Originally posted by Paul Dirac IICheckmate with bishop and knight can be forced accorking to Al Horowitz in his book "Chess Self-Teacher". A barrier is created by the bishop, knight, and king to drive the lone king back to the edge of the board and then into the same color corner as the bishop to deliver the checkmate. The final position will end something like this:
Another game I was NOT involved in is the longest game I have seen at this site.
Game 9490830
At 72 it becomes knight + bishop vs. nothing. Does theory say a win can be forced? Or does it take a mistake? Checkmate is achieved at 168. I would love to know if white was offering a draw during the second half of the game.
[pgn][Date "2012.08.2 . Kh8h7 Ng7e6 166. Kh7h8 Bf4g5 167. Kh8h7 Ne6f8 168. Kh7h8 Bg5f6 0-1[/pgn]
The book gives two other positions. One is a mate in 5 moves where the king is going to the correct corner and the other a mate in 10 to 12 moves in which the king has gone to the wrong corner.
It's true. K+B+N vs K is a forced win. However, it is very difficult and time consuming to learn and rarely, if ever, occurs. IM Jeremy Silman mentions in his endgame book that it only occurred once in his career. In my 8 years of competitive play it has only come up once; I was losing but managed to force my opponent into a K+B+N vs K endgame, and he agreed to a draw after vainly attempting to mate me.
Originally posted by chesskid001It is really not that difficult once you know the basic ideas and a couple critical positions that keep the king from escaping again and again into the wrong corner.
It's true. K+B+N vs K is a forced win. However, it is very difficult and time consuming to learn and rarely, if ever, occurs. IM Jeremy Silman mentions in his endgame book that it only occurred once in his career. In my 8 years of competitive play it has only come up once; I was losing but managed to force my opponent into a K+B+N vs K endgame, and he agreed to a draw after vainly attempting to mate me.
Originally posted by 64squaresofpainVery good game. Did you do this all in your head or did you use the RHP analyze board that I have recommended?
After the missed mate of a couple days ago I needed a nice win to perk me up...
this game was it 🙂
[pgn][Event "Ladder"] [Site "http://www.redhotpawn.com"] [Date "2013.01.13"] [EndDate "2013.01.18"] [Round "?"] [White "herrero"] [Black "64squaresofpain"] [WhiteRating "1278"] [BlackRating "1483"] [WhiteElo "1278"] [BlackElo "1483"] [Result "0-1"] ...[text shortened]... ticularly enjoy how white's King and Queen have swapped places 😀
I'm really interested to see if anyone can prove the sac "wrong" I calculated many lines but none to a conclusive win... I just thought I was better off because even though I was a piece down not only was I ahead in development but black was going to have trouble getting his pieces onto good square, or so I though but maybe someone can find a better defense (I realise that black need not have walked into mate in one)?
I am much more proud of this game than the previous one. I key in on the weaknesses while my opponent slips in a tough situation allowing me into a won king and pawn end game... all the endgame study is starting to show through.
This game may be found dull by some as I just created an iso d pawn and proved it was a weakness into the endgame while my opponent just allowed it to happen.
