

|
«figure»
a value estimated by a number of pawns. In other words, you consider
a pawn like the unit of value awarding to it the value 1.
1o) The theoretical value of chess pieces The theoretical value of chess pieces is given by the following table:
In fact the Dr Siegbert Tarrasch
writes at this subject:
(Traité pratique du jeu d'échecs 1931 ; French translation 1992 Editions
Payot, Paris, p.52)
«A Queen worthes two Rooks or three minor pieces... Two minor pieces are stronger than a Rook. Bishops and Knights are of the same value and both are approximately comparable one with the other; their mutual value is roughly of three pawns. This classification is convenient only for beginning chess players.» 2o) «Major» and «minor» chess pieces According to their comparative value, pieces (we mean figures or chessmen), other thant the King, are classified in two caregories: 3o) The «quality» The difference of value (i.e. of force) between a Rook and a minor piece is named the quality. This concept play a significant role and we will come back frequently on this subject. If you succeed in exchanging a minor piece for a Rook one says that you win the «quality» , or also that you have the «quality» at your disposal. This single advantage may be sufficient to win; but it is not always so simple and we will return frequently on this theme. Effectively it happens, sometimes that a minor piece is as stong than a Rook, and possibly stronger than this one. 4o) The «little quality» The experiment shows that in many situations, especially when many lines are open, the Bishop can reveal himself stronger than the Knight. This relative difference, not always easy to appreciate, is sometimes name the little quality. To have, in particular, the paire of Bishops against a Bishop and a Knight or against two Knight, is said the «little quality». Obviously, we should not lose sight of the fact that this advantage is much less significant than the «quality». Moreover there are situations where Knights are stronger than Bishops!
Here thus some precise details on the comparative value of pieces, fruit of the experiment. Before coming there, let us quote this Tarrasch's remark , page 303 in «Traité pratique du jeu d'échecs», previously quoted. The author expresses himself clearly on this subject: «...This general information about the relative value of pieces is completely false for strong players.Il is necessary to well understand this.» 1o) The Queen against two Rooks According to Tarrasch (p.303): «The Queen is not as strong as the two Rooks or three minor pieces; generally and all things equal besides, these figures are stronger. Both Rooks can attack twice a square, what gives them a superiority on the Queen. This one becomes stronger only when the safety of the King is threatened and that he is exposed to many checks.» Without enter in the details (it is only on the level of the «New Chess Theory» that we will do it) we can however affirm that The relative value of Queen and Rooks depends from many factors, among which: Here is an endgame example : «The Queen against both Rooks» :
DIAG 1: White to play
Judgment: In the present position it is practically obvious that the endgame is a draw: i) None of both pawn is able to reach the promotion. ii) The White King will be unable to escape checks from the Black Queen. iii) White Rooks are coordinated, preventing the White Queen from capturing one of them. The game may continue as follows: 1.Re7+ Kh6 2.Rfe3 Qc2+ 3.Kf3 Qf5+ 4.Kg2 Qd5+ 5.Kf2 Qd2+ 6.Kf3 a4 7.R7e6+ ½-½ 2o) The Queen against three minor pieces The combat between a Queen and three minor pieces is particularly captivating and uncertain. At this subject, Tarrasch (p.303 in the same ouvrage) expresses himself like this: «...It is the same with regard to minor pieces. Those must always be well defended by pawns. If they are not, their loss is about always certain in the combat against the Queen.» One can easily moderate or in any case supplement the opinion expressed by Tarrasch. Thus, for example, two Knights protecting one another constitute, for the Queen, an indestructible block (if a Queen makes face with three minor pieces she cannot all the same, except in very exceptional situations - like an immediate promotion -, sacrifice herself against one of them!). We make here similar remarks that those done, in the preceding paragraph, about confrontation between a Queen and two Rooks: the relative value of Queen and minor pices depends from many factors, among which: Let us interest now to a typical endgame: «Queen against three minor pieces»:
DIAG 2: White to play
Judgment: Here is a situation that seems rather delicate. We are tempted to credit Blacks with a significant advantage, taking into account the position of linked pawns f5 and g4, halfway to the promotion. But White has a strong retort which equalizes: 1.Nd3 We notice then that the f-pawn is practically blocked, its advance leading to a pin: 1...f4?? 2.Fe5+-; the term «pin», whose the exact meaning will be evoked later, expresses here that if the f-pawn is played in f4, then the Queen may be captured by the Bishop. We consider then that the f-pawn is pinned, therefore its loss. It may happens in this context: 1...Qh2 2.Be6 Kh4 3.Bxf5 Qb8+ 4.Nb4 Qf4 5.Be6 g3 6.Bd5 Qf2 7.d4 g2 8.Bxg2 Qxg2 9.d5 ½-½
DIAG 2a: The game is a draw
It is clear, indeed, that the game is a draw. 3o) The Queen against a Rook, a minor piece and a pawn Again it is not easy to establish general rules for such a situation, but some previous remarks are always valid in this case. We may also notice here the following Tarrasch's affirmation: «A Rook, a minor piece and a pawn on the sixth rank - for White - (or the third rank - for Black -) are stronger that a Queen». In fact, we can quote many comparable situations and will give some examples by the suite. Let us satisfy for the moment by examining the following ending:
DIAG 3: White to play
Judgment: The g-pawn is very far away from promotion. In addition Black pieces are dispersed on the chessboard. In particular the Black Knight has few future prospects. Finally the white King is not directly threatened and is not very distant from his Black vis-à-vis. All this leads to recognize a White strong advantage, which must permit them to win. But the way is long and technical and we present here only one alternative, selected among many possibilities; we believe it however significant: 1.Qc1! Rd3 2.Qg5+ Very logically, the White Queen comes close the Black King and imposes her power by checking this one. 2...Kf8 3.Qc5+ Kg7 4.Qe5+ Kg8 5.Kc7! The White King gets ready to play an active role.
DIAG 3a: The White King gets ready to play!
5...Kf8 6.Qf5 Rc3+ The poor Black Rook, obliged to defend the a3-Knight, will give only seldom the check. Let us note that of Black Knight is a priori condemned. 7.Kd8 Rc6 8.Qe5 Rg6 9.Qc5+ Kg7 10.Qxa3 After having reached this first objective, the White's Royal Couple will undertake a slow and insidious surrounding of the Black King, which will be driven back to unceasingly approach the first squares of the h-file.
DIAG 3b: The White's Royal Couple playing!
10...Re6 11.Qc3+ Kh6 12.Qh8+ Kg6 13.Kd7 Re4 14.Qg8+ Kf6 15.Qh7 Rf4 16.Qh5 Rf5 17.Qh6+ Ke5 18.Qe3+ Kf6 19.Qc3+ Kg5 20.Qg3+ Kf6 21.Kd6! Rg5 22.Qc3+ Kg6 23.Ke7! Rf5 24.Qe3! Rg5 25.Qe4+ f5!? Other variations are not better.
DIAG 3c: Position after: 25...f5!?
26.Qh4 Rg2 27.Qf6+ Kh5 28.Qxf5+ Kh4 And now the Queen wins against the Rook.
DIAG 3d: Winning endgame for White
In the above mentioned work Tarrasch (p.24) studies, in this respect, several typical situations. Here the ending can be: 29.Kf6! Kg3 30.Qg5+ Kh2 31.Qh4+ Kg1 32.Kf5 Te2 33.Qd4+ Rf2+ 34.Kg4 Kg2 35.Qc4!! 1-0 and now Black is mate in 35! 4o) The Bishop against the Knight Again a fascinating theme of study so much situations are various. But before to consider concrete examples, let us try to draw some general principles: What is a «good Knight»?: A Knight is recognized to be «Good» if it is able to reach his full potential (i.e. his full influence). This match with a few different criteria, whose some could be specified later on. Let us indicate only this: A Knight obtains his optimal effectiveness if several of the following conditions are carried out: he is: What is a «bad Knight»?: A Knight is said «Bad» if it is particularly away from most of previous conditions; in other words, this Knight owns some characteristics as follows: What is a «Good» or «bad Bishop»?: A Bishop is said «Good» if he has open diagonals at his disposal, what means primarily not blocked by pieces of his camp. In particular: a Bishop is structurally good if his action is not blocked by pawns of his camp. This last terminology is justified by the fact that this characteristic acts then as a durable quality. At the contrary: A Bishop is a Bad one if he does not dispose of open files, what means mainly that those are blocked by pieces of his camp. In particular: a Bishop is structurally bad if his action is blocked by pawns of his camp. This last terminology is justified by the fact that this characteristic intervenes usually like an enduring defect. Here a completely significant position:
DIAG 4: White to play
Judgment: We observe first that the material is identical in both camps. However, it appears immediately that White disposes of a «good Bishop» and of an «excellent Knight», whereas Black's Bishop and Knight are as «bad» as possible. The resulting endgame is not at all surprising and shows very well how White wins easily: 1.h5+! Kh7 2.Nf5 Bf8 3.Bf7 Ng7 The White Knight dominates outrageously the Black Bishop, whereas the White Bishop makes a fool of the sad Black Knight.
DIAG 4a: Winning endgame for White
4.Bg6+ Kh8 5.Nxh6 Ne6 6.Nf7+ Check the opponent's King is restrain this one; we should not deprive us to do it.
DIAG 4b: Check the opponent's King...
6...Kg7 7.Ke4! Ng5+ 8.Nxg5 fxg5 The exchange of Knights will change nothing in the ratio of forces. This more especially as regards the White King impressive freedom 9.Kf5 Be7 10.Ke6! Bf8 11.Be4! Kh6 12.Kf7! The Coup de Grace. The White Bishop and White King cooparate as well as possible.
DIAG 4c: White Bishop and White King cooparate...
12...Bg7 13.Ke8 Bh8 14.Kd7 Bg7 15.Kxc7 Bf8 16.Kd7 d5 17.cxd5 Bb4 18.d6! Ba5 19.Ke8 +-
DIAG 4d: The game is over...
1o) The Queen against one or many pawns The fight of the strongest piece on the chessboard (the Queen) against the weakest (the pawn) can take very diverse forms. Let us start with the typical example of the Queen vis-a-vis to a pawn located at only a square of the promotion. Such a situation occurs indeed at the time of a race to the promotion gained by a camp right before the other:
DIAG 5: White to play
Judgment: The White Queen can avoid the promotion of the Black pawn only by checking without stop. The risk of an immediate promotion explains in the same way the quasi immobility of the White King and also the fact that the presence of other pawns, on both sides, in an equal number, would not inevitably modify the situation. If the Black King moves with prudence, without leaving squares: f1, f2, g1, g2, h1 this game will be clearly a draw. For example : 1.Qe4+ Kg1 2.Qg6+ Kf2 3.Qf6+ Kg2 4.Qg5+ Kf2 5.Qf4+ Kg2 6.Qg4+ Kf2 7.Dh3 Kg1 8.Qg3+ Kh1 9.Qe1+ Kg2 ½-½ Here a very different and undoubtedly rarer situation: a Queen confronted with an army of pawns supported by a Knight:
DIAG 6: White to play
Judgment: As impressed as you can be by the Black formation, the White Queen is perfectly able to confront it. In fact, the game is a draw. It may follow: 1.Qf4+ Kc5 2.Qxf5 c3+ 3.Kb1 b3 4.Qxg4 d4 5.Qe6 a4 6.Qf5+ Kc4 7.Qf1+ d3 8.Qf3 c2+ 9.Kc1 There is the only choice. Thus: 9.Kb2?? a3+ 10.Kxa3 c1=Q+ 11.Ka4 Da1#; 9.Ka1?? c1=Q# 9...Cb4 10.Df4 a3 11.Qc7+ Kb4 12.Qd6+ ½-½ Now the White Queen will not stop check the Black King. 2o) The Rook against one or some pawns The Rook is naturally much less suited than the Queen to face a pawn formation. When she is confronted with a pawn close to the promotion she will obtain just the draw by sacrificing herself. Here now a case where a Rook is unable to fight validly against her exchange value in pawns:
DIAG 7: White to play
Judgment: The White Rook cannot effectively prevent the promotion of one of Black pawns. Thus, on the basis of this position, Black wins. It can follow: 1.Rh8 a5 2.Rc8+ Kd5 3.Ra8 a4 4.Ra6 e4! 5.Kc2 c4 6.Ra8 e3! 7.Rb8 Kc5 8.Kc3 a3! 9.Rc8+ Kd5!! 10.Rb8 Ke4 11.Re8+ Kf3 12.Rf8+ Kg2 13.Rg8+ Kf2 14.Rf8+ Ke1 15.Rd8 e2 16.Rxd6 b4+! 17.Kxc4 a2 18.Ra6 Kf1 19.Rf6+ Kg2 20.Rg6+ Kf3 21.Rf6+ Ke3 22.Re6+ Kd2! 23.Ra6 e1=Q 24.Rxa2 Ke3 25.Ra4 Qc3+ 26.Kb5 b3! 27.Rh4 b2 28.Rh3+ Kd4 29.Rxc3 b1=Q+ 30.Kc6 Kxc3 0-1 Here is, by contrast, a very different position, but nevertheless starting with the same force ratio:
DIAG 8: White to play ... and draw
Judgment: In the present case, White succeed in getting the draw: 1.Kb4 g6 2.Rh1 Ke6 3.Rc1 Kd5 4.Rd1+ Ke6 5.Ka5!? f5 6.Kb6 Kd7 7.Rg1 Ke6 8.Kxc6 Ke5! 9.Kxb5 Kd4! 10.Rd1+ Ke3 11.Kc4! g5 12.Rd3+ Ke2 13.Rd5! f4! 14.Kd3 g4! 15.Ke4 f3 16.Rd2+ Ke1! Is of course a blunder: 16...Kg3?? 17.Ke3! d5 18.Rxd5 Kg2 19.Rd2+ 1-0 (mate in 22!)
DIAG 8a: White to play: the game is a draw!
17.Ke3! d5 18.Rb2 d4+ 19.Kxd4 f2 20.Ke3!? f1=N+!!
DIAG 8b: A good example of underpromotion!...
The only solution: 20...f1=Q?? 21.Rb1# 21.Kf4 Nd2 22.Kxg4 Ke2 ½-½ An endgame Rook against a minor piece and without pawn is usually a draw! 3o) Minor pieces against one or some pawns In games engaging a minor piece against one, two or three pawns all again will depend on the precise context. Here, in this respect, a rather particular, but completely instructive example:
DIAG 9: White to play ... but Black wins!
Judgment: The a7-pawn goes to mobilize the Knight, which will not manage to take it and, this way, will be durably out of play. This fact, the White King will be unable to avoid the promotion of one of two Black pawns of the Kingside. Consequently, without the slightest doubt, Black wins. For example: 1.Nb3 g4 2.Nc5 a5 3.Kf2 Ke5 4.Nd3+ Ke4 5.Nc5+ Kd5 6.Nd3 f3! 7.Ke3 a4! 8.Nb4+ Kc4 9.Na2 a3! 10.Nc1 Kc3 11.Kf2 Kc2 12.Na2 Kb2 13.Nb4 a2 14.Nxa2 Kxa2 0-1 This time, according to Deep Fritz, White is mate in 32! *** CLASSICAL CHESS THEORY :
*** FOR PLEASANT SURFING AROUND THIS SITE:
*** FOR DISCOVERING WHO WE ARE:
******** ©-«Chess-Theory.com»-2004-2008 ******** |
![]() |