| |
Main
4k3/5ppp/8/8/8/8/PPP5/3K4 w - - 0 1
Diagram 132 on page 61 of Fine's BASIC CHESS ENDINGS revised by Pal
Benko and diagram 68 in the original is captioned "Whoever moves wins"
Conventional wisdom holds that White on move will los. However, doesn't
White lose because in a symmetrical position whoever moves first loses
a tempo.
Someone told me that the caption should be WHOEVER MOVES LOSES. You
have to go deep, to about 53/65 ply before this evaluation occurs.
There is a trick to playing this ending and whoever knows it probably
wins with either side on move.
Can anyone verify the claim that whoever moves loses?
|
|
| |
Date: 30 Sep 2005 18:37:10
From: Anders Thulin
Subject: Re: Szen 3 pawn problem
|
[email protected] wrote:
> 4k3/5ppp/8/8/8/8/PPP5/3K4 w - - 0 1
>
> Diagram 132 on page 61 of Fine's BASIC CHESS ENDINGS revised by Pal
> Benko and diagram 68 in the original is captioned "Whoever moves wins"
>
> Conventional wisdom holds that White on move will los.
> Can anyone verify the claim that whoever moves loses?
Might perhaps have been better to provide the solution given in the book,
and ask if anyone could find a hole in it?
Here's one solution I have -- it's from HHDB3, and refers to Bell's Life,
1840 as source (but Carrerra seems to have just the same position more
than 200 years earlier, though I can't say for certain it was the same
stipulation):
1. Ke2 Kd7 2. Kf3 Kc6 3. a4 h5 4. c4 f5 5. Kg3 Kb6 6. b4 g5 7. a5+ Ka7
8. c5 h4+ 9. Kh2 Kb8 10. b5 f4 11. Kg2 g4 12. Kg1 g3 13. Kg2 Kb7
14. b6 Kb8 15. a6 Kc8 16. c6 Kb8 17. a7+ Ka8 18. c7 1-0
The only annotation in HHDB3 is that Ke1 also wins ... but there's nothing
about white actually losing.
6. ... g5 doesn't seem to be the best move for black, but I can't see
that there's anything that turns the position to black's advantage anywhere.
The reason that this particulart position was published could very well
have been that it doesn't conform to conventional wisdom.
--
Anders Thulin ath*algonet.se http://www.algonet.se/~ath
|
| | |
Date: 01 Oct 2005 00:27:32
From: Simon Krahnke
Subject: Re: Szen 3 pawn problem
|
* Anders Thulin <[email protected] > (20:37) schrieb:
> [email protected] wrote:
>> 4k3/5ppp/8/8/8/8/PPP5/3K4 w - - 0 1
>> Diagram 132 on page 61 of Fine's BASIC CHESS ENDINGS revised by Pal
>> Benko and diagram 68 in the original is captioned "Whoever moves wins"
>> Conventional wisdom holds that White on move will los.
>> Can anyone verify the claim that whoever moves loses?
> Might perhaps have been better to provide the solution given in the book,
> and ask if anyone could find a hole in it?
>
> Here's one solution I have -- it's from HHDB3, and refers to Bell's Life,
> 1840 as source (but Carrerra seems to have just the same position more
> than 200 years earlier, though I can't say for certain it was the same
> stipulation):
>
> 1. Ke2 Kd7 2. Kf3 Kc6 3. a4 h5 4. c4 f5 5. Kg3 Kb6 6. b4 g5 7. a5+ Ka7
> 8. c5 h4+
Fine2003 from here on reads:
9. Kh3 f4 10. c6 f5 11. b5+ Ka7 12. c7! g4+ 13. Kxg4 f2 14. c8=Q f1=Q
15. b6++ 1-0
> 9. Kh2 Kb8 10. b5 f4 11. Kg2 g4 12. Kg1 g3 13. Kg2 Kb7
> 14. b6 Kb8 15. a6 Kc8 16. c6 Kb8 17. a7+ Ka8 18. c7 1-0
> The reason that this particulart position was published could very well
> have been that it doesn't conform to conventional wisdom.
Isn't it conventional wisdom that being in (distant) opposition is a
good thing? Fine's section title is �White Has the Opposition� and all
examples are won by white.
mfg, simon .... shredder 8: depth 22, but -0.38
|
| |
You also may want to update your chess library with Muller and
Lamprecht's "Secrets of Pawn Endings," which analyzes this position.
Where did you get the idea though, that "conventional wisdom holds that
white on move will lose"? Is this one of these "everybody knows" things
again?
|
| |
Date: 30 Sep 2005 08:24:21
From: Few Good Chessmen
Subject: Re: Szen 3 pawn problem
|
<[email protected] > wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> 4k3/5ppp/8/8/8/8/PPP5/3K4 w - - 0 1
>
> Diagram 132 on page 61 of Fine's BASIC CHESS ENDINGS revised by Pal
> Benko and diagram 68 in the original is captioned "Whoever moves wins"
>
> Conventional wisdom holds that White on move will los. However, doesn't
> White lose because in a symmetrical position whoever moves first loses
> a tempo.
Not all symmetrical positions are identically hold truth to this tempo
losing maneuver. As examples 8/8/8/3pK3/2kP4/8/8/8 w - - 0 1 loses (first to
move) while 8/8/8/3p1K2/1k1P4/8/8/8 w - - 0 1 wins (first to move). IMO:
Simple symmetrical as previous examples all capable of exhibiting both wins
or loses on First to Move basis but as the their complexities increase (by
materials in overall board coverage) the conclusion is usually more sided
(I'm speaking for symmetrical positions that could arised from Starting
Array).
>
> Someone told me that the caption should be WHOEVER MOVES LOSES. You
> have to go deep, to about 53/65 ply before this evaluation occurs.
> There is a trick to playing this ending and whoever knows it probably
> wins with either side on move.
>
> Can anyone verify the claim that whoever moves loses?
In OCTC, Szen staked the position in 20 games (making first move
alternately) with Saint-Amant and he won majority of the games thru
understanding of Successive Zugzwangs. I suspect he intentionally loses just
to keep the interest among his unwary victims (losing some would hurt
majority stakes). Hence to make the claim is like saying "Zugzwang is
cooked" but I could be wrong here...best get the solution of 53/65 from that
someone. Please share the solution if anyone could.
-----------------------------------------------
"laughing like children, living like lovers, roaring like thunders; i guess
that's why they call it ..."
|
| |
Date: 29 Sep 2005 19:45:31
From: Gian-Carlo Pascutto
Subject: Re: Szen 3 pawn problem
|
[email protected] wrote:
> Can anyone verify the claim that whoever moves loses?
Whoever moves *wins*. You can find a lot of stuff about this via google
etc. Look for "ICC wild 7" for example.
1. Ke2 1-0
--
GCP
|
| |
I would suggest contacting one of the US's leading study composers,
Richard Becker:
[email protected]
Remove the "nospam" from the email address to email him.
|
|
