From: DCBCS@CANAL.CRC.UNO.EDU (Dennis Baker)
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
Subject: Studying the endgame, etc.
Date: 7 Apr 92 14:30:00 GMT

On Sun, 5 Apr 1992 19:39:33 GMT pope@kpc.com (John Pope) writes:

    [ ...stuff deleted... ]

>Personally I think the best way to get the basics is go through
>Averbakh's "Chess Endings: Essential Knowledge" every couple of years.

    I seem to remember being slightly disappointed in this book.  However,
    you always see it listed as a *classic*, and I would like to take
    another look (since I've very forgetful about it at the moment).

>That book, together with Shereshevsky's "Endgame Strategy", is probably
>as much as most 2400 players know, at least in the US...

    This IS a great book.  I think Shereshevsky has another book out
    as well.

>Adding to that going through all the endings in the back of Chess Informant
>and maybe looking up similar positions in the reference works would
>probably create some sort of endgame monster...

    Yes, I always at least glance at these (as well as the combinations).

>I agree that rook endings are the most practical things to study,
>although there too you have to have some grasp of pawn endings that
>may arise by transposition.

    That's where my 1/3 of Averbakh and Maizelis comes in!  Plus I had
    2 endgame cassettes by Mednis that were pretty good, one on pawn
    endings, the other on queen and pawn endings.  BTW, the Mednis
    endgame books are pretty good as well.

>I don't think as highly as you do of the efficacy of speed chess
>to learn endings, though, unless you are playing a *very* strong 
>endgame player. Blitz does teach you the most important
>general principal (activity), but there's often so much more in
>an ending that gets glossed over because of the time limit...

    I have to pretty much agree here.  It so happens I was playing
    tons of speed chess at the time.  I used to get together with a
    friend of mine 3 and 4 times a week, playing 30-game sessions
    each time.  That was in addition to playing weekly with a group
    who met in New Orleans at the Maple Leaf Bar, then a famous chess
    hangout.  Some of the regulars were IM Mark Diesen (2490 USCF at
    the moment), FM Wayne Trosclair (2335 FIDE), NM Jim Rousselle
    (2327 USCF), and NM Michael Gold (2306 USCF).  Plus a bunch of
    NM fish like myself.  Rousselle, in fact, was much stronger than
    his 2327 rating.  The thing is, he hasn't been very active OTB
    since the 70's.  His rating was acquired in a state which started
    out with only 3 Experts at the beginning of the 70's (Louisiana).
    The last session he faced Diesen was a 3-3 split.  Rousselle has
    beaten, in the National Chess League during the late 70's, IM
    Jack Peters (twice), now-GM and former U.S. Champion Michael
    Wilder (then whiz-kid), in addition to a host of other prominent
    masters, whose names escape me at the moment.  Anyway, what a
    group to play speed chess with!

    BTW, here's one Rousselle crush:

    National Chess League 1977
    Jim Rousselle - Jack Peters
    Catalan Opening
    1 d4 Nf6 2 c4 e6 3 g3 c5 4 Nf3 cxd4 5 Nxd4 a6 6 Bg2 Qc7 7 O-O
    Qxc4 (At the time, this grab was viewed as extremely risky, but
    I think Albert got away with this move in a game vs. Browne.)
    8 Nc3 Nc6 9 Be3 Bc5 10 Nxc6! Bxe3 11 fxe3 bxc6 12 Qd6 (Not only
    preventing castling, but threatening to trap the queen with Rf4!)
    12...a5 13 Rf4 Qa6 14 Raf1 Qa7 15 Kh1! Qb8 16 Qc5! Bb7 17 Qg5!
    Rf8 18 Qxg7! Nh5 19 Qxf7+!! 1-0

    Rousselle was a BCO fanatic.  Regarding the above game,
    Rousselle's amusing comment afterwards was, "I can't take credit.
    I stole a Botvinnik idea!"

    Still, I agree with your comment about speed chess.  You can easily
    gloss over a lot.  Not to mention getting only a superficial understanding
    of some things.  I remember playing one line for two years in speed
    chess, which I saw right away in an OTB game (after about 10 minutes
    of thought) was all wrong.  But I played so many rook and pawn endgames,
    I started to get a feel for where everything belongs.  When you are 
    playing for a buck or two a game, there's plenty of incentive to put
    things right!

Dennis Baker
<DCBCS@uno.edu>
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess