My esteemed colleague Simon Waters is leading on King
endgames next week, so I will attempt a warm-up for him this
There are, in my mind, two types of chess theory:
specific. In the opening, for example, we say that in general it's a good idea to
develop all your pieces once before moving any of them twice.
Equally, we might offer that the sternest test of the Two Knights'
Defence is the move 4.Ng5, a
view reinforced when Kasparov used it to duff up Timman. Simon, I
believe, intends to do some specific theory, and so my
intention is to impart a few general principles. The point of
this, as above, is that specific analytic discoveries can contradict
general principles, and indeed some conclusions of K+P endgame theory
are distinctly against what you might expect. Although I don't
know what you expect...
RJ. Fischer - Berliner 1-0 [B03] Jose Capablanca - Abraham Kupchik 1-0 [C49] Jose Capablanca - Milan sr [New York Vidmar 1-0 [C98]
But suggestions are welcome.