[caption id="attachment_150253" align="alignleft" width="356"]
Ranindu at the FIDE World Cup[/caption]
When our National Champion Ranindu Liyanage lost a “Rook versus Rook and Bishop Endgame” against Grandmaster Grigoriy Oparin in the first knockout round of the FIDE World Cup, the overwhelming feeling among the chess lovers of the country was a one of missed opportunity. After all, this was arguably the biggest game of Ranindu’s career thus far and he played exceptionally well to get a “theoretically drawn” endgame against a much stronger opponent.
Fighting against the odds
But first, let’s put into context the challenge Ranindu was confronted with. He was playing against one of the best players of the world (Oparin is ranked 24th in the world in the Rapid format). When comparing their respective ratings, the odds greatly favoured the Russian. The ELO win probability calculator gives 90% chance of an Oparin win, a 9% chance of a draw and a mere 1% chance of a win for Ranindu, and yet, this supposedly “drawn” position occurred on the board after nearly five hours of intense struggle.
[caption id="attachment_150254" align="alignnone" width="300"]
Grigoriy Oparin - Ranindu Liyanage Ranindu played 71...Rf7! Here[/caption]
This clever stalemate idea is key to the “Second Rank Defence”. However, white can always regroup and ask more questions which is exactly what happened during the game. Let’s delve into the mystery surrounding this fascinating endgame before analyzing where Ranindu went wrong.
An easy draw, or not?
In chess literature, there persists the notion that “Rook and Bishop versus Rook” is an easy draw for the defending side. When Viktor Korchnoi tested Henrique Mecking's defensive technique in their 1974 candidates match, Robert Byrne wrote, "Were it not for Korchnoi's intense dislike of Mecking, he would not be playing this theoretical drawn position.”
Here’s an anecdote that suggests all is not as simple as it seems on paper. When International Master Peter Dely adjourned his game with Grandmaster Laszlo Barczay at the 1975 Szolnok chess tournament, he only had a lone rook against his opponent’s rook and bishop. He spent the entire rest day locating appropriate endgame literature and preparing his defence.
Naturally, when the game resumed next morning, Dely lost quickly without even putting up a fight.
The suggestion of course is that drawing this endgame is not as straightforward as Robert Byrne claimed. In fact, for decades this has truly been the nightmare endgame of chess. It is fair to say never have so few pieces given so much grief to so many for so long.
The curious thing is, with perfect play, only about 4% of all practical positions guarantee a win for the superior side. And yet, Grandmaster Keith Arkell has won it 18 times out of 18. Tony Kosten, a renowned author, says that at master level the stronger side almost always wins. The main reason is that the defensive technique is so difficult to master fully. After every accurate move from the defender, the side having the bishop can pose new questions. Furthermore, he can try this for 50 moves. The defender has to know the differences between an array of solid fortresses and zugzwanged pitfalls. More often than not, it’s an exhaustive experience.
With the help of endgame tablebases, let’s go through the key moments in Ranindu’s game after 71...Rf7 72.Ke5 Rc7.
Until the 81st move, Ranindu defended perfectly. From now on, inside the brackets are the total number of natural options available for black against the number of “correct moves” (all the other moves give white a winning position immediately) in that position . This will give a better picture of this tightrope walk.
73.Be6 Rg7 (only 2/12 are correct moves) 74.Rf6+ Ke7 (2/2) 75.Rh6 Kf8 (3/7) 76.Kd6 Rg5 (6/6) 77.Rh7 Rg6 (3/7) 78.Rc7 Rf6 (2/7) 79.Ke5 Rg6 (4/5) 80.Rf7+ Kg8 (1/2) 81.Bd5 Rg7 (Finally a misstep, with only 81...Rh6 and Kh8 being correct) and white won after 82.Rf5+ Kh7 83.Bf7 Rg4 84.Kf6 (white’s last three moves had to be perfect) Rh4 85.Bg6+ Kh6 86.Rg5 Rf4+ 87.Bf5 Rc4 88.Rg8 Rc6+ 89.Be6 Rc7 90.Rg6+ Kh5 91.Rg3 1-0.
This gives us a great idea about how tough it is to defend this endgame. Has anyone survived this ordeal? It turns out that many have, including a 16-year-old Magnus Carlsen in 2007 and a 52-year-old Anatoly Karpov in 2003.
Ranindu at the FIDE World Cup[/caption]
When our National Champion Ranindu Liyanage lost a “Rook versus Rook and Bishop Endgame” against Grandmaster Grigoriy Oparin in the first knockout round of the FIDE World Cup, the overwhelming feeling among the chess lovers of the country was a one of missed opportunity. After all, this was arguably the biggest game of Ranindu’s career thus far and he played exceptionally well to get a “theoretically drawn” endgame against a much stronger opponent.
Fighting against the odds
But first, let’s put into context the challenge Ranindu was confronted with. He was playing against one of the best players of the world (Oparin is ranked 24th in the world in the Rapid format). When comparing their respective ratings, the odds greatly favoured the Russian. The ELO win probability calculator gives 90% chance of an Oparin win, a 9% chance of a draw and a mere 1% chance of a win for Ranindu, and yet, this supposedly “drawn” position occurred on the board after nearly five hours of intense struggle.
[caption id="attachment_150254" align="alignnone" width="300"] Grigoriy Oparin - Ranindu Liyanage Ranindu played 71...Rf7! Here[/caption]
This clever stalemate idea is key to the “Second Rank Defence”. However, white can always regroup and ask more questions which is exactly what happened during the game. Let’s delve into the mystery surrounding this fascinating endgame before analyzing where Ranindu went wrong.
An easy draw, or not?
In chess literature, there persists the notion that “Rook and Bishop versus Rook” is an easy draw for the defending side. When Viktor Korchnoi tested Henrique Mecking's defensive technique in their 1974 candidates match, Robert Byrne wrote, "Were it not for Korchnoi's intense dislike of Mecking, he would not be playing this theoretical drawn position.”
Here’s an anecdote that suggests all is not as simple as it seems on paper. When International Master Peter Dely adjourned his game with Grandmaster Laszlo Barczay at the 1975 Szolnok chess tournament, he only had a lone rook against his opponent’s rook and bishop. He spent the entire rest day locating appropriate endgame literature and preparing his defence.
Naturally, when the game resumed next morning, Dely lost quickly without even putting up a fight.
The suggestion of course is that drawing this endgame is not as straightforward as Robert Byrne claimed. In fact, for decades this has truly been the nightmare endgame of chess. It is fair to say never have so few pieces given so much grief to so many for so long.
The curious thing is, with perfect play, only about 4% of all practical positions guarantee a win for the superior side. And yet, Grandmaster Keith Arkell has won it 18 times out of 18. Tony Kosten, a renowned author, says that at master level the stronger side almost always wins. The main reason is that the defensive technique is so difficult to master fully. After every accurate move from the defender, the side having the bishop can pose new questions. Furthermore, he can try this for 50 moves. The defender has to know the differences between an array of solid fortresses and zugzwanged pitfalls. More often than not, it’s an exhaustive experience.
With the help of endgame tablebases, let’s go through the key moments in Ranindu’s game after 71...Rf7 72.Ke5 Rc7.
Until the 81st move, Ranindu defended perfectly. From now on, inside the brackets are the total number of natural options available for black against the number of “correct moves” (all the other moves give white a winning position immediately) in that position . This will give a better picture of this tightrope walk.
73.Be6 Rg7 (only 2/12 are correct moves) 74.Rf6+ Ke7 (2/2) 75.Rh6 Kf8 (3/7) 76.Kd6 Rg5 (6/6) 77.Rh7 Rg6 (3/7) 78.Rc7 Rf6 (2/7) 79.Ke5 Rg6 (4/5) 80.Rf7+ Kg8 (1/2) 81.Bd5 Rg7 (Finally a misstep, with only 81...Rh6 and Kh8 being correct) and white won after 82.Rf5+ Kh7 83.Bf7 Rg4 84.Kf6 (white’s last three moves had to be perfect) Rh4 85.Bg6+ Kh6 86.Rg5 Rf4+ 87.Bf5 Rc4 88.Rg8 Rc6+ 89.Be6 Rc7 90.Rg6+ Kh5 91.Rg3 1-0.
This gives us a great idea about how tough it is to defend this endgame. Has anyone survived this ordeal? It turns out that many have, including a 16-year-old Magnus Carlsen in 2007 and a 52-year-old Anatoly Karpov in 2003.