King & Queen v King & Rook ending
-
- Posts: 1071
- Joined: Sat Apr 14, 2007 3:16 pm
- Location: Sutton Coldfield
Re: King & Queen v King & Rook ending
In Nunn's Secrets of Pawnless Endings (1994), p. 67 he gives this position as the longest win:
Nunn gives a different line (according to my computer, White has no fewer than 11 equally long wins to choose from at move 5), but it still takes at most 31 moves to win the rook.
Nunn gives a different line (according to my computer, White has no fewer than 11 equally long wins to choose from at move 5), but it still takes at most 31 moves to win the rook.
Ian Kingston
http://www.iankingston.com
http://www.iankingston.com
-
- Posts: 228
- Joined: Fri Nov 20, 2015 4:01 pm
Re: King & Queen v King & Rook ending
i once wondered if 2 knights can hold their own against a Queen because I thought maybe they could defend each other and keep the king nearby.
turns out you can't hold it. Sooner or later you have to move a knight or be checkmated. One knight falls and then the other.
turns out you can't hold it. Sooner or later you have to move a knight or be checkmated. One knight falls and then the other.
-
- Posts: 4826
- Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2007 1:13 am
- Location: Bideford
Re: King & Queen v King & Rook ending
I just checked it on Nalimov; it's a draw.Kevin O'Rourke wrote:i once wondered if 2 knights can hold their own against a Queen because I thought maybe they could defend each other and keep the king nearby.
turns out you can't hold it. Sooner or later you have to move a knight or be checkmated. One knight falls and then the other.
-
- Posts: 21314
- Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 2:51 pm
Re: King & Queen v King & Rook ending
There are some winning positions. This one, generated by playing around with ShredderIM Jack Rudd wrote: I just checked it on Nalimov; it's a draw.
-
- Posts: 10364
- Joined: Mon Aug 04, 2008 10:06 am
- Location: Somewhere you're not
Re: King & Queen v King & Rook ending
Like for instanceMatt Mackenzie wrote:There are some fairly recent instances of super-GMs failing to put this one away, of course.
"Do you play chess?"
"Yes, but I prefer a game with a better chance of cheating."
lostontime.blogspot.com
"Yes, but I prefer a game with a better chance of cheating."
lostontime.blogspot.com
-
- Posts: 228
- Joined: Fri Nov 20, 2015 4:01 pm
Re: King & Queen v King & Rook ending
so the 2 knighs can hold the draw? nice one. must remember thatIM Jack Rudd wrote:I just checked it on Nalimov; it's a draw.Kevin O'Rourke wrote:i once wondered if 2 knights can hold their own against a Queen because I thought maybe they could defend each other and keep the king nearby.
turns out you can't hold it. Sooner or later you have to move a knight or be checkmated. One knight falls and then the other.
-
- Posts: 526
- Joined: Sun May 13, 2007 11:23 pm
Re: King & Queen v King & Rook ending
Q v R:
I remember a chessbase article that spoke about a guy that had done a lot of work on the ending, including a database of key positions. Seem to recall 'rosettes' and other patterns being described.
The guy was called Derek Grimell ... His site seems to have been taken down now though.
The previously metioned Gelfand-Svidler game and commentary.
http://en.chessbase.com/post/can-you-play-this-endgame-
Paul
[Edit: worst spelling and formatting issues fixed]
I remember a chessbase article that spoke about a guy that had done a lot of work on the ending, including a database of key positions. Seem to recall 'rosettes' and other patterns being described.
The guy was called Derek Grimell ... His site seems to have been taken down now though.
The previously metioned Gelfand-Svidler game and commentary.
http://en.chessbase.com/post/can-you-play-this-endgame-
Paul
[Edit: worst spelling and formatting issues fixed]
-
- Posts: 4549
- Joined: Tue Apr 03, 2007 11:04 pm
- Location: writer
Re: King & Queen v King & Rook ending
There are available databases for all endgames upto and including seven pieces.
The most interesting from my viewpoint as a law maker is K+Q+N v k+r+b + n.
In this position, with optimum player on both sides, White can win on move 545, but makes the first capture on move 512.
White Kd3. Qh1. Nh2. Black Kf4, Ra7, Nh7, Bd1. Black to play, http://chessok.com/?page_id=27966
Of course it falls foul of the 50 Move Rule. The reason I did this research was concerning the nature of that rule. Both players could perfectly reasonably play on and on in an effort to win and neither claim on the 50 move rule. The Laws since 2014 means that the arbiter steps in after 75 moves to declare the game drawn. The reason for this is that, with an increment of 30 seconds, games could go on and on.
We chose 75 in ignorance of the recent database discoveries. Probably aesthetically it should be a higher number, perhaps 100 or 200.
Some years ago there were challenges of Q+R human against K+R computer. GM Walter Browne failed to win the first game. I think it was blitz.
The most interesting from my viewpoint as a law maker is K+Q+N v k+r+b + n.
In this position, with optimum player on both sides, White can win on move 545, but makes the first capture on move 512.
White Kd3. Qh1. Nh2. Black Kf4, Ra7, Nh7, Bd1. Black to play, http://chessok.com/?page_id=27966
Of course it falls foul of the 50 Move Rule. The reason I did this research was concerning the nature of that rule. Both players could perfectly reasonably play on and on in an effort to win and neither claim on the 50 move rule. The Laws since 2014 means that the arbiter steps in after 75 moves to declare the game drawn. The reason for this is that, with an increment of 30 seconds, games could go on and on.
We chose 75 in ignorance of the recent database discoveries. Probably aesthetically it should be a higher number, perhaps 100 or 200.
Some years ago there were challenges of Q+R human against K+R computer. GM Walter Browne failed to win the first game. I think it was blitz.
Re: King & Queen v King & Rook ending
I realise that it was probably just a typo but what was the material balance for these challenges please Stewart?Stewart Reuben wrote: Some years ago there were challenges of Q+R human against K+R computer. GM Walter Browne failed to win the first game. I think it was blitz.
Re: King & Queen v King & Rook ending
Oh ok I Googled it, it was K+Q v K+R.
Here is the game that Browne failed to win:-
http://www.chessgames.com/perl/chessgame?gid=1480950
Here is the game that Browne failed to win:-
http://www.chessgames.com/perl/chessgame?gid=1480950
-
- Posts: 1266
- Joined: Tue Nov 18, 2014 7:23 pm
Re: King & Queen v King & Rook ending
You cruel, heartless beast! Don't you think arbiters have a home to go to? With a warm bed waiting?Stewart Reuben wrote: The Laws since 2014 means that the arbiter steps in after 75 moves to declare the game drawn. The reason for this is that, with an increment of 30 seconds, games could go on and on.
We chose 75 in ignorance of the recent database discoveries. Probably aesthetically it should be a higher number, perhaps 100 or 200.
Ah, but I was so much older then. I'm younger than that now.
-
- Posts: 4549
- Joined: Tue Apr 03, 2007 11:04 pm
- Location: writer
Re: King & Queen v King & Rook ending
That is why I didn't suggest 512.
-
- Posts: 8462
- Joined: Sat Jan 02, 2010 1:28 pm
Re: King & Queen v King & Rook ending
I didn't think that was the point at all. I thought 75 was chosen because it is safely well past 50.Stewart Reuben wrote: We chose 75 in ignorance of the recent database discoveries. Probably aesthetically it should be a higher number, perhaps 100 or 200.
If you want a picture of the future, imagine a QR code stamped on a human face — forever.
-
- Posts: 670
- Joined: Sun Jun 14, 2009 10:47 pm
- Location: Leeds
Re: King & Queen v King & Rook ending
The one time I had it, I couldn’t do it and after messing around for ages, I wound up just taking the Rook with my queen in frustration making it a K vs K draw. I did some studying up on it afterwards, but this was a couple of years ago, not sure I’d be able to win it again now.
"When you see a good move, look for a better one!" - Lasker
-
- Posts: 2
- Joined: Wed Jun 07, 2017 12:45 pm
Re: King & Queen v King & Rook ending
Hi All
I have written up the analysis I have done on this ending. Hopefully this is useful to some of you.
Part 1 - Winning from the Philidor Position
http://www.thequietmove.com/queen-v-roo ... -philidor/
Part 2 - Getting to Philidor Position
http://www.thequietmove.com/queen-v-roo ... -philidor/
There's really no short-cut for this, as the ending is complex with best play from the defender. In practice, you may find a nice fork along the way!
Would appreciate any feedback.
Best wishes,
Andrew
I have written up the analysis I have done on this ending. Hopefully this is useful to some of you.
Part 1 - Winning from the Philidor Position
http://www.thequietmove.com/queen-v-roo ... -philidor/
Part 2 - Getting to Philidor Position
http://www.thequietmove.com/queen-v-roo ... -philidor/
There's really no short-cut for this, as the ending is complex with best play from the defender. In practice, you may find a nice fork along the way!
Would appreciate any feedback.
Best wishes,
Andrew