King and Fawn Endings

The presence of a protected passed pawn does not guarantee necessarily the win.

32 Shirov - Timman Wijk aan Zee 1996

Following l.g5, Black termi­nated his resistance, obviously considering that the protected passed f6-pawn is a very serious argument. Naturally, that deci­sion was a little bit too emotion­al and the subsequent analyses proved that it was never too late to resign ...

1 .. .'~d6 2.h4 It is also a draw after 2.fS gxfS

3.h4 <.!teS 4.<.!tf3 f4 S.hS <.!tfS 6.g6 hxg6 7.h6<.!tf6 8.<.!txf4 gS (Shirov).

2 ... 'it>xc6 3.f5 'it>d6 But not 3 ... gxfS? 4.hS<.!td6 S.g6

hxg66.h6. 4.f6 'it>d7 It is not good for Black to play

the move 4 ... c6, as it was recom­mended in some sources, be­cause of S.<.!tg3! 'it>d7 (or S ... <.!te6 6.<.!tf4 <.!td6 7.hS! gxhS 8.g6 hxg6 9.'it>gS - analogously to the pre­vious example) 6.hS gxhS 7.'it>h4

28

cS 8.'it>xhS c4 9.<.!th6 c3 10.0 c2 11.f8~ c1~ 12.~0+ <.!tc6 13.~f6+ <.!tbS 14.<.!txh7, and his defence is tremendously difficult.

5.'it>f3 'it>e6 6.'it>f4 'it>f7 7.'it>e5 Black must play very accurate­

ly. In particular, he should watch about the possibility h4-hS on the kingside. For example 7.'it>g4<.!te6 8.hS <.!tf7! (After the indifferent move 8 ... <.!td6, White would fol­low with 9.hxg6 hxg6, and then he goes with his king to the c6-square, countering 'it>d8 with the move f6-0, winning the game.) 9.hxg6+ <.!txg6!

7 ..• 'it>e8 8.'it>d5 'it>d7 9.'it>c5 'it>e8 with a draw (Shirov).

The protected passed pawn is also quite useful for defensive purposes. In that case, it can com­pensate the material advantage of the opponent, since it is not always possible to win the game without the participation of the king. The simplest example on that theme can be seen in the fol­lowing diagram.

33

Draw

Black's king cannot leave the square a8-a5-d5-d8.

It is also worth mentioning that there are some construc­tions, which are practically as effective as having a pro­tected passed pawn. They are sufficient to restrict the mobility of the enemy king. See an exam­ple of that kind - we can call that construction as having "a poten­tial passed pawn".

34 Kovalevskaya - Demina

Moscow 1999

l.\WfJ? Human desire to enter a king

and pawn ending with an extra pawn is quite understandable; nevertheless, this is a mistake. It is amazing, but the majority of computer programs suggest that move, at least at first sight.

1 ..• \WxfJ+ 2.<~xfJ bS! 3.@e3 This is the key moment. White

fails to compromise his oppo­nent's queenside with the move 3.a4, because of 3 ... bxa4 and his

Strategy

king cannot enter the square of Black's a-pawn.

3 ... aS! White was threatening here

4.a4! b4 5.a5!, winning.

35

Black has completed his de­fensive construction. He cannot create a passed pawn indeed, but White cannot clarify the situation on the queenside. Black has a po­tential threat to create a passed pawn and White's king is restrict­ed in its mobility, so he cannot promote his passed pawns on the kingside without it.

4.@d3 f5 5.@d2 @f6 6.a3 @g6 7.@e3 @f6 8.@d2 and the opponents agreed to a draw. In case of 8.f3, Black can even play 8 .. .f4+ 9.gxf4 (But not 9.@xf4 b4 and White suddenly gets check­mated: 1O.axb4 a4 1l.b5 a3 12.b6 a2 13.b7 a1~ 14.b8~ ~xd4#) 9 ... @f5 1O.h5 @f6.

There is also another construc­tion - we can call it a permanent threat of a breakthrough.

29