This article is about a defensive technique in chess. For the chess variant, see Fortress chess.
In chess, a fortress is an endgamedrawing technique in which the side behind in material sets up a zone of protection that the opponent cannot penetrate. This might involve keeping the enemy king out of one's position, or a zone the enemy cannot force one out of (e.g. see the opposite-coloredbishops example). An elementary fortress is a theoretically drawn (i.e. a book draw ) position with reduced material in which a passive defense will maintain the draw.[1]
Fortresses pose a problem for computer chess: computers fail to recognize fortress-type positions and are unable to achieve the win against them despite claiming a winning advantage.[3]
Knight protecting rook pawn on the seventh rank: draw
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
8
8
7
7
6
6
5
5
4
4
3
3
2
2
1
1
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
Bishop, Rook and King protect f7, g7, h7: draw
Perhaps the most common type of fortress, often seen in endgames with only a few pieces on the board, is where the defending king is able to take refuge in a corner of the board and cannot be forced away or checkmated by the superior side. These two diagrams furnish two classic examples. In both cases, Black simply shuffles their king between a8 and the available square adjacent to a8 (a7, b7, or b8, depending on the position of the white king and pawn). White has no way to dislodge Black's king, and can do no better than a draw by stalemate or some other means.
Note that the bishop and wrong rook pawn ending (i.e. where the pawn is a rook pawn whose promotion square is the color opposite to that of the bishop) in the diagram is a draw even if the pawn is on the seventh rank or further back on the a- file . Heading for a bishop and wrong rook pawn ending is a fairly common drawing resource available to the inferior side.[4]
The knight and rook pawn position in the diagram, however, is a draw only if White's pawn is already on the seventh rank, making this drawing resource available to the defender much less frequently. White wins if the pawn is not yet on the seventh rank and is protected by the knight from behind. With the pawn on the seventh rank, Black has a stalemate defense with their king in the corner.[5]
Heading for h1. After another 10 moves the position in the following diagram was reached:
Serper vs. Nakamura
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
8
8
7
7
6
6
5
5
4
4
3
3
2
2
1
1
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
Black to play. White has achieved a fortress.
Black has no way of forcing White's king away from the corner, so he played
12... Kf2
and after 13.h4 gxh4 the game was drawn by stalemate.
Back-rank defense
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
8
8
7
7
6
6
5
5
4
4
3
3
2
2
1
1
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
The back-rank defense in rook and pawn versus rook endings: another type of fortress in a corner
The back-rank defense in some rook and pawn versus rook endgames is another type of fortress in a corner (see diagram). The defender perches their king on the pawn's queening square, and keeps their rook on the back rank (on the "long side" of the king, not, e.g., on h8 in the diagram position) to guard against horizontal checks. If 1.Rg7+ in the diagram position, Black heads into the corner with 1...Kh8! Note that this defense works only against rook pawns and knight pawns.[7]
Rook vs. bishop
Seirawan, 2003
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
8
8
7
7
6
6
5
5
4
4
3
3
2
2
1
1
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
Rook versus bishop, with the defending king in the "safe" corner. White to move, draw.
In the ending of a rook versus a bishop, the defender can form a fortress in the "safe" corner—the corner that is not of the color on which the bishop resides (see diagram). White must release the potential stalemate, but they cannot improve their position.[8]
1. Rc3 Ba2
2. Rc2 Bb3
3. Rc7 Bg8
Pawn and bishop
de la Villa, 2008
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
8
8
7
7
6
6
5
5
4
4
3
3
2
2
1
1
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
Draw with bishop on either color if the white king does not leave the corner
In this position from de la Villa, White draws if their king does not leave the corner. It is also a draw if the bishop is on the other color, so it is not a case of the wrong bishop.[9]
Rook and pawn versus queen
Van der Poel vs. Smits, 2000
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
8
8
7
7
6
6
5
5
4
4
3
3
2
2
1
1
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
The basic fortress with rook and pawn on the second rank versus a queen
In the diagram, Black draws by moving his rook back and forth between the d6- and f6-squares, or moves his king when checked, staying behind the rook and next to the pawn. This fortress works when all of these conditions are met:
The white king is not able to cross the rank of the black rook, and the white queen is unable to do anything useful.
1. Qd5+ Rd6
2. Qb5+ Kd8
3. Qb8+ Kd7
4. Qb5+ ½-½
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
8
8
7
7
6
6
5
5
4
4
3
3
2
2
1
1
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
Drawing places of a white pawn, from White's perspective
Positions such as these (when the defending rook and king are near the pawn and the opposing king cannot attack from behind) are drawn when (see diagram):
the pawn is on the c-, d-, e-, or f-file and the second, sixth, or seventh rank
the pawn is anywhere on the b- or g-file
the pawn is on the a- or h-file and the third or seventh rank.
In this position, with Black to move, Black can reach a drawing fortress.
1...b4
2. Kd6 Rc3
3. Kd7
and now 3...Ka3 and several other moves reach the fortress. In the actual game, Black made the weak move 3...Rd3? and lost.[12]
Similar example
Whitaker vs. Ferriz, 1959
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
8
8
7
7
6
6
5
5
4
4
3
3
2
2
1
1
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
Position after 50.Re3
In this 1959 game between Whitaker and Ferriz, White sacrificed a rook for a knight in order to exchange a pair of pawns and reach this position, and announced that it was a draw because (1) the queen cannot mate alone, and (2) the black king and pawn cannot approach to help.[13] However, endgame tablebase analysis shows Black to have a forced win in 19 moves starting with 50... Qc7+ (the only winning move), taking advantage of the fact that the rook is currently unprotected – again illustrating how tablebases are refining traditional endgame theory.
Example with more pawns
Salov vs. Korchnoi, 1997
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
8
8
7
7
6
6
5
5
4
4
3
3
2
2
1
1
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
Even with equal pawns, Korchnoi could not break through Salov's fifth-rank defense.
From the diagram, in Salov vs. Korchnoi, Wijk aan Zee 1997,[14] White was able to hold a draw with a rook versus a queen, even with the sides having an equal number of pawns. He kept his rook on the fifth rank blocking in Black's king, and was careful not to lose his rook to a fork or allow a queen sacrifice for the rook in circumstances where that would win for Black. The players agreed to a draw after:
Drawing fortress with bishops on opposite colors, Black to move
In endings with bishops of opposite colors (i.e. where one player has a bishop that moves on light squares, while the other player's bishop moves on dark squares), it is often possible to establish a fortress, and thus hold a draw, when one player is one, two, or occasionally even three pawns behind. A typical example is seen in the diagram. White, although three pawns behind, has established a drawing fortress, since Black has no way to contest White's stranglehold over the light squares. White simply keeps his bishop on the h3–c8 diagonal.[15]
Example from game
Lautier vs. Rublevsky, 2003
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
8
8
7
7
6
6
5
5
4
4
3
3
2
2
1
1
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
Black to move gives up a pawn to set up a fortress.
In an endgame with opposite-colored bishops, positional factors may be more important than material. In this position, Black sacrifices a pawn (leaving him three pawns down) to reach a fortress.
1... Kf5!
2. Kxf7 Bh5+
3. Kg7 Bd1
4. Be7 ½-½
After 4...Be2 5.Kh6 Bd1 6.h5 Black just waits by playing 6...Be2.[16]
Queen versus two minor pieces
Here are drawing fortresses with two minor pieces versus a queen.[17] Usually the defending side will not be able to get to one of these positions.
Bishop and knight
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
8
8
7
7
6
6
5
5
4
4
3
3
2
2
1
1
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
Drawing fortress (in either corner that the bishop controls)
The bishop and knight fortress is another type of fortress in a corner. If necessary, the king can move to one of the squares adjacent to the corner, and the bishop can retreat to the corner. This gives the inferior side enough tempo moves to avoid zugzwang. For example:[18]
Drawing fortress (in any corner), the Lolli position
In the two bishop versus queen ending, the queen wins if the Lolli position is not reached, but some of them take up to seventy-one moves to either checkmate or win a bishop, so the fifty-move rule comes into play. From the diagram:
1. Qe7+ Kc8
2. Qe6+ Kb7
3. Qd6 Ba7
4. Qe7+ Kb6!
5. Qd8+ Kb7!
6. Ka5 Bc5!
and White cannot prevent ... Bb6, which gets back to the Lolli position.[19]
Two knights
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
8
8
7
7
6
6
5
5
4
4
3
3
2
2
1
1
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
Drawing fortress
In the two knights fortress, the knights are next to each other and their king should be between them and the attacking king. The defender must play accurately, though.[20]
Lolli, 1763
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
8
8
7
7
6
6
5
5
4
4
3
3
2
2
1
1
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
Draw
There are several drawing positions with two knights against a queen. The best way is to have the knights adjacent to each other on a file or rank, with their king between them and the enemy king. This is not a true fortress since it is not static. The position of the knights may have to change depending on the opponent's moves. In this position (Lolli, 1763),
1. Qd1 Nd2+
2. Ke2 Nb3
and Black has an ideal defensive position.
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
8
8
7
7
6
6
5
5
4
4
3
3
2
2
1
1
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
White to move. Draw with the queen anywhere except the marked squares.
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
8
8
7
7
6
6
5
5
4
4
3
3
2
2
1
1
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
Draw, but Black must keep his king in a good position.
If the knights cannot be adjacent to each other on a file or rank, the second best position is if they are next to each other diagonally (see diagram).
The third type of defensive formation is with the knights protecting each other, but this method is more risky.[21]
With pawns
Ree vs. Hort
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
8
8
7
7
6
6
5
5
4
4
3
3
2
2
1
1
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
Black to play
Ree vs. Hort
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
8
8
7
7
6
6
5
5
4
4
3
3
2
2
1
1
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
Draw agreed. Black has established an impenetrable fortress.
Sometimes the two minor pieces can achieve a fortress against a queen even where there are pawns on the board. In Ree-Hort, Wijk aan Zee 1986 [22] (first diagram), Black had the material disadvantage of rook and bishop against a queen. Dvoretsky writes that Black would probably lose after the natural 1...Bf2+? 2.Kxf2 Rxh4 because of 3.Kg3 Rh7 4.Kf3, followed by a king march to c6, or 3.Qg7!? Rxf4+ 4.Kg3 Rg4+ 5.Kf3, threatening 6.Qf6 or 6.Qc7.[23] Instead, Hort forced a draw with 1... Rxh4!! 2. Kxh4 Bd4! (imprisoning White's queen) 3. Kg3 Ke7 4.Kf3 Ba1 (second diagram), and the players agreed to a draw. White's queen has no moves, all of Black's pawns are protected, and his bishop will shuttle back and forth on the squares a1, b2, c3, and d4.
Knight versus a rook and pawn
Em. Lasker vs. Ed. Lasker, 1924
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
8
8
7
7
6
6
5
5
4
4
3
3
2
2
1
1
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
A surprising draw
At the great New York City 1924 tournament, former world championEmanuel Lasker was in trouble against his namesake Edward Lasker, but surprised everyone by discovering a new endgame fortress.[24][25] Despite having only a knight for a rook and pawn, White draws by moving his knight back and forth between b2 and a4. Black's only real winning try is to get his king to c2. However, to do so Black has to move his king so far from the pawn that White can play Ka3–b2 and Nc5xb3, when the rook versus knight ending is an easy draw. The game concluded:
Bishop versus rook and bishop pawn on the sixth rank
from de la Villa, page 220
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
8
8
7
7
6
6
5
5
4
4
3
3
2
2
1
1
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
Black draws
A bishop can make a fortress versus a rook and a bishop pawn on the sixth rank, if the bishop is on the color of the pawn's seventh rank square and the defending king is in front of the pawn. In this position, White would win if he had gotten the king to the sixth rank ahead of the pawn. Black draws by keeping the bishop on the diagonal from a2 to e6, except when giving check. The bishop keeps the white king off e6 and checks him if he goes to g6, to drive him away. A possible continuation:
1... Ba2 2. Kf4
2.f7 is an interesting attempt, but then Black plays 2...Kg7! (not 2...Bxf7?? when White wins by playing 3.Kf6) and then 3...Bxf7, with a draw. 2...Kg7 prevents 3.Kf6, which would win.
2... Bc4 3. Kg5 Bd5!
The only move to draw, since the bishop must be able to check the king if it goes to g6.
4. Rc7 Ba2! 5. Kg6 Bb1+! 6. Kh6 Ba2! 7. Ra7
If 7.f7 Bxf7!: the pawn can be safely captured when the white king is on h6.
A defense perimeter is a drawing technique in which the side behind in material or otherwise at a disadvantage sets up a perimeter, largely or wholly composed of a pawn chain, that the opponent cannot penetrate. Unlike other forms of fortress, a defense perimeter can often be set up in the middlegame with many pieces remaining on the board.
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
8
8
7
7
6
6
5
5
4
4
3
3
2
2
1
1
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
White, on move, forces a draw.
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
8
8
7
7
6
6
5
5
4
4
3
3
2
2
1
1
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
Black, ahead two rooks and a bishop, cannot breach White's defense perimeter.
The position in the first diagram, a chess problem by W.E. Rudolph (La Strategie 1912), illustrates the defense perimeter. White already has a huge material disadvantage, but forces a draw by giving up his remaining pieces to establish an impenetrable defense perimeter with his pawns. White draws with 1. Ba4+! Kxa4 (1... Kc4?? 2. Bb3+! Kb5 3. c4+ Kc6 4. Ba4+!, forcing Rb5, wins for White) 2. b3+ Kb5 3. c4+ Kc6 4. d5+ Kd7 5. e6+! Kxd8 6. f5! (second diagram). Now Black is up two rooks and a bishop (normally an overwhelming material advantage) but has no hope of breaking through White's defense perimeter. The only winning attempts Black can make are to place his rooks on b5, c6, etc. and hope that White captures them. White draws by ignoring all such offers and simply shuffling his king about.[27]
Petrosian vs. Hazai
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
8
8
7
7
6
6
5
5
4
4
3
3
2
2
1
1
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
Black to play
Petrosian vs. Hazai
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
8
8
7
7
6
6
5
5
4
4
3
3
2
2
1
1
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
White cannot penetrate Black's fortress.
The above example may seem fanciful, but Black achieved a similar defense perimeter in Arshak Petrosian–Hazai, Schilde 1970[28] (first diagram) via a swindle. Black has a difficult endgame, since White can attack and win his a-pawn by force, and he has no counterplay. Black tried the extraordinary 45... Qb6!?, to which White replied with the obvious 46. Nxb6+? This is actually a critical mistake, enabling Black to establish an impenetrable fortress. White should have carried out his plan of winning Black's a-pawn, for example with 46.Qc1 (threatening 47.Nxb6+ cxb6 48.h4! gxh4 49.Qh1 and Qh3, winning) Qa7 47.Qd2 followed by Kb3, Nc3, Ka4, and Na2–c1–b3. 46... cxb6 Now Black threatens 47...h4, locking down the entire board with his pawns, so White tries to break the position open. 47. h4 gxh4 48. Qd2 h3! 49. gxh3 Otherwise 49...h2 draws. 49... h4! (second diagram) Black has established his fortress, and now can draw by simply moving his king around. The only way White could attempt to breach the fortress would be a queen sacrifice at some point (for example Qxa5 or Qxe5), but none of these give White winning chances as long as Black keeps his king near the center. The players shuffled their kings, and White's queen, around for six more moves before agreeing to a draw.[29][30]
Smirin vs. HIARCS
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
8
8
7
7
6
6
5
5
4
4
3
3
2
2
1
1
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
Position after 46.Kg1: White envisions a pawn fortress.
Smirin vs. HIARCS
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
8
8
7
7
6
6
5
5
4
4
3
3
2
2
1
1
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
Position after 51.Nc3: the fortress is complete.
In Smirin-HIARCS, Smirin-Computers match 2002,[31] the super-grandmaster looked to be in trouble against the computer, which has the bishop pair , can tie White's king down with ...g3, and threatens to invade with its king on the light squares. Smirin, however, saw that he could set up a fortress with his pawns. The game continued 46... g3 47. h3! A surprising move, giving Black a formidable protected passed pawn on the sixth rank, but it begins to build White's fortress, keeping Black's king out of g4. 47... Bc5 48. Bb4! Now Smirin gives HIARCS the choice between an opposite-colored bishops endgame (in which, moreover, White will play Be7 and win the h-pawn if Black's king comes to the center) and a bishop versus knight ending in which Smirin envisions a fortress. 48... Bxb4 49. axb4 Kf7 Black could try to prevent White's coming maneuver with 49...Bd3, but then White could play 50.Nf3 Kh5 (forced) 51.Nd4. 50. Nb5! Ke6 51. Nc3! Completing the fortress. Now Black's king has no way in, and his bishop can do nothing, since White's king can prevent ...Bf1, attacking White's only pawn on a light square. The game concluded: 51... Bc2 52. Kg2 Kd6 53. Kg1 Kc6 54. Kg2 b5 55. Kg1 Bd3 56. Kg2 Be4+ 57. Kg1 Bc2 58. Kg2 Bd3 59. Kg1 Be4 60. Kf1 ½–½
This is a semi-fortress, but White wins in 45 moves.
Lomonosov Tablebases
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
8
8
7
7
6
6
5
5
4
4
3
3
2
2
1
1
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
White to move, although Black mates in 193.
The endgame of two bishops versus a knight was thought to be a draw for more than one hundred years. It was known that the temporary defensive fortress in this position could be broken down after a number of moves, but it was assumed that the fortress could be reformed in another corner. Computer endgame tablebases show that the bishops generally win, but it takes up to 66 moves. It takes several moves to force Black out of the temporary fortress in the corner; then precise play with the bishops prevents Black from forming the fortress in another corner. The position in the diagram was thought to be a draw by Kling and Horwitz but computer analysis shows that White wins in 45 moves (either by checkmate or by winning the knight). All of the long wins in this endgame go through this type of semi-fortress position.[33]
Pintér vs. Bronstein, 1977
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
8
8
7
7
6
6
5
5
4
4
3
3
2
2
1
1
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
Position before 68.Kd4
This game[34] between József Pintér and David Bronstein demonstrates the human play of the endgame. The defender has two ideas: (1) keep the king off the edge of the board and (2) keep the knight close to the king. White reaches the semi-fortress after 71. Nb2!, which falls after 75... Kb5!. White gets to a semi-fortress again in another corner after 90. Ng2+. After 100. Ke3 White cannot hold that semi-fortress any longer, but forms one in another corner after 112. Nb7!. On move 117 White claimed a draw by the fifty move rule.[35]
Positional draw
Portisch vs. Kavalek, 1978
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
8
8
7
7
6
6
5
5
4
4
3
3
2
2
1
1
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
White to move
A "positional draw" is a concept most commonly used in endgame studies and describes an impasse other than stalemate. It usually involves the repetition of moves in which neither side can make progress or safely deviate. Typically a material advantage is balanced by a positional advantage. Fortresses and perpetual check are examples of positional draws.[36] Sometimes they salvage a draw from a position that seems hopeless because of a material deficit.[37]GrandmasterJohn Nunn describes a positional draw as a position in which one side has enough material to normally win and he is not under direct attack, but some special feature of the position (often a blockade) prevents him from winning.[38]
A simple example is shown in the game between Lajos Portisch and Lubomir Kavalek. White could have won easily with 1.Be1 Kc6 2.b4. However, play continued 1. b4? Nb8 2. b5 Nc6+! The only way to avoid the threatened 3...Nxa5 is 3.bxc6 Kxc6, but the resultant position is a draw because the bishop is on the wrong color to be able to force the rook pawn'spromotion (see above, wrong bishop, and wrong rook pawn).[39]
Pachman
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
8
8
7
7
6
6
5
5
4
4
3
3
2
2
1
1
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
Either side to move
Luděk Pachman cites the endgame position in the diagram as a simple example of a positional draw. White on move simply plays waiting moves with the bishop (Bb1–c2–d3). As for Black, "If he is unwilling to allow the transition to the drawn ending of Rook versus Bishop, nothing else remains for him but to move his Rook at [e5] continuously up and down the [e-file]." Pachman explains, "The indecisive result here contradicts the principles concerning the value of the pieces and is caused by the bad position of the black pieces (pinned rook at [e4]).".[40]
In this position from a game between Pal Benko and International Master Jay Bonin, White realized that the blockade cannot be broken and the game is a draw despite the extra material.[44]
Simkhovich, 1926
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
8
8
7
7
6
6
5
5
4
4
3
3
2
2
1
1
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
White to play and draw
Simkhovich, 1926
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
8
8
7
7
6
6
5
5
4
4
3
3
2
2
1
1
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
Positional draw
The position looks lost for White, as he cannot stop the h-pawn from queening, but he does have a defence which seems to defy the rules of logic. White will calmly construct a "fortress" which will hide his pieces from attack. The only weakness in White's "fortress" is the g-pawn. This pawn has to be defended by the bishop and the only square where this can be done safely is from h6.
1. Bf6! White threatens to stop the advance of the h-pawn with ...Be5+; building the fortress immediately does not work: 1.f6? h2 2.Kf8 h1=Q 3.Kg7 (3.Kg8 Qg2 4.Bf8 Qa8 5.Kg7 Kd7 6.Kg8 Ke6 7.Kg7 Kf5 8.Kg8 Bb3 9.Kg7 Qh1−+) 3...Kd7 4.Bb4 Ke6 5.Bd2 Kf5 6.Be3 Qf3 7.Bd2 Qe2 8.Bc1 Qd1 9.Be3 Qd3 10.Bc1 Qc3−+; 1... Kd6 2. Be7+ 2.fxg6? This move destroys the fortress 2...fxg6 3.Be7+ Kc6−+. 2...Kc6 2... Ke5 White draws without a fortress after 3.fxg6 fxg6 4.Bd8 Kd6 5.Nf6! h2 6.Ne4+ Ke6 7.Nf2 Bd5 8.Bf6 h1=Q 9.Nxh1 Bxh1=; 3. f6! Chess computer programs have difficulty assessing "fortress" positions because the normal values for the pieces do not apply. White has achieved the closing of the long diagonal a8–h1. The only way to avoid this would be for Black to repeat moves. Now White can build his "fortress" without the worry of the queen getting to the back rank via the long diagonal. 3...h2 4. Bf8! h1=Q 5. Bh6! with the idea of 6.Kf8 and 7.Kg7. White will be safe behind the barrier of pawns. It is a positional draw.
Related Research Articles
Zugzwang is a situation found in chess and other turn-based games wherein one player is put at a disadvantage because of their obligation to make a move; a player is said to be "in zugzwang" when any legal move will worsen their position.
The Lucena position is one of the most famous and important positions in chess endgame theory, where one side has a rook and a pawn and the defender has a rook. Karsten Müller said that it may be the most important position in endgame theory. It is fundamental in the rook and pawn versus rook endgame. If the side with the pawn can reach this type of position, they can forcibly win the game. Most rook and pawn versus rook endgames reach either the Lucena position or the Philidor position if played accurately. The side with the pawn will try to reach the Lucena position to win; the other side will try to reach the Philidor position to draw.
Triangulation is a tactic used in chess to put one's opponent in zugzwang. Triangulation is also called losing a tempo or losing a move.
In chess, a passed pawn is a pawn with no opposing pawns to prevent it from advancing to the eighth rank; i.e. there are no opposing pawns in front of it on either the same file or adjacent files. A passed pawn is sometimes colloquially called a passer. Passed pawns are advantageous because only the opponent's pieces can stop them from promoting.
The Philidor position is a chess endgame involving a drawing technique for the defending side in the rook and pawn versus rook endgame. This technique is known as the third-rank defense due to the positioning of the defending rook. It was analyzed by François-André Danican Philidor in 1777. Many rook and pawn versus rook endgames reach either the drawn Philidor position or the winning Lucena position. The defending side should try to reach the Philidor position; the attacking side should try to reach the Lucena position. Said grandmaster Jesús de la Villa, "[The Lucena and Philidor positions] are the most important positions in this type of endgame [...] and in endgame theory."
The Tarrasch rule is a general principle that applies in the majority of chess middlegames and endgames. Siegbert Tarrasch (1862–1934) stated the "rule" that rooks should be placed behind passed pawns – either the player's or the opponent's. The idea behind the guideline is that (1) if a player's rook is behind his passed pawn, the rook protects it as it advances, and (2) if it is behind an opponent's passed pawn, the pawn cannot advance unless it is protected along its way.
The chess endgame with a king and a pawn versus a king is one of the most important and fundamental endgames, other than the basic checkmates. It is an important endgame for chess players to master, since most other endgames have the potential of reducing to this type of endgame via exchanges of pieces. Players need to be able to determine quickly whether a given position is a win or a draw, and to know the technique for playing it. The crux of this endgame is whether or not the pawn can be promoted, so checkmate can be forced.
The rook and pawn versus rook endgame is a fundamentally important, widely studied chess endgame. Precise play is usually required in these positions. With optimal play, some complicated wins require sixty moves to either checkmate, capture the defending rook, or successfully promote the pawn. In some cases, thirty-five moves are required to advance the pawn once.
In chess, opposition is a situation in which two kings are two squares apart on the same rank or file. Since kings cannot move adjacent to each other, each king prevents the other's advance, creating a mutual blockade. In this situation, the player not having to move is said to have the opposition. It is a special type of zugzwang and most often occurs in endgames with only kings and pawns. The side with the move may have to move their king away, potentially allowing the opposing king access to important squares. Taking the opposition is a means to an end, normally to force the opponent's king to move to a weaker position, and is not always the best thing to do.
In chess, a blunder is a critically bad move or decision. A blunder severely worsens the player's situation by allowing a loss of material, checkmate, or anything similar. It is usually caused by some tactical oversight, whether due to time trouble, overconfidence, or carelessness. Although blunders are most common in beginner games, all human players make them, even at the world championship level. Creating opportunities for the opponent to blunder is an important skill in over-the-board chess.
In chess, a desperado is a piece that is either en prise or trapped, but captures an enemy piece before it is itself captured in order to compensate the loss a little, or is used as a sacrifice that will result in stalemate if it is captured. The former case can arise in a situation where both sides have hanging pieces, in which case these pieces are used to win material prior to being captured. A desperado in the latter case is usually a rook or a queen; such a piece is sometimes also called crazy or mad.
The chess endgame of a queen versus pawn is usually an easy win for the side with the queen. However, if the pawn has advanced to its seventh rank it has possibilities of reaching a draw, and there are some drawn positions with the pawn on the sixth rank. This endgame arises most often from a race of pawns to promote.
In chess, a swindle is a ruse by which a player in a losing position tricks their opponent and thereby achieve a win or draw instead of the expected loss. It may also refer more generally to obtaining a win or draw from a clearly losing position. I. A. Horowitz and Fred Reinfeld distinguish among "traps", "pitfalls", and "swindles". In their terminology, a "trap" refers to a situation where players go wrong through their own efforts. In a "pitfall", the beneficiary of the pitfall plays an active role, creating a situation where a plausible move by the opponent will turn out badly. A "swindle" is a pitfall adopted by a player who has a clearly lost game. Horowitz and Reinfeld observe that swindles, "though ignored in virtually all chess books", "play an enormously important role in over-the-board chess, and decide the fate of countless games".
The opposite-colored bishops endgame is a chess endgame in which each side has a single bishop and the bishops reside on opposite-colored squares. Without other pieces besides pawns, these endings are widely known for their tendency to result in a draw. These are the most difficult endings in which to convert a small material advantage to a win. With additional pieces, the stronger side has more chances to win, but not as many as when bishops are on the same color.
A pawnless chess endgame is a chess endgame in which only a few pieces remain, and no pawns. The basic checkmates are types of pawnless endgames. Endgames without pawns do not occur very often in practice except for the basic checkmates of king and queen versus king, king and rook versus king, and queen versus rook. Other cases that occur occasionally are (1) a rook and minor piece versus a rook and (2) a rook versus a minor piece, especially if the minor piece is a bishop.
In chess, particularly in endgames, a key square is a square such that if a player's king can occupy it, he can force some gain such as the promotion of a pawn or the capture of an opponent's pawn. Key squares are useful mostly in endgames involving only kings and pawns. In the king and pawn versus king endgame, the key squares depend on the position of the pawn and are easy to determine. Some more complex positions have easily determined key squares while other positions have harder-to-determine key squares. Some positions have key squares for both White and Black.
The rook and bishop versus rook endgame is a chess endgame where one player has just a king, a rook, and a bishop, and the other player has just a king and a rook. This combination of material is one of the most common pawnless chess endgames. It is generally a theoretical draw, but the rook and bishop have good winning chances in practice because the defense is difficult. Ulf Andersson won the position twice within a year, once against a grandmaster and once against a candidate master; and grandmaster Keith Arkell has won it 18 times out of 18. In positions that have a forced win, up to 59 moves are required. Tony Kosten has seen the endgame many times in master games, with the stronger side almost always winning. Pal Benko called this the "headache ending."
In a chess endgame of a king, bishop, and pawn versus king, a wrong rook pawn is a rook pawn whose promotion square is the opposite color from the bishop's square color. Since a side's rook pawns promote on opposite-colored squares, one of them may be the "wrong rook pawn". This situation is also known as having the wrong-colored bishop or wrong bishop. In many cases, the wrong rook pawn will only draw, when any other pawn would win. A fairly common defensive tactic is to reach one of these drawn endgames, often through a sacrifice.
In a chess endgame, a wrong bishop is a bishop that would have been better placed on the opposite square color. This most commonly occurs with a bishop and one of its rook pawns, but it also occurs with a rook versus a bishop, a rook and one rook pawn versus a bishop, and possibly with a rook and one bishop pawn versus a bishop.
The queen and pawn versus queen endgame is a chess endgame in which both sides have a queen and one side has a pawn, which one tries to promote. It is very complicated and difficult to play. Cross-checks are often used as a device to win the game by forcing the exchange of queens. It is almost always a draw if the defending king is in front of the pawn.
Müller, Karsten; Pajeken, Wolfgang (2008), How to Play Chess Endings, Gambit Publications, ISBN978-1-904600-86-2 (chapter 11 gives extensive coverage to fortresses)
This page is based on this Wikipedia article Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply. Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.
