black to move

Rxg2??=

I considered 30...Be8, but failed to see a clear way forward after 31.Qc7. It should not have been difficult to see 31...Nf2+ 32.Ke1 Rdd2 and checkmate should come soon.

30...f4 was an alternative to which I was oblivious. 31.h3 Be8 and now 32.Qc7 is met with a clear mate threat 32...fxe3! White must give up the queen.

31.Qc7 Rc8 32.Qxd7 Nf2+? 33.Ke1?

33.Kd2 gives White an advantage

33...Nd3

Here, I was sure that I could force a draw if necessary, but that is an illusion. However, my threats render it necessary for White to force a draw with checks by the queen.

34.Kf1 Rf2+ 35.Kg1 Rxc3

White to move

36.Qd5+ Kf8 37.Qd8+ Kf7 38.Qd7+ Kf8 39.Qd6+ Ke8??

Of course, surrendering to the repetition with either 39...Kg7 or 39...Kf7 was the correct course.

40.Qe6++-

Black to move

My king is forced to a dark square where the queen can fork my king and rook.

I could have resigned here, but played on as my opponent was behind on the clock. White's rook became active in the final assault on my king.

Tactics Training

These days, it seems that I spend more time doing puzzles online (chessdotcom mostly, but also Lichess and Chess Tempo) than working with positions in books. Still, for serious improvement in tactical vision and calculation, books are superior.

After racing through Thomas Engqvist, 300 Most Important Chess Positions (2018) in less than three months, I’m more highly motivated to keep 300 Most Important Tactical Chess Positions (2020) near the center of my chess activities through the rest of 2025. Four of the first five positions in the book have forcing continuations that run deep enough that I anticipate some challenge working through the book. Difficulty makes the enterprise worthwhile.

Today’s position arose in Mason,J.—Winawer,S., Vienna 1882. Engqvist’s analysis is instructive. At least three problems for players at different levels can be extracted from Mason’s combination.

Engqvist's position is before Mason's 40.Rxg5 (see photograph). If Black refuses the rook sacrifice, 40...Qf8 41.Rg6 controls the sixth rank. Then, 41...Rxf5

White to move

42.Qxf5! Qxf5 43.Rg7+ Nd7 44.Rxd7+ Kc8 45.Rxb8+ (only move) 45...Kxb8 46.Rb7+ and whichever way Black's king steps, Black's queen is coming off the board and White has a winning endgame.

After the line played in the game (40.Rxg5 hxg5 41.Qh7+ Nd7 42.Bxd7 Qg8--this position appeared as a exercise on chessgames.com in 2003--43.Rb7+ Kxb7), there is a more basic exercise position.

White to move

The discovery (44.Bc8+) is Engqvist's theme for this exercise, and the interference is an important aspect of why it works. Posters on chessgames.com and Engqvist valorize Mason's technique bringing home the full point for the resulting ending of queen and bishop vs. two rooks.

The Superiority of Books

For beginning students, the sequencing in such books as Sergey Ivashchenko, Manual of Chess Combinations (1997) and Susan Polgar, A World Champion’s Guide to Chess (2015) will lead to much more rapid growth in tactics skill than random positions online. Of course, with certain membership levels, chessdotcom and Chess Tempo allow training with particular themes and rating levels, so these can be tweaked with appropriate guidance.

For players who know basic patterns, but need work on strengthening calculation skills and assessing resulting positions after a combination, such books as Mark Dvoretsky, Secrets of Chess Tactics (1992), Paata Gaprindashvili, Imagination in Chess (2004), and Cyrus Lakdawala, Tactical Training (2021) offer abundant exercises.

Yakov Nieshtadt, Improve Your Chess Tactics (2012) is highly regarded for its organizational scheme and definitions, while Yuri Averbakh, Chess Tactics for Advanced Players (1992) articulates a notion of contacts that should be more common in chess literature.

300 Most Important Chess Positions

A Book Review

If you follow Chess Skills, then you know that I've been working through Thomas Engqvist, 300 Most Important Chess Positions (2018) at a pace far more accelerated than recommended by the author. When I announced this 60 day effort in December, I noted, “failure may be expected”. I worked through the last four positions this morning, the 74th day.

I heartily recommend this book. Studying five positions per week, as the author suggests, improves retention, and likely long-term benefits from study. Having raced through the book, I will be reviewing and deepening my study of many positions in the book over the coming months.

Engqvist’s 300 positions are selected from classical games, recent master practice, and compositions. Engqvist also includes some of his own most instructive losses. He is guided by a library of chess books, many years of playing, and experience coaching. The core idea of deep study of a limited number of positions developed from the way he was coached by Robert Danielsson while a young player. He studied positions from Ludek Pachman’s books on the middlegame and endgame.

Alekhine builds his gun

In the introduction, Engqvist makes a case for careful, disciplined study and focus on a limited number of positions per week. This contrasts markedly with Jeremy Silman's recollection that as a young chess player, he went through "200 to 500 games a day, every day" ("Studying Master Games and Berkmaster's First Over-the-Board Tournament Battle"). Silman claims that he absorbed tactical patterns and positional concepts in this manner. Engqvist advocates reflection and review with intent to "understand, grasp and assimilate the most important idea(s)" (9). He asserts that studying too many positions at once lead you to forget what you have learned. At the core of this learning process, he writes, is "to gain a deeper appreciation of the inner qualities of the pieces, their movements and their actual value in any specific position" (emphasis in original, 9).

By way of illustration, he offers this composition by Paul Rudolf von Bilguer from 1843.

White to move

This position appears in the introduction and as number 281 in the text. Both Ludek Pachman and André Chéron advocate 1.Qe6 and consider the position a draw, but tablebases show that it is a win. There is much to attempt to absorb in the tablebase moves that Engqvist annotates (274-276), but he notes that sometimes the queen works best when it does no more than a rook can do (9). 1.Qc7! is the only winning move. The queen's demotion explains the first move, but subsequent moves draw on the full mobility of the queen, leading Engqvist to marvel at "how the attacker uses the queen over practically the whole board" (276).

The positions that he chooses are interesting, challenging, instructive, and practical. Most of them were tested with chess players who subscribed to an email course where they were presented five positions per week. Rarely is a single move or short sequence the solution that one must find while examining the position. Only a few offer long computer solutions as in the Bilguer study. A considerable number of positions feature equal or near equal positions from games where strong moves and persistent maneuvers eventually provoked error.

Many of the positions are suitable for training with a study partner. Engqvist recommends playing both sides with another person, or against the computer. Teaching the position to someone else improves retention he notes, and in my experience also depth of understanding. My young students often vex me with moves that were not anticipated in master commentary or computer analysis. The positions in this book are excellent resources for coaches. The day that I acquired this book in February 2019, I took it to a lesson with my top student. We looked at six endgames and then the first position in the book (see "A New Book and a Morphy Game"). The next few weeks, this student and I will be playing some of the rook and queen endings.

Emphasis is on positional concepts, rather than tactical operations. The author notes that this emphasis distinguishes his book from Lev Alburt, Chess Training Pocket Book: 300 Most Important Positions and Ideas (1997), which emphasizes tactics. Alburt also limits the number of endgames. He states that becoming a "strong player" requires knowledge of 12 key pawn endings, not hundreds (9). These 12 are in his Pocket Book. Alburt's book is the second one that I list in "Ten Books to Achieve 1800+".

Some positions in 300 Most Important Chess Positions are surprising, such as White’s second move in the English Opening, Sicilian Reversed.

White to move

But this position is placed alongside others (both English Opening and Sicilian Defense) with references to several games played by top players. There is plenty of study material in these games. I might also note that Engqvist’s opening choices reflected in the positions chosen offer more variety than those in another collection of 300 positions that I’ve spent time working through: Rashid Ziyatdinov, GM-RAM: Essential Grandmaster Knowledge (2000). Ziyatdinov’s positions stem from games where 1.e4 is the overwhelming choice.

An instructive sequence of positions that I found highly motivating began with Bologan,V.--Frolov,A., Moscow 1991, a Sicilian Defense, then in a variation continued with Anand,V.--Illescas Cordoba,M., Linares 1992 and reference to Karpov,A.--Kasparov,G., Moscow 1985.  It continued with Bologan--Frolov for two more positions, then Marin,M.--Korneev,O., Capo d'Orso 2008 takes us through moves 2-4 through three positions in the English Opening, Sicilian Reversed.

The first position in the book is slightly less surprising, but with two book moves played by Adolf Anderssen and Paul Morphy, as well as many other players before and since, Engqvist’s preference for Morphy’s choice provokes reflection.

White to move

9.Nc3 and 9.d5 both get played by masters today. Adolf Anderssen favored 9.d5 and won many games from this position. Paul Morphy showed, Engqvist suggests, that 9.Nc3 is a better developing move.

As I consider Morphy’s 9.Nc3 in the Evans Gambit or Mihai Marin’s view that after 1.c4 e5, 2.g3 is the most precise, I am reminded of my tendency to blitz out opening moves by rote and only begin thinking after an inaccuracy. Engqvist’s positions from very early in the game should help me to develop better habits. Thinking should begin before the first move, even if positions at move 10 are well-studied.

There are positions in this book that I have used with students for many years and there are positions that are wholly new to me. There are many positions with several pages of analysis and variations. There are positions that should be drawn, but one player was able to present sufficient difficulties to provoke error.

Ziyatdinov advocates memorizing the 56 games from which he draws the middlegame positions; Engqvist is more selective in games that he suggests the student commit to memory. Schulten -- Morphy, New York 1857, a King's Gambit that Morphy won in 21 moves, appears in both and I'm close to having it in my long-term memory. I have not yet started the effort to memorize Karpov,A.--Unzicker,W., Nice 1974, which is another suggestion of Engqvist's.

One position that I studied in early January led me to improve my move order in a position that I frequently reach while playing against the Caro-Kann.

Several endgame positions that I played against Stockfish before or after reading Engqvist's notes drove me to dig into some of the volumes in Yuri Averbakh's eight-volume series.

Engqvist's analysis is fresh, lucid, and thought-provoking. Many of his memorable phrases guide me when they should--appropriate moments during play. For example, "Nimzowitsch tried to make his opponent tired and careless by doing nothing" (230). In Duras -- Nimzowitsch, San Sebastian 1912, more than twenty moves of rooks and kings were played in a completely equal endgame. Only when Duras erred did Nimzowitsch move a pawn.

I reflected on this lesson while playing online a completely drawn ending of bishop and knight versus bishop, and then nine moves prior to a draw by the 50-move rule, my opponent allowed a small combination that allowed me to win his bishop. That game, then, became my first opportunity to checkmate with bishop and knight that did not result from a deliberate underpromotion. Because of Engqvist's choice of positions, I had recently practiced that checkmate, too (see "Recognizing Known Positions").

300 Most Important Chess Positions was on my shelf nearly six years, serving as occasional study material and reference for finding positions suitable for some of my students. Now that I've been through every position, I will use it more actively.

I have a to do list that developed as I was going through the book. The list includes studying Jose Capablanca's analysis of a couple of his games in My Chess Career (1920), the only Capablanca authored book that I did not wholly read in 2021. Engqvist brought to my attention a game that Richard Reti analyzes in Master of the Chessboard (1930), which I intend to study. Some of Engqvist's analysis draws from Victor Bologan, Victor Bologan: Selected Games 1985-2004 (2007), and I added it to my library. The long rook endgames and queen endings are games worth reviewing periodically until I absorb their lessons.

Another task presented to me after racing through this book is that Engqvist has also published 300 Most Important Tactical Chess Positions (2020), 300 Most Important Chess Exercises (2022), and Chess Lessons from a Champion Coach (2023). Any or all of these books would be worth my time. Perhaps I'll continue to ignore Engqvist's advice on pacing, and race through his tactics book in the near future.

Recognizing Known Positions

Earlier this month at a youth tournament that I ran, I watched one of my students miss an elementary checkmate in two moves. It was a ladder mate (or rolling barrier, as it is called in Bruce Pandolfini, Pandolfini's Endgame Course [1988]). But, a few moved later, this same player executed the checkmate. When he was successful, he controlled the first and second rank. He missed it when the mate could have occurred on the h-file with the g-file also under control.

I suspect that known patterns may be harder for young students to recognize when they are rotated 90°.

Last night, I reached a position where I had to execute a checkmate with knight and bishop. It was the first time that I had such a position that was not due to seeking it, such as when I underpromote a pawn. After I captured my opponent's last piece, I had very nearly the position that I have used in training. The checkmate took me 32 moves, but there were a couple of times when my move extended the distance to mate by six. My opponent answered these with moves that helped me get back on course.

Black to move

I played 107...Nd6, one of two optimal moves.

After 108.Ka5, Kc6 would have kept me on a known path, but I played 108...Bc5, which is equally good in terms of distance to mate. The move I played shows that I was not recognizing the pattern.

Several moves later, White's king has ventured into territory that I might have controlled.

Black to move

116...Nc3+ extends the distance to mate by one move.

Had I played 116...Be3, forcing White's king to the edge, I would have been following advice I've given students dozens of times, usually while teaching two bishops against a lone king. Here, that is the best move. Then again:

Black to move

I was feeling confused when I missed the mate in eleven that forces in three moves a position that I know.

118...Bc3 119.Kb3 Kd3 120.Ka4 Kc4 121.Ka3

Black to move

121...Bb4+ forcing White to the second rank when 122.Kb2 Ne3 sets up the barrier that I studied in Pandolfini's Endgame Course the first time that I learned this elementary checkmate.

White to move

Alas, I made a knight move and it was still mate in 18, as it had been since my move 116.

Nonetheless, I finally reached a position where I was able to draw on memory and calculation only two to three moves deep to finish the job.

Black to move, mate in nine

My work studying Thomas Engqvist, 300 Most Important Chess Positions (2018) resumes today with this position from Timman,J. -- Lutz,C., Wijk aan Zee 1995.

Black to move

Here, Black must defend successfully, avoiding the position analyzed by François-André Danican Philidor in 1849, which I spent some time working on Friday, and between rounds in a Swiss tournament this past weekend. It was the previous position in Engqvist's excellent book.

The 90° rotation might vex me the same way it did my young student.

Playing Drawn Endgames

Do you play out a position that is technically drawn? Twelve years ago, here on Chess Skills, I inquired about an endgame that I was watching live. Levon Aronian made Fabiano Caruana play 36 moves in a dead drawn rook and bishop vs. rook ending. Some research showed that Aronian had won such endings in previous games. When time is short and one side faces no dangers, it makes sense to press and force the opponent to prove their skills in maintaining equality.

Thomas Engqvist makes this point in 300 Most Important Chess Positions (2018) with several examples. First is Duras,O. -- Nimzowitsch,A., San Sebastian 1912.

Black to move

Engqvist writes:

Nimzowitsch tried to make his opponent tired and careless by doing nothing. As a matter of fact there is nothing Black can do. By playing in this "innocent" manner Nimzowitsch managed to fool his opponent. (230-231)

After 24 moves of seemingly pointless shuffling, the players reached this position.

Black to move

Duras erred with 57.Rg5. Nimzowitsch seized the moment with 57...f5 and Duras resigned ten moves later.

Engqvist adds Flohr,S. -- Vidmar,M., Nottingham 1936, where he notes, "In practice it's not easy to defend these kinds of endings and even famous masters and grandmasters make mistakes that eventually lead to a loss" (238). Vidmar resigned 16 moves after his critical error.

Then, in Chigorin,M. -- Tarrasch,S., Budapest 1896, Tarrasch offered a draw in this position.

White to move

"Chigorin correctly declined since White cannot lose anyway", Engqvist observes (240).

After 30.Kf4 Kf8 31.f3 Kg8 32.Ra7 Kf8 33.g4 hxg4 34.fxg4

Black to move

34...Ra1??

34...Kg8 was necessary. Engines need considerable search depth to perceive the error here, but Chigorin appeared to understand the moment.

35.Kf5 Rf1+ 36.Kg6 Rf4 37.g5 fxg5 38.hxg5

In this position, I recognized that White will be able to reach a Lucena position, although that took another ten moves.

My own insistence on playing on when there is the sliver of a chance of eventual victory developed as a consequence of reading Jacob Aagaard, Excelling at Technical Chess (2004) almost twenty years ago. Yesterday, I faced an opponent in online play who pressed when he had a slight edge in a technically drawn ending. I erred. He missed his chance. And then, he took the game almost to stalemate, even offering me opportunities to fall apart in an elementary pawn ending.

White to move

Stripes,J. -- Johnson,F. [A04]
Live Chess Chess.com, 19.02.2025

28.Ra1!= Rxa1 29.Rxa1 Ra8 30.Ke3?!

An inaccuracy

30.Ra6 Rb8 31.Rxa7 Rxb3 32.Rxe7 Rc3 33.Re8+ Kg7 34.Rd8 Rxc4 35.Rxd6=

30...Kf8 31.Ra6 c5

31...Rb8 32.Ra3 a5 33.Kf4 would be more difficult for White.

White to move

32.d5?

32.dxc5 dxc5 33.Kd3=

32...Ke8

32...f5 should win.

33.Kd3 Kd7 34.Kc3

34.g4 is White's best chance. It seems that both of us missed the strength of f7-f5.

34...e6?

34...f5!

I have survived my first error and the game is again drawn with best play.

35.e4 f5 36.dxe6+ Kxe6 37.exf5+ gxf5

White to move

38.Kd3??

38.b4= cxb4+ 39.Kxb4 Rb8+ 40.Kc3 Rg8! 41.c5! Rxg3+ 42.Kd2 Ke5 43.cxd6 Rg7 44.Ke3 Rd7 45.Kf3
38.h5!=

38...h5-+ 39.Ke3 Ke5 40.Ra5

Black to move

40... a6??

Spoils the win.

40...Rb8-+ 41.Ra3 a5
40...Rg8-+

41.b4!=

The rest of the game was played well by both sides and a draw was the appropriate result. I never had winning chances, but there were opportunities for me to go wrong, so my opponent pressed.

41...Rc8 42.bxc5 Rxc5 43.Rxa6 Rxc4 44.Ra5+ d5

White to move

45.Ra8 Rc3+ 46.Kf2 d4 47.Re8+ Kd5 48.Rf8 Ke4

White to move

49.Re8+ Kd5 50.Rf8 Ke5 51.Re8+ Kf6 52.Rh8 Kg6 53.Rg8+ Kf7 54.Rg5 Kf6 55.Rxh5 Rc2+ 56.Kf3 d3 57.Rh6+ Ke5 58.Rh8 d2 59.Rd8 Rc3+

White to move

60.Ke2 Rxg3 61.Rxd2

61.Kxd2 f4 62.Re8+ Kf5 63.Ke2=

61...Rg2+ 62.Ke1 Rxd2 63.Kxd2

And now, in a drawn pawn ending, my opponent goes to remove my pawn, and then makes me show that I know where to place my king.

63...Kf4 64.Ke2 Kg4 65.h5 Kxh5 66.Kf3 Kg5 67.Kg3 f4+ 68.Kf3 Kf5 69.Kf2 Ke5 70.Kf3 Kf5 71.Kf2 Ke4 72.Ke2 f3+ 73.Kf2 Kf4 74.Kf1 Ke3 75.Ke1 Ke4 76.Kf2 Kf4 77.Kf1 Kg4 78.Kf2 Kf4 Game drawn by repetition ½-½

Having lost all four prior encounters against Atlanta coach and chess expert Frank Johnson, I'm very happy with the draw. My work on rook endings with Engqvist's book and Jesus de la Villa, 100 Endgames You Must Know, 4th. ed. (2015) made a difference in navigating difficulties, but did not prevent all errors.

Revising Plans

In late December, I set myself a course of study of 300 Most Important Chess Positions (2018) by Thomas Engqvist. Although the author suggests learning five positions per week, my plan was to work through five per day. I maintained this schedule until last Thursday.

Friday, my wife and I left for a weekend at a lake cabin and some play in the snow with our puppy. I took the book along, but did not spend as much time working on it as planned.

Upon my return, there were further distractions that kept me from resuming my rapid pace through the book. One of the endgames gave me some trouble as I tried to beat Stockfish from a winning position. Parts of three days this week were invested in this one endgame.

Black to move

Black's best move here, according to Engqvist, is Re1+, but the computer also played Rh1 in some games against me. It took several tries and some time studying Engqvist's analysis before I succeeded is winning with White. I ended up using another study by Genrikh Kasparian as the starting position. This one does not appear in Harold van der Heijden's Endgame Study Database, but Engqvist’s position could occur in the study I used.

The past two days, I have resumed my project of working through five positions per day. If there are no further disruptions to my plan, I should finish in early March. I do have a two-day break planned during a weekend Swiss at the end of February.

Half-Way

The five positions from Thomas Engqvist, 300 Most Important Chess Positions (2018) that I worked through today were all familiar from endgame work I did with a student six months ago or so. Two--a simple Philidor Position and a Lucena Position--I have been teaching eighteen years. Although review, one position composed by Max Karstedt and published in Deutsches Wochenschach in October 1909 confused me slightly because Stockfish made a move that differed from the solution that I knew.

In my struggle with the difference, I made an inaccurate move that was still winning, except that I could not win it.

White to move

In Karstedt's solution, Black's rook is on h1. Hence, Rc6+ sets up a skewer if the rook is captured. Nonetheless, 7.Rc6+ is still the best move and after 7...Kd5, both Rc8 and Ra6 are winning with a shorter distance to mate after Ra6. If 7...Kb5, 8.Rc8 wins.

After some contemplation, I played 7.Rb1. The computer could have opted for the idea in Karstedt's study nonetheless: 7...Rg8+ 8.Kc7 Rg7+ 9.Kb8 Rg8+ 10.Kb7 Rg7+ 11.Ka6 Rg6+ 12.Ka5 Rg3 threatens mate if White promotes, so 13.Rb5+ Kd6 14.Kb6 Rg8 15.Ra5 and the pawn will promote.

Instead, Stockfish 16 played 7...Rxb1 and I spent the next ten minutes being reminded that I have not learned queen vs. rook well enough to succeed against software.

Today was the 30th day in my quest to race through this book at five positions per day instead of the recommended five positions per week. Even this relatively easy day added another item to my "to do" list that is growing because of this pace. Yesterday, three positions game me some difficulty and this morning I spend some time looking through the first few chapters of Yuri Averbakh, Rook v. Minor Piece Endings (1978). The endings of rook and pawn vs. bishop (chapter 3 in Averbakh) serve as an excellent supplement to some ideas that Engqvist introduced yesterday.

I have now completed the first 75 positions on the opening and middlegame, and the first 75 endgames in Engqvist's book. I am on schedule.

60 Days, 300 Positions: Day Twenty-four

In defiance of Thomas Engqvist's clear advice in 300 Most Important Positions (2018), I remain on track to complete the book in 60 days. Engqvist suggests five positions per week with review of the previous week's in addition to five new positions. The idea is to "assimilate the knowledge to be gained" and be able to use it for a lifetime. He warns, "If you study too many positions and gloss over them too quickly you run an increased risk of eventually losing your discipline and then forget what you once endeavoured to learn" (7-8).

There is no question that I am glossing over many positions, while I spend many hours with others. Accordingly, I am keeping track of positions or other resources that I intend to return to after concluding the 60 day sprint. Assuming that I remain on track, I will finish my first complete read of the book in the last week of February. More than likely, I will go through it again in the near future.

Today, I am running a youth chess tournament. Such an activity cuts into my study time. I will have the book with me and endeavor to work through with some attention positions 56-60. I am working from the front of the book and also from the middle. I have been through 60 endgame positions (151-210).

Books beget books. As I am reading Engqvist's text and studying positions, I am driven to some of his sources. Three positions in the section on development were taken from a game that Victor Bologan analyzes in Victor Bologan: Selected Games 1985-2004 (2007). That book was added to my personal library earlier this month and I am reading the biographical narrative with the intent to study some of the games at another time.

In the summer of 2023, I added to my library seven of the eight volumes of Comprehensive Chess Endings, edited by Yuri Averbakh. It is no surprise that Engqvist draws some positions and analysis from these books. There is more in each of them that I could be studying. When Engqvist draws a position from one of the volumes, I find myself looking at other positions nearby. 

Other books that have been referenced are among those I have occasionally dipped into and intend to again, such as Anatoly Karpov, How to Play the English Opening and Jose Capablanca, My Chess Career. Richard Reti, Masters of the Chessboard analyzes a game that Engqvist brought to my attention. On chessgames.com, Raymond Keene claims he earned many victories against the structure Black adopted in that game thanks to having studied Reti’s analysis.

Despite Engqvist's ideas about how his book should be utilized, I am enjoying and finding productive my accelerated study. Among the benefits are that I am playing fewer games online and playing somewhat more consistently. In this position from this morning, I missed an easy tactic. But it was one of only a few inaccuracies and I did a good job of depriving my opponent of any play--a theme I saw in several master games from which positions the past few days were extracted.

White to move

26.Nxg6+ should have been easy to spot, and a couple of moves later I was courting that opportunity. Even so, after 26.Qf6+, I remained fully in control and my knight is far better than Black's bishop.

Eight moves later, my position had improved while my opponent seemed to be moving backwards.

Black to move

Black attempted to bring some pieces into battle with 34.f6. My reply was not the computer's preference, but was aimed at bringing both rooks into play. Only one was needed as Black collapsed quickly.

35.Ra4 e5? 36.gxf6+ Rxf6 37.Qxe5+ Be6 38.Rxa6 Rf5 39.Ra7+ and Black resigned.

Knight and Bishop Checkmate: How and Why

Is is necessary to know a checkmate that you will never need to execute? Aside from deliberate choices due to underpromotion, I have never had to checkmate with a knight and a bishop in a game. I was on the weaker side in a blitz game on Internet Chess Club 25 years ago and got a draw because my opponent did not know how to perform the mate. I saw one young student try and fail in a youth tournament, and then in the very next round have the ending again, this time with the lone king and another draw.

In one tournament that I won, my last round opponent had failed to execute the checkmate in the previous round, else he could have won the event with a draw against me.

Many players never face it.

In Silman’s Complete Endgame Course: Beginner to Master (2007), Jeremy Silman writes:

I heretically decided not to include Bishop and Knight vs. Lone King because it’s far from easy to master, and it occurs very rarely in over-the-board play. In fact, I only got it once in my entire career, while IM John Watson and IM John Donaldson never got it at all! Is such a rarity really worth the two or three hours it would take to learn it? I say no. (xv)

On the other hand, Thomas Engqvist in 300 Most Important Chess Positions (2018) considers it of such importance that three of the 300 are concerned with this checkmate. Acknowledging its rarity (“it will probably happen once or twice in your life”), Engqvist states:

I used to teach children this endgame at a very early stage and they should know how to do it before they reach an Elo rating of 1500 to get a good feeling for how knight and bishop can harmonise together like a bishop pair. (184)

Practicing positions with few pieces develops understanding and appreciation of each piece’s unique capabilities. As Vasily Smyslov stated in Vasily Smyslov: Endgame Virtuoso (1997), "the properties and peculiarities of the pieces are most clearly revealed in the endgame" (6). Most chess study positions involve knowledge and skills that will be applied to other positions.

Yesterday, using the useful “Table of Computer Database Results for Pawnless Endings” in Karsten Müller and Frank Lamprecht, Fundamental Chess Endings (2001), I set up the knight and bishop ending that is longest distance to checkmate and played it against Stockfish. After my first five moves, I reached this position and noted the wall created on the central squares by the bishop and knight.

Black to move

I also worked through the three positions in Engqvist’s book. The first two involve the technique I have learned, forgotten, and relearned (see "Bishop and Knight Checkmate"). The third position is presented to teach the technique in lessons for beginners on Lichess that I have criticized it as more difficult.

It comes from Andre Chéron, Lehr-und Handbuch der Endspiele (1964). With Engqvist’s encouragement, I decided it was worth learning. It was not as difficult as I had thought and I spent some time practicing against the computer.

Then, I searched ChessBase Mega 2024 for endgames that reached a knight and bishop against a lone king. There are many more than I expected. Finding one that ended in a draw, I started going through the game. At several points where I thought I saw an improvement, I played from that position against Stockfish. Then, I used Stockfish and tablebases to identify areas where my play could be improved.

This exercise showed me that knowing more than one technique for executing the checkmate had practical implications. In a game, one might find one of the techniques is much faster than the other.

Here are some positions from that game. I do not know how much time pressure existed when the player was unable to finish successfully. An internet search turned up tournament information that listed the Black player’s rating as 1850.

Black to move

Black can force checkmate in 8 moves. The game went on another 20.

Nine moves earlier, Black had a mate in 9.

Black to move

A few moves prior, Black had a mate in 15, did not play it perfectly, but made progress as White did not offer the best defense.

Black to move

The closest Black came to finishing was mate in seven.

Black to move

109...Be3 (or Bf4, Bg5, Bh6) should be played, forcing White to the a-file. 110.Ka3 Kc3 111.Ka2 Bc1 and the bishop occupies the critical diagonal. 112.Kb1 Nd3 113.Ka2 Kc2 114.Ka1 Bb2+ 115.Ka2 Nb4#.

Students wanting to learn this checkmate could start with positions where checkmate can be forced in three to six moves and build from there.

Some Knight Endings

After working through the 13 knight endings in Thomas Engqvist, 300 Most Important Chess Positions (2018) over the course of several days, I put together five endings to play with some of my students. Two were from Engqvist and the others were found using ChessBase 17's research feature.

Black to move

From Sulistya,M. -- Slingerland,C., Timisoara 1988

As I beat Stockfish 16 rather easily from this position after forcing an exchange of knights, I hoped my students would do the same. That they did not suggests we might do more work on endings with a pawn majority and no pieces.

Black to move

This one is in Engqvist and from a game I cannot locate in databases: Gebhardt -- Bellman, Levelezes 1996. It is a good one to practice with. Stockfish evaluates Black's advantage as less than a pawn. I was lucky to get a draw with Stockfish 16 while playing Black. Well, not actually luck; I used the takeback feature.

White to move

In Pohjala,H.--Sulskis,S., Jyvaskyla 2013, White missed a chance for equality from this position. Against Stockfish on the iPad, I was able to hold the draw. Maybe I'll see if I can do the same against Stockfish 16 on my computer.

White to move

This position arose in Rossetto,H.--Stein,L., Amsterdam 1964 and Black won after a long struggle. The engine says the position is equal. I have not tested myself against the machine with this one.

Black to move

Black is slightly better and went on to win from this position in Lasker,E.--Nimzowitsch,A., Zurich 1934. Engqvist has this one in his book. Stockfish does not find fault with 35...h5, which all of my students played, but it seems the me that White might have more difficulties if that pawn holds back a bit.