Эндшпиль в шахматах: теория и практика.

Final phase in the game of chess
The endgame (or ending) is the final stage of a chess game which occurs after the middlegame. It begins when few pieces are left on the board. The line between the middlegame and the endgame is often not clear, and may occur gradually or with a quick exchange of pieces. The endgame, however, tends to have different characteristics from the middlegame, and the players have correspondingly different strategic concerns. In particular, pawns become more important as endgames often revolve around attempts to promote a pawn by advancing it to the eighth The king, which normally is kept safe during the game, becomes active in the endgame, as it can help escort pawns to promotion, attack enemy pawns, protect other pieces, and restrict the movement of the enemy king. Not all chess games reach an endgame; some of them end earlier. All chess positions with up to seven pieces on the board have been solved by endgame tablebases, so the outcome (win, loss, or draw) of best play by both sides in such positions is known, and endgame textbooks teach this best play. However, most endgames are not solved, so textbooks teach useful strategies and tactics about them. The body of chess theory devoted to endgames is known as endgame theory. Compared to opening theory, which changes frequently, giving way to middlegame positions that fall in and out of popularity, endgame theory is less subject to change. Many endgame studies have been composed; they consist of endgame positions which are solved by finding a win for White when there is no obvious way to win, or finding a draw when White appears to lose. In some compositions, the starting position would be unlikely to occur in an actual game; but if the starting position is not artificial, the composition may be incorporated into endgame theory. Endgames are usually classified based on the type of pieces that remain.

The ending of king and bishop versus king is a trivial draw, in that checkmate is not even possible. Likewise for king and knight versus king. Two knights cannot force checkmate against a lone king (see Two knights endgame). While there is a board position that allows two knights to checkmate a lone king, such requires a careless move by the weaker side to execute. If the weaker side also has material (besides the king), checkmate is sometimes possible. The winning chances with two knights are insignificant except against a few pawns. The procedure can be long and difficult. In competition, the fifty move rule will often result in the game being drawn first. The endgame of king and three knights against king will not normally occur in a game, but it is of theoretical interest. The three knights win. Two of the most common pawnless endgames (when the defense has a piece in addition to the king) are (1) a queen versus a rook and (2) a rook and bishop versus a rook. A queen wins against a rook — see A rook and bishop versus a rook is generally a theoretical draw, but the defense is difficult and there are winning positions (see Rook and bishop versus rook endgame).

King and pawn endgames involve only kings and pawns on one or both sides. International Master Cecil Purdy said, "Pawn endings are to chess as putting is to golf." Any endgame with pieces and pawns has the possibility of into a pawn ending. In king and pawn endings, an extra pawn is decisive in more than 90 percent of the cases. Getting a passed pawn is crucial (a passed pawn is one which does not have an opposing pawn on its file or on adjacent files on its way to promotion). Nimzowitch once said that a passed pawn has a "lust to expand". An is particularly deadly. The point of this is a decoy – while the defending king is preventing it from queening, the attacking king wins pawns on the other side. Opposition is an important technique that is used to gain an advantage. When two kings are in opposition, they are on the same (or ) with one empty square separating them. The player having the move loses the opposition. That player must move the king and allow the opponent's king to advance. However, the opposition is a means to an end, which is penetration into the enemy position. The attacker should try to penetrate with or without the opposition. The tactics of triangulation and zugzwang as well as the theory of corresponding squares are often decisive. Unlike most positions, king and pawn endgames can usually be analyzed to a definite conclusion, given enough skill and time. An error in a king and pawn endgame almost always turns a win into a draw or a draw into a loss – there is little chance for recovery. Accuracy is most important in these endgames. There are three fundamental ideas in these endgames: opposition, triangulation, and the Réti manoeuvre.

This is one of the most basic endgames. A draw results if the defending king can reach the square in front of the pawn or the square in front of that (or capture the pawn). If the attacking king can prevent that, the king will assist the pawn in being promoted to a queen or rook, and checkmate can be achieved. A is an exception because the king may not be able to get out of the way of its pawn.

Knight and pawn endgames feature clever manoeuvring by the knights to capture opponent pawns. While a knight is poor at chasing a passed pawn, it is the ideal piece to block a passed pawn. Knights cannot lose a tempo, so knight and pawn endgames have much in common with king and pawn endgames. As a result, Mikhail Botvinnik stated, “A knight ending is really a pawn ending.”

This is generally a draw since the knight can be sacrificed for the pawn, however, the king and knight must be covering squares in the pawn's path. If the pawn reaches the seventh rank and is supported by its king and knight, it usually promotes and wins. In this position, White to move wins: 1. b6 Nb7! 2. Ne6! Na5 3. Kc8! N any 4. Nc7#. If Black plays the knight to any other square on move 2, White plays Kc8 anyway, threatening b7+ and promotion if the knight leaves the defense of the b7 square. Black to move draws starting with 1 Nc4 because White cannot gain a tempo.

Bishop and pawn endgames come in two distinctly different variants. If the opposing bishops go on the same color of square, the mobility of the bishops is a crucial factor. A is one that is hemmed in by pawns of its own color, and has the burden of defending them. The adjacent diagram, from Molnar–Nagy, Hungary 1966, illustrates the concepts of good bishop versus bad bishop, opposition, zugzwang, and outside passed pawn. White wins with 1. e6! (vacating e5 for his king) 1 Bxe6 2. Bc2! (threatening Bxg6) 2 Bf7 3. Be4! (threatening Bxc6) 3 Be8 4. Ke5! (seizing the opposition [i. e. the kings are two orthogonal squares apart, with the other player on move] and placing Black in zugzwang—he must either move his king, allowing White's king to penetrate, or his bishop, allowing a decisive incursion by White's bishop) 4 Bd7 5. Bxg6!

Endings with bishops of opposite color, meaning that one bishop works on the light squares, the other one working on dark squares, are notorious for their character. Many players in a poor position have saved themselves from a loss by trading down to such an endgame. They are often drawn even when one side has a two pawn advantage, since the weaker side can create a blockade on the squares on which his bishop operates. The weaker side should often try to make their bishop by placing their pawns on the same color of their bishop in order to defend their remaining pawns, thereby creating an impregnable fortress.

This is a draw if the defending king is in front of the pawn or sufficiently close. The defending king can occupy a square in front of the pawn of the opposite color as the bishop and cannot be driven away. Otherwise the attacker can win.

This is a draw if the defending king is in front of the pawn or sufficiently near. The bishop is kept on a diagonal that the pawn must cross, and the knight cannot both block the bishop and drive the defending king away. Otherwise, the attacker can win.

Generally (but not always), if the defending king can reach the queening square of the pawn the game is a draw (see Philidor position), otherwise the attacker usually wins (if it is not a rook pawn) (see Lucena position). The winning procedure can be very difficult and some positions require up to sixty moves to win. If the attacking rook is two files from the pawn and the defending king is cut off on the other side, the attacker normally wins (with a few exceptions). The rook and pawn versus rook is the most common of the "piece and pawn versus piece" endgames. The most difficult case of a rook and pawn versus a rook occurs when the attacking rook is one file over from the pawn and the defending king is cut off on the other side. Siegbert Tarrasch gave the following rules for this case: For a player defending against a pawn on the fifth or even sixth ranks to obtain a draw, even after his king has been forced off the queening square, the following conditions must obtain: The file on which the pawn stands divides the board into two unequal parts. The defending rook must stand in the longer part and give checks from the flank at the greatest possible distance from the attacking king. Nothing less than a distance of three files makes it possible for the rook to keep on giving check. Otherwise it would ultimately be attacked by the king. The defending king must stand on the smaller part of the board. (See the short side defense at Rook and pawn versus rook endgame.)

"All rook and pawn endings are drawn." The context of this quote shows it is a comment on the fact that a small advantage in a rook and pawn endgame is less likely to be converted into a win. Mark Dvoretsky said that the statement is "semi joking, semi serious". This quotation has variously been attributed to Savielly Tartakower and to Siegbert Tarrasch. Writers Victor Korchnoi, John Emms, and James Howell, attribute the quote to Tartakower, whereas Dvoretsky, Andrew Soltis, Karsten Müller, and Kaufeld & Kern attribute it to Tarrasch. John Watson attributed to Tarrasch "by legend" and says that statistics do not support the statement. Benko wonders if it was due to Vasily Smyslov. Attributing the quote to Tarrasch may be a result of confusion between this quote and the Tarrasch rule concerning rooks. The source of the quote is currently unresolved. Benko noted that although the saying is usually said with tongue in cheek, it is truer in practice than one might think.

In queen and pawn endings, passed pawns have paramount importance, because the queen can escort it to the queening square alone. The advancement of the passed pawn outweighs the number of pawns. The defender must resort to perpetual check. These endings are frequently extremely long affairs. For an example of a queen and pawn endgame see Kasparov versus the World – Kasparov won although he had fewer pawns because his was more advanced. For the ending with a queen versus a pawn, see Queen versus pawn endgame.

The queen and pawn versus queen endgame is the second most common of the "piece and pawn versus piece" endgames, after rook and pawn versus rook. It is very complicated and difficult to play. Human analysts were not able to make a complete analysis before the advent of endgame tablebases. This combination is a win less frequently than the equivalent ending with rooks.

In an endgame, two are approximately equivalent to a rook plus one pawn. The pawn structure is important. The two pieces have the advantage if the opponent's pawns are weak. Initiative is more important in this endgame than any other. The general outcome can be broken down by the number of pawns. The two pieces have one or more extra pawns: always a win for the pieces. Same number of pawns: usually a draw but the two pieces win more often than the rook. The rook has one extra pawn: usually a draw but either side may have winning chances, depending on positional factors. The rook has two additional pawns: normally a win for the rook.

Without pawns this is normally drawn, but either side wins in some positions. A queen and pawn are normally equivalent to two rooks, which is usually a draw if both sides have an equal number of additional pawns. Two rooks plus one pawn versus a queen is also generally drawn. Otherwise, if either side has an additional pawn, that side normally wins. While playing for a draw, the defender (the side with fewer pawns) should try to avoid situations in which the queen and rooks are forcibly traded into a losing king and pawn endgame.

If there are no pawns, the position is usually drawn, but either side wins in some positions. A queen is equivalent to a rook and bishop plus one pawn. If the queen has an additional pawn it wins, but with difficulty. A rook and bishop plus two pawns win over a queen.

Without pawns, the queen normally wins but it can be difficult and there are some drawn positions (see ). If the rook has one pawn drawing positions are possible, depending on the pawn and the proximity of the rook and king. See Otherwise the queen wins. If the rook has two connected pawns the position is usually a draw. For any other two pawns, the queen wins except in the positions where a fortress with one pawn can be reached. If the rook has three or more pawns the position is usually a draw but there are cases in which the queen wins and some in which the rook wins. If the queen also has a pawn or pawns it wins except in unusual positions.

There are many cases for a lone piece versus pawns. The position of the pawns is critical. Minor piece versus pawns: A minor piece versus one or two pawns is normally a draw, unless the pawns are advanced. Three pawns either draw or win, depending on how advanced they are. Three connected pawns win against a bishop if they all get past their fourth rank. A knight can draw against three connected pawns if none are beyond their fourth rank. Rook versus pawns: If the rook's king is not near, one pawn draws and two pawns win. If the rook's king is near, the rook wins over one or two pawns and draws against three. Four pawns usually win but the rook may be able to draw, depending on their position. More than four pawns win against the rook. Queen versus pawns: A queen can win against any number of pawns, depending on how advanced they are. The queen would win against eight pawns on the second rank but one pawn on the seventh rank may draw (see Queen versus pawn endgame) and two advanced pawns may win.

Endgame tablebases have made some minor corrections to historical endgame analysis, but they have made some more significant changes to endgame theory too. (The fifty move rule is not taken into account in these studies.) Major changes to endgame theory as a result of tablebases include the following:
Queen versus rook (see ). There are two changes here enabling the rook to put up a better defense, but the queen still wins. (a) People usually opt for a second rank defense with the rook on the second rank and the king behind it (or symmetrical positions on the other edges of the board). Tablebases show that a third rank defense takes a while to breach, which is difficult for a human to do. (b) People had assumed that the rook needs to stay as close to the king for as long as possible, but tablebases show that it is best to move the rook away from the king at some earlier point. Queen and pawn versus queen. Tablebases have shown that this can be won in many more positions than was thought, but the logic of the moves is presently beyond human understanding. Queen versus two bishops. This was thought to be a draw due to the existence of a drawing fortress position, but the queen can win most of the time by preventing the bishops from getting to the fortress. However, it can take up to 71 moves to force a win. Queen versus two knights. This was thought to be a draw, and indeed it generally is, but the queen has more winning positions than was previously thought. Also, many analysts gave a position (see diagram) that they thought was a draw but it is actually a win for the queen. In the diagram, White checkmates in 43 moves, starting with 1. Qc7 (the only winning move). Nunn says "The general result is undoubtedly a draw, but there are many losing positions, some of them very lengthy." On the other hand, 73.44% of positions are won by the queen, almost all of the remainder being positions where the side with two knights can immediately capture the queen – 97.59% of positions with the side with the queen to move are won by that side. However, these percentages can be misleading, and most "general results" are based on the analysis of grandmasters using the tablebase data. For instance, although nearly 90 percent of all of these positions are wins for the queen, it is generally a draw if the king is not separated from the knights and they are on reasonable squares. Two bishops versus a knight. This was thought to be a draw but the bishops generally win. However, it takes up to 66 moves. The position in the diagram was thought to be a draw for over one hundred years, but tablebases show that White wins in 57 moves. All of the long wins go through this type of semi fortress position. 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 temporary fortress in another corner. Before computer analysis, Speelman listed this position as unresolved, but "probably a draw". Queen and bishop versus two rooks. This was thought to be a draw but the queen and bishop usually win. It takes up to 84 moves. Rook and bishop versus bishop and knight, bishops on opposite colors. This was thought to be a draw but the rook and bishop generally win. It takes up to 98 moves. Magnus Carlsen successfully converted this configuration within the 50 move limit against Francisco Vallejo Pons in 2019. Even with best play from the starting RB v BN position, the stronger side would have won a piece well within 50 moves. Rook and bishop versus rook. The second rank defense was discovered using tablebases.

In May 2006 a record shattering 517 move endgame was announced (see first diagram). Marc Bourzutschky found it using a program written by Yakov Konoval. Black's first move is 1 Rd7+ and White wins the rook in 517 moves. This was determined using the easier to calculate depth to conversion method, which assumes that the two sides are aiming respectively to reduce the game to a simpler won ending or to delay that conversion. Such endgames do not necessarily represent strictly optimal play from both sides, as Black may delay checkmate by allowing an earlier conversion or White may accelerate it by delaying a conversion (or not making one at all). In September 2009, it was found that the distance to mate (not conversion) in that position was 545 (see the first diagram). The same researchers later confirmed that this (along with variations of it) is the longest 7 man pawnless endgame, and that, with pawns, the longest 7 man endgame is the one depicted in the second diagram. White takes 6 moves to promote the pawn to a Knight (leading to a position similar to the first diagram), after which it takes another 543 moves to win the game. The fifty move rule was ignored in the calculation of these results and lengths, and as of 2014, these games could never occur, because of the seventy five move rule.

The table below lists the most common endings in actual games by percentage (percentage of games, not percentage of endings; generally pawns go along with the pieces). +Endgame frequency table Percent Pieces Pieces8.45rookrook6.76rook & bishoprook & knight3.45two rookstwo rooks3.37rook & bishoprook & bishop (same color)3.29bishopknight3.09rook & knightrook & knight2.87king & pawnsking (and pawns)1.92rook & bishoprook & bishop (opposite color)1.87queenqueen1.77rook & bishoprook1.65bishopbishop (same color)1.56knightknight1.51rookbishop1.42rook & knightrook1.11bishopbishop (opposite color)1.01bishoppawns0.97rookknight0.92knightpawns0.90queen & minor piecequeen0.81rooktwo minor pieces0.75rookpawns0.69queenrook & minor piece0.67rook & pawnrook ( & no pawns)0.56rook & two pawnsrook ( & no pawns)0.42queenpawns0.40queenrook0.31queentwo rooks0.23king & one pawnking0.17queenminor piece0.09queen & one pawnqueen0.08queentwo minor pieces0.02bishop & knightking0.01queenthree minor pieces

"[I]n order to improve your game, you must study the endgame before anything else; for, whereas the endings can be studied and mastered by themselves, the middlegame and the opening must be studied in relation to the endgame." (Emphasis in original.) " the endgame is as important as the opening and middlegame three of the five losses sustained by Bronstein in his drawn match with Botvinnik in 1951 were caused by weak endgame play." "Studying the opening is just memorizing moves and hoping for traps, but studying the endgame is chess." – Joshua Waitzkin
"If you want to win at chess, begin with the ending." – Irving Chernev
"Repeating moves in an ending can be very useful. Apart from the obvious gain of time on the clock one notices that the side with the advantage gains psychological benefit." – Sergey Belavenets
"It cannot be too greatly emphasized that the most important role in pawn endings is played by the king." – Siegbert Tarrasch
"After a bad opening, there is hope for the middle game. After a bad middle game, there is hope for the endgame. But once you are in the endgame, the moment of truth has arrived." – Edmar Mednis
"Patience is the most valuable trait of the endgame player." – Pal Benko