< Probably, I shouldn't post about chess itself in this forum. But I noticed some other chess threads, and no-one seems to mind... >

There's one particular end-game that I'm struggling with.

Let's say I have a bishop, a knight, a rook and three pawns. My opponent only has a queen.

In this situation, I should (depending on board position, obviously) be better, right? I have more material, and more pieces.

But I always get whipped in this situation. The queen is unstoppable on an almost empty board. I obviously can't contain her, and though I look for forks and skewers etc, my opponent only has one piece to worry about defending, whereas I have 6.

What should I be aimed to do in this situation?

Or do you disagree about my initial evaluation: is it *not* a winning position for me?

It's a chess forum, so why shouldn't we talk about chess?



If the pawns are conected then it should be an easy win. If they are scatered all over the board then it is more tricky, but it should be winning also. The key for your sucess is the coordination of your pieces. If they are well coordinated by protecting each other and critical squares then the queen is no match for them. But if they break formation, the enemy queen can pick them up quickly.

Coordination - thats all it can be said in general. For something concrete to say, we need a position.

Yes, this would be a pretty sad forum if you couldn't post a chess question.

Obviously, board position is a factor. I would look at getting a pawn to the opposite side of the board in hopes of getting it promoted... but it would be a slow process.

Thanks guys. Just to help somewhat, I've set up a board position.

Here I'd be tempted to play Rb1 (threatening a skewer) or Ng5+ (threatening a fork, also I can push the f pawn to defend the knight).
But of course, my opponent would probably spot simple tactics like this...is the problem that I'm looking for tactics instead of a strategy?

btw My rating, based on playing 10-minute games against computer opponents on Chessmaster...is about 1100. I've beat opponents as high as 1400, but I more often lose to opponents rated that high. My weakness is the endgame.

Queen endings (Q vs. Q or Q vs. minor pieces) are notoriously tricky. For the player with the minor pieces, pawns and Rooks, King safety is paramount, beware of the Queen's ability to administer perpetual check.

Obviously, watch out for forks and skewers. Advance your passed pawns as quickly as king safety allows (without having them picked off.)

In your position, it should be a fairly straight forward win. Your king is relatively secure, so advancing the pawns in this case probably wouldn't be a good idea. I think your on the right track with Rb1, the Queen will have a tough time fending off the Rook and two minor pieces as Black's King has no shelter.

Whoops, just noticed that Rb1 is a terrible blunder - Qc2+. This is the kind of thing that happens to me!

...and on edit, I see woodpusherghd didn't spot that either. Maybe I shouldn't feel so bad about my inability to convert positions like this
Thanks for the advice though

I told you they were tricky!!

Here is how I played this ending against Chessmaster. (just copy this and paste it into your Chessmaster - "edit--paste--PGN")



[Event ""]
[Site ""]
[Date "2008.12.22"]
[Round ""]
[White "ebutaljib"]
[Black "Chessmaster"]
[TimeControl "900"]
[Result "1-0"]
[ECO " "]
[Setup "1"]
[FEN "8/2q4k/B7/8/4N3/5PP1/6KP/R7 w - - 0 1"]

1.Nf2
{00:00}
1...Kg7
{00:19 (Score: 7.08, Depth: 6/14)}
2.Bd3
{00:03}
2...Qc5
{00:43 (Score: 7.16, Depth: 6/14)}
3.Ra6
{00:07}
3...Qe3
{01:16 (Score: 7.27, Depth: 6/14)}
4.h4
{00:18}
4...Qe5
{01:31 (Score: 7.34, Depth: 5/13)}
5.Be4
{00:32}
5...Qc5
{01:56 (Score: 7.40, Depth: 5/13)}
6.Rc6
{00:38}
6...Qh5
{02:21 (Score: 7.38, Depth: 5/13)}
7.Kh3
{00:56}
7...Qa5
{02:54 (Score: 7.61, Depth: 6/14)}
8.g4
{01:06}
8...Kf8
{03:20 (Score: 7.70, Depth: 5/13)}
9.g5
{01:22}
9...Qa1
{03:49 (Score: 7.77, Depth: 6/14)}
10.Rc2
{01:54}
10...Qf1+
{04:14 (Score: 7.76, Depth: 5/13)}
11.Kg4
{02:00}
11...Qa1
{04:29 (Score: 8.10, Depth: 5/13)}
12.Nh3
{02:27}
12...Qa7
{05:10 (Score: 10.83, Depth: 6/14)}
13.h5
{02:44}
13...Qd7+
{05:16 (Score: 12.18, Depth: 5/13)}
14.Kh4
{02:56}
14...Kf7
{05:35 (Score: 13.83, Depth: 5/13)}
15.Rc6
{03:08}
15...Ke7
{05:49 (Score: 13.79, Depth: 5/13)}
16.Nf4
{03:15}
16...Qd2
{06:36 (Score: 13.51, Depth: 5/13)}
17.Kg4
{03:27}
17...Qd4
{07:07 (Score: 13.54, Depth: 5/13)}
18.h6
{03:49}
18...Qg1+
{07:23 (Score: 14.26, Depth: 4/12)}
19.Kf5
{03:55}
19...Qh2
{07:28 (Score: 18.06, Depth: 4/12)}
20.Nd5+
{04:13}
20...Kd7
{07:28 (Score: 18.10, Depth: 4/12)}
21.Nf6+
{04:18}
21...Kd8
{07:34 (Score: 21.70, Depth: 4/12)}
22.Kg6
{04:23}
22...Qa2
{07:40 (Score: 17.92, Depth: 4/12)}
23.h7
{04:32}
23...Qf7+
{07:44 (Score: 24.57, Depth: 4/12)}
24.Kh6
{04:56}
24...Qf8+
{07:46 (Score: 29.42, Depth: 3/11)}
25.Kh5
{04:59}
25...Qh8
{07:48 (Score: 33.19, Depth: 4/12)}
26.g6
{05:06}
26...Ke7
{07:51 (Score: Mate08, Depth: 3/11)}
27.Kh6
{05:20}
27...Qb8
{07:52 (Score: Mate09, Depth: 3/9)}
28.Nh5
{05:45}
28...Qb2
{07:54 (Score: Mate08, Depth: 3/10)}
29.g7
{05:56}
29...Qd2+
{07:54 (Score: 27.53, Depth: 2/6)}
30.Kg6
{06:01}
30...Qg2+
{07:54 (Score: Mate11, Depth: 3/11)}
31.Kh6
{06:16}
31...Qd2+
{07:55 (Score: 0.00, Depth: 54/62)}
32.f4
{06:19}
32...Qd6+
{07:56 (Score: Mate07, Depth: 2/7)}
33.Rxd6
{06:20}
33...Kxd6
{07:56 (Score: Mate04, Depth: 2/4)}
34.g8=Q
{06:23}
34...Kc5
{07:56 (Score: Mate03, Depth: 1/3)}
35.Qd5+
{06:25}
35...Kb4
{07:56 (Score: Mate03, Depth: 1/3)}
36.h8=Q
{06:31}
36...Ka3
{07:56 (Score: Mate02, Depth: 1/2)}
37.Qb5
{06:35}
37...Ka2
{07:56 (Score: Mate01, Depth: 1/2)}
38.Qhb2#
{06:38}
1-0



It's not that hard. Always protect your pieces and avoid eternal check. If the pawns would be scatered (or just one pawn), then it's much harder to avoid checks.

And watch out for stalemate tricks (see move 23.)

I looked into the database and the side who has a rook, knight, bishop and a pawn wins in 95% against the lone queen.

Even in Staunton's time, they knew how to convert it into a win

[Event "London m4"]
[Site "London"]
[Date "1851.??.??"]
[Round "8"]
[White "Von Jaenisch, Carl Friedrich"]
[Black "Staunton, Howard"]
[Result "0-1"]
[ECO "C32"]


1. e4 e5 2. Nc3 Nf6 3. f4 d5 4. exd5 e4 5. d4 Bb4 6. Bc4 Nxd5 7. Bxd5 Qxd5 8.
Nge2 Bg4 9. O-O Bxc3 10. Nxc3 Qd7 11. Qe1 f5 12. Be3 O-O 13. Qh4 Rf6 14. h3 Rh6
15. Qf2 Bh5 16. g4 Bf7 17. h4 Bc4 18. Rfe1 fxg4 19. Nxe4 Bd5 20. f5 Rb6 21. Bg5
Na6 22. c4 Bxc4 23. Nc5 g3 24. Qxg3 Qxf5 25. Re5 Qg6 26. b3 Bf7 27. Nd7 Rd6 28.
h5 Qxh5 29. Nf6+ gxf6 30. Bxf6+ Qg6 31. Rg5 Rxf6 32. Kh2 Re8 33. Rg1 Qxg5 34.
Qxg5+ Rg6 35. Qd2 c6 36. Rxg6+ Bxg6 37. Qg5 Nc7 38. Qa5 Nb5 39. d5 b6 40. Qd2
Rd8 41. a4 Rxd5 42. Qf4 Nd6 43. Qf6 Rd2+ 44. Kg1 Rd1+ 45. Kh2 Rd2+ 46. Kg1 Rd1+
47. Kh2 Rd5 48. Qd8+ Ne8 49. Qe7 Rd2+ 50. Kg1 Rd3 51. b4 Rd4 52. b5 cxb5 53.
axb5 Rd5 54. Qe6+ Bf7 55. Qg4+ Kf8 56. Qb4+ Nd6 57. Qa3 Ke8 58. Qxa7 Rxb5 59.
Qc7 Rb1+ 60. Kh2 Rb2+ 61. Kg1 Nc4 62. Qc6+ Ke7 63. Qe4+ Be6 64. Qxh7+ Kd6 65.
Qg7 b5 66. Qf8+ Kd5 67. Qd8+ Kc6 68. Qe8+ Bd7 69. Qe4+ Kc7 70. Qd4 Bc6 71. Qc5
Kb7 72. Kf1 Rd2 73. Ke1 Rd7 74. Ke2 Rd2+ 75. Ke1 Rd5 76. Qf8 Ne5 77. Qg7+ Ka6
78. Qc7 b4 79. Qc8+ Kb5 80. Qb8+ Kc4 81. Qb6 b3 82. Ke2 Bb5 83. Qc7+ Kb4+ 84.
Ke3 Rc5 85. Qd8 Nd3 86. Qd4+ Bc4 87. Kd2 b2 88. Qc3+ Ka4 89. Kc2 Bb3+ 90. Kb1
Ba2+ 91. Kxa2 Rxc3 0-1

"Even in Staunton's time, they knew how to convert it into a win"

Yeah all right, don't rub it in!

Thanks for doing all that work for me, I see that the idea is basically to get the king safe before doing anything...Nf2 is not a move I would have even considered, but will consider moves like that from now on.

It's interesting you mention stalemate traps such as on move 23...I've had a couple of chessmaster opponents do that to me recently -- sacrifice their last piece when their king/pawns have no moves. A nice tactic, and not one a human's ever attempted against me.

quote:

Originally posted by sholtom:
Yeah all right, don't rub it in!

Don't feel bad about that. They knew perfectly well how to play chess even back then. Afterall Staunton was the world's strongest player at one point.


There is more than one way to win. When I played 1.Nf2 my main motivation was not to protect the king, but to support the bishop on d3 or e4, to be able to advance the f pawn. As you see I later didn't see any need to move the f3 pawn so it remained on the initial position almost until the end.
Like I said previously, the key is the coordination of your pieces. If you take a closer look you'll see that my pieces always protect each other, and black quenn is powerless because of that.

It's a good training position. Play it over and over against Chessmaster himself until you succed. When your success rate increases to a decent level, remove one of the pawns

Another fine demonstration how a lone queen is helpless against three pieces.



[Event "FIDE Grand Prix 2008/09"]
[Site "Jermuk, Armenia"]
[Date "2009.08.11"]
[Round "3"]
[White "Alekseev, Evgeny"]
[Black "Inarkiev, Ernesto"]
[Result "1-0"]
[ECO "E99"]
[WhiteElo "2714"]
[BlackElo "2675"]
[PlyCount "145"]
[EventDate "2009.08.08"]
[EventType "tourn"]
[EventRounds "13"]
[EventCountry "ARM"]
[EventCategory "19"]
[Source "Jermuk, Armenia"]
[SourceDate "2009.08.11"]
[TimeControl "40/7200:20/3600:900+30"]

1. Nf3 Nf6 2. c4 g6 3. Nc3 Bg7 4. e4 d6 5. d4 O-O 6. Be2 e5 7. O-O Nc6 8. d5
Ne7 9. Ne1 Nd7 10. f3 f5 11. g4 Nf6 12. Nd3 c6 13. Be3 Kh8 14. Kh1 Bd7 15. Rg1
Be8 16. Qd2 fxe4 17. fxe4 b5 18. b3 Rc8 19. g5 Nxe4 20. Nxe4 cxd5 21. cxd5 Nxd5
22. Rgc1 Bc6 23. Rxc6 Rxc6 24. Bg1 Qa8 25. Bf1 Rfc8 26. Nb4 Nxb4 27. Qxb4 Rc2
28. Bg2 d5 29. Nf2 e4 30. Rd1 Rc1 31. Qd2 R8c2 32. Qxc1 Rxc1 33. Rxc1 h6 34.
gxh6 Bxh6 35. Rc7 Qd8 36. Rxa7 Be3 37. Rb7 Qf8 38. Nxe4 Qc8 39. Rf7 Qe6 40. Rf6
Qg4 41. Bxe3 dxe4 42. Rf8+ Kg7 43. Re8 Qe2 44. Rxe4 Qxa2 45. b4 Qb1+ 46. Bg1 g5
47. h3 Qd1 48. Re5 Kf6 49. Rxb5 g4 50. Rd5 Qe1 51. Rd4 gxh3 52. Bxh3 Qg3 53.
Bg4 Qb3 54. Kg2 Qb2+ 55. Bf2 Qb3 56. Bd7 Qg8+ 57. Bg4 Qg5 58. Kf3 Qb5 59. Ke3
Qa6 60. Be2 Qa3+ 61. Bd3 Qc1+ 62. Ke2 Qb2+ 63. Kf3 Qb3 64. b5 Qd1+ 65. Kg2 Ke5
66. b6 Qb3 67. Re4+ Kd6 68. Be2 Qg8+ 69. Rg4 Qb3 70. Bf3 Ke5 71. b7 Kf6 72. Bg3
Qc2+ 73. Kh3 1-0