Wednesday, July 11, 2007

The right track

The past few days I have learned more from the endgame than in the previous 6 months with exercises of near-theoretical endings. At least that's how it feels. By playing thru the annoted mastergames I get the hang of most common endgames like B vs B, B vs N, N vs N en R vs R. It makes so much difference if you have an idea what to head for. The idea's how to play the common practical endgames are so much more important than those theoretical endings without a clue what you are doing.

And dare I say it, now I have finally a beginning I wouldn't even be too surprised if I'm going to be good at this part of the game. That is not going to happen any time soon, but I'm starting to like the endgame. It is a part of the game where logical thinking prevails over brilliancy. Logic is more of my liking. Besides that my brilliancy in chess is still somewhat limited:)

12 days to go to the tournament. I want to consolidate my new acquired knowledge and to get some practice. If I can find the time I will try to formulate a few of the found idea's.


  1. I wonder if you have seen this book which the reviewer says is the only one he has seen which stresses similar themes to Shereshevsky (e.g., what to do when you haven't hit the 'technique' aspect of the endgame).

  2. Where do you get the annotated master games with near-endings? Is it from a particular endgme book?

  3. Tempo, would like know what ending book are you reading, "Mastering the Endings" or "Endgame Strategy" ? or is it other else ? Good luck in the tournament, effort will be payed. Interesting, my last name was Schereschevsky, but my grandfather and their brothers cut it to Schere, their father came to Argentina from Lithuania in 1889. Dont know if any of them played chess but remember my grandfather was friend of Najdorf, who lived here.

  4. I pick the annotated endgames from anyware I can find them.