Runner endgame
As bishop ending when are chess the playoffs referred, in which not only the kings only one or more runners and at least one builder are available. In bishop endings with one black and one white bishop, a distinction is made between bishop endings of the same color and unequal color. In the first case the field color of both bishops is the same, in the second case it is different.
- In the case of bishops of the same color, it is an advantage to fix opposing pawns by blocking pawn pairs on the field color of the opposing bishop. There they can be attacked by their own runner and restrict the opposing runner's freedom of movement.
- With bishops of different colors, even two extra pawns are sometimes not enough to win the game if the defending party can block them on squares of the color of their bishop.
For the mating lead with two bishops against the single king: see elementary mating lead .
The "wrong" runner
The endgame is almost always king, bishop and pawn against king. The edge pawn with the so-called false runner is an important exception . This is a runner who does not control the field of conversion of his marginal pawn. If the defending king can occupy the conversion square or one of the three neighboring squares in this situation, the bishop party cannot win, since an approach of their king leads at most to a stalemate .
This motif forms the basis of numerous draw combinations in tournament practice.
| a | b | c | d | e | f | G | H | ||
| 8th |  |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
8th |
| 7th | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7th |
| 6th | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6th |
| 5 | |
|
|
|
|
 |
 |
|
5 |
| 4th | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4th |
| 3 | |
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
3 |
| 2 | |
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
2 |
| 1 | |
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
1 |
| a | b | c | d | e | f | G | H |
In this position of Gioacchino Greco from the 17th century, White has two more pawns. However, Black settles for a draw by sacrificing his bishop .
1.… Bf5 – h3 2. g2xh3
leads to an endgame that White cannot win. His two pawns are on the h-file. The black king goes to the conversion square and simply commutes between h8 and a neighboring square.
If white does not capture the bishop, then the black bishop gives himself up for the white g-pawn on the next move. Even then, White is left with the wrong bishop and the game ends in a draw.
Pawns against bishops
Affiliated farmers
The bishop usually holds a draw against two connected pawns if his king is not very far from the pawns. Sooner or later the bishop has to sacrifice himself to one of the pawns, his king must then be close enough to hold the resulting pawn ending in a draw.
The following example shows a study in which the runner alone can stop six farmers.
American Chess Nuts, 1868
| a | b | c | d | e | f | G | H | ||
| 8th | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
8th |
| 7th |  |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7th |
| 6th | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6th |
| 5 | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5 |
| 4th | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4th |
| 3 | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3 |
| 2 | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2 |
| 1 | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1 |
| a | b | c | d | e | f | G | H |
Solution:
1. Bh3 – d7 + Ka4 – a3
2. Bd7 – c6 Ka3 – a2
3. Kc3 – c2 a7 – a6
4. Bc6 – h1 The black pawns are not converted , a draw .
In his study, Tarrasch illustrates a rarely occurring gain for the peasants with the support of the king.
Isolated farmers
If the king of the bishop stands in front of one of the pawns, the draw is clear. In the case of kings that are far away, the bishop can usually hold a draw against two - or more - isolated pawns if he can hold all of them on the same diagonal at the same time. However, if he controls the squares in front of each pawn on different diagonals, he cannot hold this balancing act for long, and the pawns will usually win. The following example illustrates these aspects:
2000
| a | b | c | d | e | f | G | H | ||
| 8th | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
8th |
| 7th | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7th |
| 6th | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6th |
| 5 | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5 |
| 4th | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4th |
| 3 | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3 |
| 2 | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2 |
| 1 | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1 |
| a | b | c | d | e | f | G | H |
Solution:
1. g6!
But not 1. Bf6? f4 2. Kd6 f3 3. Bd4 c3! and the white bishop cannot hold the balancing act, Black wins.
1.… f6 !?
An interesting attempt, because after 1.… fxg6 2. Bg5 White's idea comes up: The bishop controls all black pawns on the diagonal c1 – h6, White holds a draw.
2. Kd6!
White has to play exactly! After the careless 2. Bxf6? f4, White's bishop gets into a balancing act again, while White's g-pawn plays no role. Black wins.
2.… Kf8!
Black could also with 2.… f4? still go wrong, because after 3. Be7! f3 4. Ke6 f2 5. g7 the white g-pawn suddenly goes through to convert.
3. Kd5 and White has secured the draw: his king has reached the square of the f5-pawn and the bishop stops the c-pawn.
Runner with pawn against pawn
In general, this material constellation is won for the runner's party. In addition to the well-known exception of edge pawns with a wrong bishop - the additional pawn of the defending party usually does not play a role - there are other exceptional cases.
If the defending party has an edge pawn or knight pawn that is blocked by the opposing pawn on its starting square, the defending king can sometimes entrench himself in a fortress and thus prevent defeat.
| a | b | c | d | e | f | G | H | ||
| 8th | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
8th |
| 7th | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7th |
| 6th | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6th |
| 5 | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5 |
| 4th | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4th |
| 3 | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3 |
| 2 | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2 |
| 1 | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1 |
| a | b | c | d | e | f | G | H |
With 1. Ke3 – f2 White moves into a fortress and commutes with the king on the squares f1, f2, g1 and h1. An attempt by the black king to approach the game leads to stalemate if the white defense is correct . White only has to pay attention to the position W: Kg1, S: Kf3, bishop on the diagonal a8 – e4 not Kg1 – h1? to move, because then Kf3 – f2 checkmates. Kg1 – f1 is enough for a draw.
Even further pairs of pawns blocking each other on g3 / g4 and f4 / f5 or black pawns on the h-file do not change the position. But with a second white-squared bishop Black could win because the second bishop controls the diagonal a6 – f1 and Kg1 – f1 is therefore not possible. Alexei Troizki has proven this with a beautiful study. However, this case has little practical relevance.
There are also cases with passed pawns on both sides, in which the king of the bishop party is too far away from the action to be able to support his own pawn or stop the opposing pawn. In such cases the defending party can sometimes eliminate the opposing passed pawn by using its own passed pawn to distract the bishop . A surprising maneuver on this subject is shown in a study by A. and K. Sarychev .
There are exceptions to the exception: In the following position, White wins even though he has the wrong bishop.
464. German chess sheets, 1931
| a | b | c | d | e | f | G | H | ||
| 8th | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
8th |
| 7th | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7th |
| 6th | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6th |
| 5 | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5 |
| 4th | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4th |
| 3 | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3 |
| 2 | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2 |
| 1 | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1 |
| a | b | c | d | e | f | G | H |
Every bishop move would be a decisive loss of speed , because the black king then reaches the saving corner a8. 1. Kh3 – g3 would also be wrong? Kf1xg1, because after capturing the pawn a4, the white king can no longer prevent the black king from marching to a8.
Solution:
1. Kh3 – h2! Kf1 – e2
2. Kh2 – g3! Ke2 – d3
3. Kg3 – f4! Kd3 – c4
4. Kf4 – e5! Kc4 – b5
5. Ke5 – d6 (5) Kb5 – a6
6. Kd6 – c6 (7) Now the way to a8 is blocked. Ka6 – a5
7. Kc6 – b7! Ka5 – b5
8. Bg1 – b6! Kb5 – c4
9. Kb7 – c6! Kc4 – b3
10. Bb6 – c5! The black pawn is captured without leaving the king on a8, and the subsequent conversion decides the game.
Match-colored bishop finals
With bishops of the same color, an extra pawn can be decisive, but not least the pawn structure and the position of the kings are important for assessing the position.
Runner with pawn against runner
A single extra builder is often not enough to make a profit. If the defending king can get in front of the pawns, the draw is clear. Only when the pawn is already on the sixth or seventh row and the defending king is away from him or behind him are there some exceptional cases in which the pawns win.
Leningrad, 1931
| a | b | c | d | e | f | G | H | ||
| 8th | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
8th |
| 7th | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7th |
| 6th | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6th |
| 5 | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5 |
| 4th | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4th |
| 3 | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3 |
| 2 | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2 |
| 1 | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1 |
| a | b | c | d | e | f | G | H |
The later world champion Botvinnik accepted an offer of a draw at this point, although he could win:
1. Kc6! Bc8
2. Bc4! Black is 2.… Bg4
3. Kb7! Bf3 +
4. Ka7 and the maneuver Bc4 – a6 – b7 decides the game in White's favor.
Two extra farmers are almost always enough to make a profit. There can be exceptional cases if one of the two pawns is an edge pawn with the wrong bishop . In this case, if the defending party can sacrifice its bishop against the other pawn and, with its king, reach the square of the edge pawn, it holds a draw.
Runner with pawn against runner with pawn
In the following game example, the position is materially balanced, but the fight is on the knife edge because both parties have advanced passed pawns. Black is fighting for victory because his pawns have advanced further and it is his turn.
USSR, 1970
| a | b | c | d | e | f | G | H | ||
| 8th | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
8th |
| 7th | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7th |
| 6th | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6th |
| 5 | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5 |
| 4th | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4th |
| 3 | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3 |
| 2 | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2 |
| 1 | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1 |
| a | b | c | d | e | f | G | H |
The game took the following course:
1.… Bh1 This move was described as excellent in the chess informator with two exclamation marks.
2. b5 Not 2. Lxh1 g2 3. Lxg2 hxg2 4. a7 g1D 5. a8D Da1 + and White loses the queen. 2.… g2 3. b6 Or 3. a7 g1D 4. a8D Da1 + and wins. 3.… g1D 4. Bxh1 Qxh1 5. b7 Qb1 and White gave up the game.
Later, John Nunn showed how White could have defended himself better and how Black could actually have clearly won the position in the diagram. Instead of 2. b5 White had to go
2. Kb5! try to avoid the later skewer on the a-line. Nunn's variant is 2.… g2 3. a7 g1D 4. a8D Qf1 + 5. Kb6! Qf2 + 6. Kc7 Bxb7 7. Qxb7 Qd4! and Black still have practical chances of winning, but the matter is not clear. It was only at the beginning of the 21st century that it was possible to show with the help of endgame databases that Black was actually on the move.
On the other hand, Black would have had better calm in the diagram position
1.… Ke5! played. White needs two more paces to advance his b-pawn before he actually threatens something. So Black leads his king back to defense. 2. Kb6 Or 2. b5 Kd6 3. Kb6 (3. b6 Bc6! And White does not get converted) 3.… Bd5 4. Bxd5 g2 5. a7 g1D + 6. Kb7 Qg7 + 7. Ka6 Qa1 + 8. Kb7 Kxd5 and Black wins. 2.… Be4! now possible because Black can convert his g-pawn with a check bid. 3. Kc7 3. Bxe4 g2 or 3. Kb5 Bd3 + or 3. a7 Bxb7 4. Kxb7 h2 are hopeless for White. 3.… g2 4. a7 g1D 5. a8D Qg7 + and Black wins by means of a general exchange on b7.
A well-known and beautiful study by Heuäcker shows how a blocked farmer's own peasant can be the undoing of a party.
Bishop endings of different colors
If bishops are of different color, the game often ends in a draw because the pawns of the stronger party are often unable to overcome a blockade on the defending bishop's squares.
Runner with pawn against runner
A single extra pawn is not enough to win, as it can usually be easily controlled by the defending bishop.
Sometimes even two extra farmers are not enough to make a profit. If the pawns are isolated, the stronger party has a greater chance of winning, because the more lines there are between the passed pawns , the more difficult it is to set up a saving blockade.
Wijk aan Zee, 1975
| a | b | c | d | e | f | G | H | ||
| 8th | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
8th |
| 7th | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7th |
| 6th | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6th |
| 5 | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5 |
| 4th | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4th |
| 3 | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3 |
| 2 | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2 |
| 1 | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1 |
| a | b | c | d | e | f | G | H |
White gave up the game at this point, although he managed to draw:
74. Kd3! Kg4
75th Ke2! Kh3
76. Kf2! ...
White was probably only thinking of 76. Kf1? Kh2 or Be3, and the conversion of either passed pawn is inevitable.
76 ... Kh2
or 76 ... g4 77. Kg1! and the pawns are reliably prevented from advancing on g2.
77. Kf3! Bd6
78.Bc8!
White blocks the advance of the pawns on g4, Black cannot advance. Draw!
On the other hand, the attempt to hold the pawns with the king from behind fails in a study-like manner:
74. Kd4? Kg4 or 74.… Bc1 75. Be2 + Kh4! 76. Ke4 Bd6 77.Kf5 g4! 78. Kg6 g3 79. Bf3 Bf8 Zugzwang 80.Bd5 Kg4 81.Be6 + Kf4 82.Bh3 h4! 83. Kh5 Be7! 84.Bg2 Bd8 Waiting move, forced move 85.Bh3 Kf3 and Black wins.
Runner with pawn against runner with pawn
In the following example of the game, White only has one extra pawn, but his two passed pawns are far away from each other and are already well advanced, while the black pawn does not initially play a major role. At first glance, the situation is similar to that with two extra pawns.
| a | b | c | d | e | f | G | H | ||
| 8th | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
8th |
| 7th | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7th |
| 6th | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6th |
| 5 | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5 |
| 4th | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4th |
| 3 | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3 |
| 2 | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2 |
| 1 | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1 |
| a | b | c | d | e | f | G | H |
Black gave up the game here. Tournament winner Aronjan then showed how Black could have achieved a draw:
51. Kf4 h5! Otherwise it follows 52.Bg4. 52. Ke4 Ke7 53. Kd5 Kd7 54. f6 + Ke8 55.Be6 h4 and his h-pawn secures the draw for Black.
Egon Erker analyzed an attempt to win the game anyway:
As the variant given by Aronjan shows, Black gets a draw if his pawn advances to h4. This can be prevented by changing tasks between the white king and the white bishop. First, the white king blocks the h5-square and at the appropriate time passes this task on to the bishop:
51. Kh5 Kg7 52. Bg2 Be3 53. Bc6 Kf6 54. Bd7 Ke7 55. Be6 Kf6 56. Kg4 Ba7 57. Bd7 Kf7 Possible is 57.… Ke5. 58.Ba4 Kf6 59. Be8 The desired change of task has been achieved. This alone is not enough to win, because after 59 ... Ke5! the white king can no longer intervene decisively on the queenside.
Erker's strategy would be successful
51 ... Be3? 52.Bg4 Zugzwang . Now the black king has to move away from the white pawn for a moment, which allows the bishop to regroup. 52.… Kf7 53. Bd1 Kf6 54. Bc2 Kf7 55. Kg4 Threatening 56. Kf3. 55.… Bg1 56. Bd1 Kf6 57. Kf4 . The bishop now reliably controls h5 and his king can decisively support the passed pawn on the queenside as he moves forward. The next plan: The bishop covers the pawns f5 from g4, after which the white king can move to b7. On black h5 the bishop moves to h3. If the black king attacks the bishop from h4, White wins with the pawn move to f6.
Individual evidence
- ↑ Greco's original study
- ^ John Nunn: Tactical Chess Endings . Falken-Verlag, Niedernhausen / Ts. 1985, ISBN 3-8068-0752-3 , pp. 59-61 .
- ↑ Nalimov Endgame Tablebases
- ↑ Schach , 2/2006, page 14.
- ^ Rochade Europa , 8/2006, page 48.
- ↑ Egon Erker: On the trail of the cohort error. in: Rochade Europa , 5/2008, page 53.