Chapter 4 BISHOP VS. PAWNS The Elementary Fortresses There are many endgames in which the only way to defend consists of constructing a position impenetrable to the enemy. Such a po- sition is called a fortress, and the method is called constructing a fortress. [use the term “elementary fortress” to mean those theoretical positions with minimal mate- rial and a king usually placed on the edge or ina corner of the board, in which the stronger side proves unable to exploit a significant material advantage. We have already encountered such positions in the chapter on “Knight vs. Pawns” (Diagrams 2-2, 2-4, and 2-5). Here, and also in later chapters, you will learn other elementary fortresses which are important for the practical player. Bishop and Rook Pawn If the bishop does not control the rook pawn’s queening square, then the weaker side has only to get his king into the corner (we call that the “safe” corner). 4-1 Vi mm) Black to move plays 1...@g8!, with an ob- vious draw. Let’s learn the techniques of cutting the king off from the safe corner. Let’s suppose that it’s White's move instead. If the bishop were on f5, he would win after 1 e6! With Black’s king on f6, a different standard cutoff maneuver - 1 4ih5(e8)! - works instead. But in the diagrammed. position, there is only one way to play for the win: 1 Qh7 OFT 2 Hd3 BEG (A 3...285) 3 DES BET (A 4... 98) 4 Mh7 (4 Be6+ £6) 4...£6= Relocate the white king to d2, and it can reach the pawn in time to help it queen: 1 .h7! ST 2 Se3 S66 3 S4t—. Everything we've said so far is elementary. Yet even strong players forget about these ideas surprisingly often, andmake mistakes in the sim- plest positions. I had no difficulty finding ex- amples for the “tragicomedies” section of this chapter. Now let's look at a position with paired rook pawns (with the king cut off from the corner). The famous theoretician Vsevolod Rauzer did considerable analysis on this situation. V. Rauzer, 1928 White cuts offand then drives the king away from the corner, yet still, he cannot win. The de- fensive method is simple: just keep the king in the upper half of the board. Then, any attempt to remove the a4-pawn will allow Black’s king to get back to the safe corner a8. 12.46 Gd8 2 Ob7 Gd7 3 Ac7 Beb64 Gc6 Be7 5 Abb Heb 6 Ac5 Hes 7 HFS Heb 8 Ad6 Sf7 9 Hd7 HF6 10 Qh2 G7 10...8£5 11 Be7 Hg5 (but not 11...8e4? 12 Be6+—) 12 Be6 &g6 is also possible. 11 Les Hg6 Or 11...87f8, but not 11...8g8? 12 &c6! Bf7 13 BbS Seb 14 Sxa4!+—. 12 Be (12 &e6 Sf5!) 12...7g5 13 Lb2 G26 14 AF6 Dh6 15 SF7 Ph7 16 Les hb 17 Ag7+ Gh7 18 Hf8 Hg6 19 Ges BFS 20 HE7 Hed 21 MF8 VFS 22 Le7 82White has managed to drive the king closer to the center; but now he has to keep him from returning to a8. As aresult, the way is once again, open to the upper half of the board. 22...7e5 23 He8 Heb 24 L£8 WF6 25 Lb4 &g7, etc. Now let’s see what happens with the king in the lower half of the board instead: let’s play 7.44? (instead of 7...8e6). 8 Ad6! Bed (8.84 9 Ac5 Bd3 10 Sb5) 9 Sb5 Sd5 10 Ah2O Heb 11 Bxa4 Sd7 12 Sb5 Sc8 13 &b6+—. From this variation we can see how vital that h2-b8 diagonal is to the bishop. However, the only way the bishop can occupy it is if the black king gets too frisky. If he follows the above-cited rule of defense in- stead, then White will be unable to keep the bishop on the necessary diagonal and keep the king out at the same time. Amazingly, in the last diagrammed position Averbakh examines only 8 .g7+?, allowing Black to gain the half-point by 8...8e4! (after 8...8c4? the quickest win is by 9 S.b2 &b3 10 Sb5!) 9 Sd6 SES 10 eS, and now 10...8g6 - again, not the “active” 10...8e4? 11 @e6!+—. And yet, in the final position, it’s still quite dif- ficult to demonstrate a win for White. For ex- ample, after 11...f3! 12 5 @e3, he must find the exact move: 13 &.b2!! I won’t reproduce all of Rauzer’s analysis here - those wishing to see it may find it in any endgame reference. I might add (without giving the full proof, which is pretty weighty) that if, in Rauzer’s start- ing position, we move the pawn on a3 back to a2, the evaluation changes. White will try to stale- mate the enemy king (while still keeping him away fromthe corner, of course), in order to force the move a4-a3, after which the bishop can pick off the pawn. If Black tries to avoid this sce- 83 nario, then he must move his king into the cen- ter, which will allow White, by playing a2-a3 at the right moment, to obtain the “bad” black king situation we have already seen. Now for one more variation on Rauzer’s position (analyzed by Horwitz and Averbakh). Let’s add a black pawn at b5. 4-4 B? Now the king’s arrival in that left-hand up- per corner is mortally dangerous. It will be stale- mated, and be forced to play 5-b4, when the a3-pawn goes to the b-file. White to move wins quickly by 1 8.a5 &b8 2 Lb6 a8 (2...88 3 &c7O) 38c7O b4 4 abt—. But Black to move renders the position drawn, since White can no longer stalemate the king. The move ...b5-b4 is no longer even fatal; in fact, at the right moment it will be Black’s salvation. 1...d8! 2 Gd6 Pe8 3 Geb Yd8 4 Ad6 (4 Ba5+ Bes!) 4...Hc8 (4...8e8? 5 8e70) 5 Le5 (6 Be7 Bb7 6 Sd7 b4! 7 ab Sb6-, but not 7...a3? 8 Ac5! a2 9 Bd4+—-) 5.8! Black loses after 5...&b7? 6 &d6 c8 (6...b4 7 ab &b6 8 &b2! Sbs 9 a3 Bcd 10 Sc6 Bb3 11 b5; 6...8b6 7 Ad4+ &b7 8 &d7) 7 B£6Bb7 8 Ad8 Sc8 9 b6 Sb7 10 Hc5 Hc8 11 Bc6 Sb8 12 Las Ba7 (12...Hc8 13 Ac7; 12...8a8 13 &c7 Ba7 14 Ab6+ a6 15 Bc6) 13 Ac7 or 13 Ab4. 6 L£6+ He 7 Le7 Hc6 8 Ad6 b4t= White can drive the enemy king to the kingside and try to stalemate it there. In order to avoid stalemate, the king will have to retreat to the lower half of the board; but that is less dan- gerous now than it was without the b5-pawn, in view of ...b5-b4! at the right moment, which now becomes a resource for Black.Tragicomedies Gutman - Mikenas Riga 1969 What could have been simpler than 1 e6 Sxf4 2e7 Ad7 3 h6+—, or 1 h6 Gxf4 2 e6+~? 1 2.967? &xf4 2 Axf5 Gutman evidently expected 2...8%f5? 3 h6 £96 4 e6+—. However, it is more important for Black to take, not the bishop, but the e-pawn. 2...8xe5! 3 h6 £6 4 He2 BF7 5 Lh7 Of6 6 228 Sg6 7 h7 Yg7 Drawn. Gershon - Thorhallsson Bermuda 1999 Here too, the win is elementary: 1 @g5h3 2 g3, followed by 3 Suf5 - White winds up two pawns ahead. Gershon chose a different way, making the same mistake Gutman did in the pre- ceding example: he only expected Black to take his attacked bishop. 1 h3?? gh 2 gh a6 3 gs Axb7 4 Mxb7 &d7! On 5 @xh4, the black king has time to get to h8; otherwise, we have Rauzer’s drawn posi- tion. The game ended in a draw. Where should Black put his king in the next diagram? As close as possible to h8, of course. 84 Fischer - Taimanov Vancouver cmaf (2) The most accurate way to draw was: 1...2d3! 2 h4 44 3HF5 Sd6! 4 Sxf4 Be7=. Also possible was 1...2d6 2 e2 \d7+3Gf7 Se5 4h4 Af. Amazingly, the highly experienced grandmaster sent his king off in the opposite direction, 1... 8742? 2 Lc8! G4 (2...Af3 3.Ab7+; 2...0d3 3 Af5+) 3 h4 Nothing can save him now: as you will re- call, the knight has a difficult time with rook pawns. 3..f3 45 Ags 5 AF5! DF3 6 ho De5 7 Hg6 Af3 8 h7 Ah4+ 9 HF6 Black resigned, Dombrowska - Lyszowska Polish ch 1988 4-8 w? 1 @gl?? @h3t If 2 hI, then 2...£4c5© 2 g4 hg, and the rook pawn becomes a knight pawn. And on 2 ‘Sfl, either 2...8h2 or 2...:c5 decides. There- fore, White resigned. White had to play 1 @h2! Black can nei- ther drive White’s king from the comer, nor put White in zugzwang. For example, 1...3 2@h3 cS 3 Ph2 Ad4 4 Yhi!= (but not 4 Gh3?? glo).