What makes game 5 of the World Championship a draw?
up vote
4
down vote
favorite
I was watching recently the excellent ChessNetwork commentary of the 5th game of the WCC 2018 between Magnus Carlsen and Fabiano Caruana. The end position looked like this and players shook hands after white played g4:
[FEN "8/5R2/5bp1/3rpk1p/8/4B2P/5PP1/5K2 w - - 0 1"]
There is not much to grip onto on either side for sure, but it doesn't strike me as a draw either. The line I get with Stockfish is not straight forward.
{ [Stockfish 280218 64 POPCNT] 68:+0.00} 1...Ke6 2.Ra7 Rd6 3.Ke2
hxg4 4.hxg4 Rc6 5.f3 Bd8 6.Rg7 Kf6 7.Rg8 Bb6 8.Bh6 Rd6 9.Rf8+ Ke6 10.
Re8+ Kd5 11.Be3 Bd8 12.f4 exf4 13.Bxf4 Re6+ 14.Rxe6 Kxe6 15.Kd3 Kd5
16.Ke3 Be7 17.Kd3 Bb4 18.Ke3 Bc5+ 19.Kf3 Be7 20.Be3 Bd8 21.Bf4 Be7
Is there any simple explanation why this position appears as an obvious draw other than a lack of goals to pursue on both sides?
draw world-championship
add a comment |
up vote
4
down vote
favorite
I was watching recently the excellent ChessNetwork commentary of the 5th game of the WCC 2018 between Magnus Carlsen and Fabiano Caruana. The end position looked like this and players shook hands after white played g4:
[FEN "8/5R2/5bp1/3rpk1p/8/4B2P/5PP1/5K2 w - - 0 1"]
There is not much to grip onto on either side for sure, but it doesn't strike me as a draw either. The line I get with Stockfish is not straight forward.
{ [Stockfish 280218 64 POPCNT] 68:+0.00} 1...Ke6 2.Ra7 Rd6 3.Ke2
hxg4 4.hxg4 Rc6 5.f3 Bd8 6.Rg7 Kf6 7.Rg8 Bb6 8.Bh6 Rd6 9.Rf8+ Ke6 10.
Re8+ Kd5 11.Be3 Bd8 12.f4 exf4 13.Bxf4 Re6+ 14.Rxe6 Kxe6 15.Kd3 Kd5
16.Ke3 Be7 17.Kd3 Bb4 18.Ke3 Bc5+ 19.Kf3 Be7 20.Be3 Bd8 21.Bf4 Be7
Is there any simple explanation why this position appears as an obvious draw other than a lack of goals to pursue on both sides?
draw world-championship
1
Your line doesn't match the position, since there is an hxg4 but g4 hasn't been played in the diagram.
– Isac
Dec 6 at 12:16
@isac good spot, corrected.
– Jacques Gaudin
Dec 6 at 12:27
add a comment |
up vote
4
down vote
favorite
up vote
4
down vote
favorite
I was watching recently the excellent ChessNetwork commentary of the 5th game of the WCC 2018 between Magnus Carlsen and Fabiano Caruana. The end position looked like this and players shook hands after white played g4:
[FEN "8/5R2/5bp1/3rpk1p/8/4B2P/5PP1/5K2 w - - 0 1"]
There is not much to grip onto on either side for sure, but it doesn't strike me as a draw either. The line I get with Stockfish is not straight forward.
{ [Stockfish 280218 64 POPCNT] 68:+0.00} 1...Ke6 2.Ra7 Rd6 3.Ke2
hxg4 4.hxg4 Rc6 5.f3 Bd8 6.Rg7 Kf6 7.Rg8 Bb6 8.Bh6 Rd6 9.Rf8+ Ke6 10.
Re8+ Kd5 11.Be3 Bd8 12.f4 exf4 13.Bxf4 Re6+ 14.Rxe6 Kxe6 15.Kd3 Kd5
16.Ke3 Be7 17.Kd3 Bb4 18.Ke3 Bc5+ 19.Kf3 Be7 20.Be3 Bd8 21.Bf4 Be7
Is there any simple explanation why this position appears as an obvious draw other than a lack of goals to pursue on both sides?
draw world-championship
I was watching recently the excellent ChessNetwork commentary of the 5th game of the WCC 2018 between Magnus Carlsen and Fabiano Caruana. The end position looked like this and players shook hands after white played g4:
[FEN "8/5R2/5bp1/3rpk1p/8/4B2P/5PP1/5K2 w - - 0 1"]
There is not much to grip onto on either side for sure, but it doesn't strike me as a draw either. The line I get with Stockfish is not straight forward.
{ [Stockfish 280218 64 POPCNT] 68:+0.00} 1...Ke6 2.Ra7 Rd6 3.Ke2
hxg4 4.hxg4 Rc6 5.f3 Bd8 6.Rg7 Kf6 7.Rg8 Bb6 8.Bh6 Rd6 9.Rf8+ Ke6 10.
Re8+ Kd5 11.Be3 Bd8 12.f4 exf4 13.Bxf4 Re6+ 14.Rxe6 Kxe6 15.Kd3 Kd5
16.Ke3 Be7 17.Kd3 Bb4 18.Ke3 Bc5+ 19.Kf3 Be7 20.Be3 Bd8 21.Bf4 Be7
Is there any simple explanation why this position appears as an obvious draw other than a lack of goals to pursue on both sides?
draw world-championship
draw world-championship
edited Dec 6 at 12:27
asked Dec 3 at 21:45
Jacques Gaudin
220210
220210
1
Your line doesn't match the position, since there is an hxg4 but g4 hasn't been played in the diagram.
– Isac
Dec 6 at 12:16
@isac good spot, corrected.
– Jacques Gaudin
Dec 6 at 12:27
add a comment |
1
Your line doesn't match the position, since there is an hxg4 but g4 hasn't been played in the diagram.
– Isac
Dec 6 at 12:16
@isac good spot, corrected.
– Jacques Gaudin
Dec 6 at 12:27
1
1
Your line doesn't match the position, since there is an hxg4 but g4 hasn't been played in the diagram.
– Isac
Dec 6 at 12:16
Your line doesn't match the position, since there is an hxg4 but g4 hasn't been played in the diagram.
– Isac
Dec 6 at 12:16
@isac good spot, corrected.
– Jacques Gaudin
Dec 6 at 12:27
@isac good spot, corrected.
– Jacques Gaudin
Dec 6 at 12:27
add a comment |
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
up vote
6
down vote
accepted
Some points to consider:
- No passed pawn
- All rook endgames with equal number of pawns in its own half are drawn (I do not know if this is a theorem, but it is almost a theorem).
- One of the players can probably force exchange of bishops and get it to rook endgame with equal number of pawns.
- Both players are 2800+ and it is a classical game, so enough time to think and make the right moves.
EDIT: You can look at the game discussed here, where one side has Rook along with 'a' and 'c' pawns, while the other side just has a rook and the game is still a draw.
add a comment |
up vote
6
down vote
Computer engines are of little use in positions like this. Still it is a pretty obvious draw, because of:
- equal (and very limited) material
- pawns on the same side of the board
- no weaknesses for either player
- active and safe kings
In order to win this, one would have to win material or promote a pawn, neither of which can be forced.
add a comment |
up vote
1
down vote
I'll add a few points to the answers already given:
- If both sides exchanged all their pawns, the game is a draw, because R+B vs. R+B is a draw. In fact R+B vs. R is a draw . Think about this for a moment: it means that if either side can exchange their bishop for all three of the other side's pawns, they're the only side that can win (since they can still theoretically promote a pawn while the opponent will never be able to checkmate them).
- Obviously from that position, for either side to win, they must push their pawns to promotion. But there are no passed pawns. What's likely to happen after the pawn pushes is that the pawns are going to be exchanged.
- Neither side has a material advantage.
You can imagine what's likely to happen if both players had played on. Because of #2, pawns will be pushed and likely exchanged. Because of #3, there's a good chance all the pawns are exchanged. If either side is to have any hope of winning, it needs to be able to win a pawn for nothing. But even if that happens, some pawns are still likely to have been exchanged, leaving a R+B+P vs. R+B scenario ... and then the side with the R+B can just sacrifice the Bishop for the pawn and the game is drawn by #1.
add a comment |
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
up vote
6
down vote
accepted
Some points to consider:
- No passed pawn
- All rook endgames with equal number of pawns in its own half are drawn (I do not know if this is a theorem, but it is almost a theorem).
- One of the players can probably force exchange of bishops and get it to rook endgame with equal number of pawns.
- Both players are 2800+ and it is a classical game, so enough time to think and make the right moves.
EDIT: You can look at the game discussed here, where one side has Rook along with 'a' and 'c' pawns, while the other side just has a rook and the game is still a draw.
add a comment |
up vote
6
down vote
accepted
Some points to consider:
- No passed pawn
- All rook endgames with equal number of pawns in its own half are drawn (I do not know if this is a theorem, but it is almost a theorem).
- One of the players can probably force exchange of bishops and get it to rook endgame with equal number of pawns.
- Both players are 2800+ and it is a classical game, so enough time to think and make the right moves.
EDIT: You can look at the game discussed here, where one side has Rook along with 'a' and 'c' pawns, while the other side just has a rook and the game is still a draw.
add a comment |
up vote
6
down vote
accepted
up vote
6
down vote
accepted
Some points to consider:
- No passed pawn
- All rook endgames with equal number of pawns in its own half are drawn (I do not know if this is a theorem, but it is almost a theorem).
- One of the players can probably force exchange of bishops and get it to rook endgame with equal number of pawns.
- Both players are 2800+ and it is a classical game, so enough time to think and make the right moves.
EDIT: You can look at the game discussed here, where one side has Rook along with 'a' and 'c' pawns, while the other side just has a rook and the game is still a draw.
Some points to consider:
- No passed pawn
- All rook endgames with equal number of pawns in its own half are drawn (I do not know if this is a theorem, but it is almost a theorem).
- One of the players can probably force exchange of bishops and get it to rook endgame with equal number of pawns.
- Both players are 2800+ and it is a classical game, so enough time to think and make the right moves.
EDIT: You can look at the game discussed here, where one side has Rook along with 'a' and 'c' pawns, while the other side just has a rook and the game is still a draw.
edited Dec 4 at 5:10
answered Dec 4 at 4:52
Leg
535210
535210
add a comment |
add a comment |
up vote
6
down vote
Computer engines are of little use in positions like this. Still it is a pretty obvious draw, because of:
- equal (and very limited) material
- pawns on the same side of the board
- no weaknesses for either player
- active and safe kings
In order to win this, one would have to win material or promote a pawn, neither of which can be forced.
add a comment |
up vote
6
down vote
Computer engines are of little use in positions like this. Still it is a pretty obvious draw, because of:
- equal (and very limited) material
- pawns on the same side of the board
- no weaknesses for either player
- active and safe kings
In order to win this, one would have to win material or promote a pawn, neither of which can be forced.
add a comment |
up vote
6
down vote
up vote
6
down vote
Computer engines are of little use in positions like this. Still it is a pretty obvious draw, because of:
- equal (and very limited) material
- pawns on the same side of the board
- no weaknesses for either player
- active and safe kings
In order to win this, one would have to win material or promote a pawn, neither of which can be forced.
Computer engines are of little use in positions like this. Still it is a pretty obvious draw, because of:
- equal (and very limited) material
- pawns on the same side of the board
- no weaknesses for either player
- active and safe kings
In order to win this, one would have to win material or promote a pawn, neither of which can be forced.
answered Dec 3 at 22:31
user1583209
11.7k11452
11.7k11452
add a comment |
add a comment |
up vote
1
down vote
I'll add a few points to the answers already given:
- If both sides exchanged all their pawns, the game is a draw, because R+B vs. R+B is a draw. In fact R+B vs. R is a draw . Think about this for a moment: it means that if either side can exchange their bishop for all three of the other side's pawns, they're the only side that can win (since they can still theoretically promote a pawn while the opponent will never be able to checkmate them).
- Obviously from that position, for either side to win, they must push their pawns to promotion. But there are no passed pawns. What's likely to happen after the pawn pushes is that the pawns are going to be exchanged.
- Neither side has a material advantage.
You can imagine what's likely to happen if both players had played on. Because of #2, pawns will be pushed and likely exchanged. Because of #3, there's a good chance all the pawns are exchanged. If either side is to have any hope of winning, it needs to be able to win a pawn for nothing. But even if that happens, some pawns are still likely to have been exchanged, leaving a R+B+P vs. R+B scenario ... and then the side with the R+B can just sacrifice the Bishop for the pawn and the game is drawn by #1.
add a comment |
up vote
1
down vote
I'll add a few points to the answers already given:
- If both sides exchanged all their pawns, the game is a draw, because R+B vs. R+B is a draw. In fact R+B vs. R is a draw . Think about this for a moment: it means that if either side can exchange their bishop for all three of the other side's pawns, they're the only side that can win (since they can still theoretically promote a pawn while the opponent will never be able to checkmate them).
- Obviously from that position, for either side to win, they must push their pawns to promotion. But there are no passed pawns. What's likely to happen after the pawn pushes is that the pawns are going to be exchanged.
- Neither side has a material advantage.
You can imagine what's likely to happen if both players had played on. Because of #2, pawns will be pushed and likely exchanged. Because of #3, there's a good chance all the pawns are exchanged. If either side is to have any hope of winning, it needs to be able to win a pawn for nothing. But even if that happens, some pawns are still likely to have been exchanged, leaving a R+B+P vs. R+B scenario ... and then the side with the R+B can just sacrifice the Bishop for the pawn and the game is drawn by #1.
add a comment |
up vote
1
down vote
up vote
1
down vote
I'll add a few points to the answers already given:
- If both sides exchanged all their pawns, the game is a draw, because R+B vs. R+B is a draw. In fact R+B vs. R is a draw . Think about this for a moment: it means that if either side can exchange their bishop for all three of the other side's pawns, they're the only side that can win (since they can still theoretically promote a pawn while the opponent will never be able to checkmate them).
- Obviously from that position, for either side to win, they must push their pawns to promotion. But there are no passed pawns. What's likely to happen after the pawn pushes is that the pawns are going to be exchanged.
- Neither side has a material advantage.
You can imagine what's likely to happen if both players had played on. Because of #2, pawns will be pushed and likely exchanged. Because of #3, there's a good chance all the pawns are exchanged. If either side is to have any hope of winning, it needs to be able to win a pawn for nothing. But even if that happens, some pawns are still likely to have been exchanged, leaving a R+B+P vs. R+B scenario ... and then the side with the R+B can just sacrifice the Bishop for the pawn and the game is drawn by #1.
I'll add a few points to the answers already given:
- If both sides exchanged all their pawns, the game is a draw, because R+B vs. R+B is a draw. In fact R+B vs. R is a draw . Think about this for a moment: it means that if either side can exchange their bishop for all three of the other side's pawns, they're the only side that can win (since they can still theoretically promote a pawn while the opponent will never be able to checkmate them).
- Obviously from that position, for either side to win, they must push their pawns to promotion. But there are no passed pawns. What's likely to happen after the pawn pushes is that the pawns are going to be exchanged.
- Neither side has a material advantage.
You can imagine what's likely to happen if both players had played on. Because of #2, pawns will be pushed and likely exchanged. Because of #3, there's a good chance all the pawns are exchanged. If either side is to have any hope of winning, it needs to be able to win a pawn for nothing. But even if that happens, some pawns are still likely to have been exchanged, leaving a R+B+P vs. R+B scenario ... and then the side with the R+B can just sacrifice the Bishop for the pawn and the game is drawn by #1.
answered Dec 7 at 0:56
Allure
621115
621115
add a comment |
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Chess Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Some of your past answers have not been well-received, and you're in danger of being blocked from answering.
Please pay close attention to the following guidance:
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fchess.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f23122%2fwhat-makes-game-5-of-the-world-championship-a-draw%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
1
Your line doesn't match the position, since there is an hxg4 but g4 hasn't been played in the diagram.
– Isac
Dec 6 at 12:16
@isac good spot, corrected.
– Jacques Gaudin
Dec 6 at 12:27