I was standing there in St. Louis watching Niemann play Rosen. Hans says "You know how to beat an IM? You DRAGGG them into the endgame!". Hans dragged, Eric lost. True story, to the best of my recollection.
I think the benefit of studying theoretical endgames is to think about it mathematically. Once you know the simplest wins you can build an understanding up from there, learn your transitions, etc. Architects have to study math too. Of course people don't typically start out as architects, but if you never learn the theory you can never be one. Certainly don't want to be a carpenter forever. So it's about balance I guess. Another reason I was attracted to DEM is not only because I find the positions beautiful but also because it provides some innate structure to approaching endgames. A roadmap, so I feel I know where I'm going. There are also different ways you can approach reading it, like first pass at low elo just learn the simplest ones and later passes do deeper positions as they become more relevant. Anyway thats my opinion on the matter
Reading through some of the comments, I think it's clear that many people tend towards theoretical endgame manuals because it's concrete and it's all compiled in one source, so if someone wants to "get better at endgames" they'll be able to pick up one book and learn stuff. Whereas my experience has been similar (it sounds like) to your own - I have gotten better at (practical) endgame play by 1) getting shown GM games with endgame technique by my coaches; 2) playing endgames, including training positions (some from my own games, some given from coach) and reviewing them afterwards. But that's really annoying to compile material in one place! It sounds like Sherevsky is the best one, but that's the main one I know of! Maybe next best is study the games of Karpov/Capablanca/etc.
Practical Chess Endings by Paul Keres is the best endgame book. Silman's book is disjointed. The simplest, for those with little time, is Chess Endings Essential Knowledge by Averbakh.
Among de la Villa's 100 endgames, there are some difficult positions like those you showed, sure. But if you are not at the master level, you don't have to take the book title literally. Feel free to leave some of the endgames for later stages of your chess development. You can easily recognize those by simply taking a broad look at how much text there is in a chapter. I'm a big fan of the book, but even I have so far skipped those fh-pawn rook endgames. The bishop endgame draw might not be likely to appear on the board but it's satisfyingly beautiful and as you said, not too difficult. It's fair to argue that doing tactics training profits you most in short term, after you've learned KPk and Lucena and other basic stuff. You can get away with not knowing rest of the stuff. But the book is enjoyable to study, themes are so clearly selected and presented. And the content isn't entirely useless, either.
Yep I agree, certainly not all of them are too difficult, and many of them should be solidified in one's repertoire - but if we were to apply the 80/20 rule to endgame study, I think the practical element is probably moreso whats gets 80% of the results, and the theoretical ones the other 20%. Of course they can blend together at some point though.
The prologue of the book itself displays an approach with the 30 more important games to know before you attempt the whole thing. It is as much a motivation as a high quality curated selection to start of. That said I'd wish I had a starting point to approach practical endgames in an ordered manner, but I haven't found that yet, maybe Silmann's book is the one doing that task.
Loved this vid. Great real life examples. I enjoyed when you asked what would white do? I paused the vid and made my guesses. Just a very instructional video. Thanks Sam. More endgame vids please 💯💪👍
Shereshevky's 'Endgame Strategy' is probably a good place to start. I picked up a lot studying players like Karpov (edit: and from getting beat up several times by stronger players in endgames)
Nice topic Sam 👍 I think at least basic end games you should know how to win or draw - rook pawn end games. I have messed up several rook end games where either I could have won or at least hold it.
It's interesting to see the mindset of these players, I'm not particularly high rated (1740 DWZ), but I usually try to avoid endgames against higher rated players, unless I am very confident and have a clear and concrete plan on how to play it out. I know when I'm facing a lower rated opponent like 1400-1500 I want the game to be calm and chill where we get into an endgame where I can just grind slowly until they crack and win without any complications. The last thing I want is some crazy middle game position with all kinds of positional and material imbalances where I am highly likely to miss something and give my lower rated opponent a chance to win. And I figure that when I'm playing a higher rated opponent they are thinking the same. So if I'm playing someone 1900-2000+ I always always try to complicate, make the position as sharp as possible, sac pawns for activity, if it gets to the endgame I probably would have lost anyway so I just try to be active and cause as many problems as possible.
@@walterbrownstone8017 We have exactly the same point. 1. In the opening, there are a lot of good moves. You have to calculate all possible variations they could play. 2. In the endgame, There are not a lot of variations but you should be able to determine the result (especially before entering this game stage) hence why I said you need deeper calculations
Openings seems easier because you can learn some variations, or be familiar with typical pawnstructures and get habits. If you play logiclally, just develop your pieces thought the center, there are a lot of good moves, or at least moves that are not so bad. In endgames, there is no mercy. If you are not good at calculating, playing actively and evaluate positions correctly, it will be seen imediatly. You can't hide yourself behind theory.
@@Jean-BaptistePOQUELIN On the other hand, endgames are already based on theories. Their results are mostly predetermined while openings can still be tricky and stronger players can get an advantage. For example, no matter how stronger my opponent is, if it is a theoretically known drawn endgame, then it will be a drawn endgame. Whilst in the opening, Just a minor tempo or a wrong order of move(even following the same structure) could get you in trouble
Hey, great video. as a 2100 lichess rated player, I've been drilling the 100 endgames you must know and yeah I feel like I am barely better at actual endgames, how do you suggest actually training them, especially for someone who plays aggressive openings and rarely reaches the endgame in my games ?
Practice them against a training partner, if possible Or practice them against yourself, and use an engine to ‘guide’ you (to make sure you’re not blundering/overlooking stuff) That’s the best way to do it, that’s a lot better than just reading, in my opinion
I would agree with this. Also if you say you rarely reach endgames, they might just not be of huge importance for you to study right now. For a lot of players when they reach an endgame it is already a decisive advantage for one side, as opposed to the endings shown in this video which were for the most part were only a pretty small advantage starting out for the eventual victor.
Depends what level you're at to begin with. For a lot of players they're not at a level where they really need that much direct work on their endgames. For improving endgame understanding, something like 'Endgame Strategy' by Shereshevsky is good. Practicing endgames vs training partners is also great if you can. I got a lot of my practice through actual playing experience OTB, which helped me a lot.
but there are many, many, helpful techniques in100EG that i've applied directly to endgames with more pawns or pieces. (Also I think de la Villa took most of his 100 endgames from DEM...)😂
I was standing there in St. Louis watching Niemann play Rosen. Hans says "You know how to beat an IM? You DRAGGG them into the endgame!". Hans dragged, Eric lost. True story, to the best of my recollection.
Hans still cheated multiple times and is a try hard man-child. At least Eric Rosen is well mannered and likeable.
@@90sK1dFOr3v3r Yea it was pretty obvious that Eric is the same irl as on stream. Just an all around good guy.
Best mindset for this is “there are no equal trades”
I think the benefit of studying theoretical endgames is to think about it mathematically. Once you know the simplest wins you can build an understanding up from there, learn your transitions, etc.
Architects have to study math too. Of course people don't typically start out as architects, but if you never learn the theory you can never be one. Certainly don't want to be a carpenter forever. So it's about balance I guess.
Another reason I was attracted to DEM is not only because I find the positions beautiful but also because it provides some innate structure to approaching endgames. A roadmap, so I feel I know where I'm going.
There are also different ways you can approach reading it, like first pass at low elo just learn the simplest ones and later passes do deeper positions as they become more relevant.
Anyway thats my opinion on the matter
Reading through some of the comments, I think it's clear that many people tend towards theoretical endgame manuals because it's concrete and it's all compiled in one source, so if someone wants to "get better at endgames" they'll be able to pick up one book and learn stuff.
Whereas my experience has been similar (it sounds like) to your own - I have gotten better at (practical) endgame play by 1) getting shown GM games with endgame technique by my coaches; 2) playing endgames, including training positions (some from my own games, some given from coach) and reviewing them afterwards. But that's really annoying to compile material in one place! It sounds like Sherevsky is the best one, but that's the main one I know of! Maybe next best is study the games of Karpov/Capablanca/etc.
Good stuff mate. I have the Dvoretsky book still in its plastic wrap with every intention to one of these days actually read it…
Silman's complete endgame course
Is the greatest endgame book
I've never read it actually, but yeah heard good things about it
It’s good
It’s a much better book for club level players than more advanced stuff, like Dvoretsky
@ifbfmto9338 yeah so like it's better for 99% of chess players
@@Thechesslad1Yes
But you can also argue, that Dvoretsky matters a lot more (it does) for the 1 percent of chess players that actually matter
Practical Chess Endings by Paul Keres is the best endgame book. Silman's book is disjointed. The simplest, for those with little time, is Chess Endings Essential Knowledge by Averbakh.
Among de la Villa's 100 endgames, there are some difficult positions like those you showed, sure. But if you are not at the master level, you don't have to take the book title literally. Feel free to leave some of the endgames for later stages of your chess development. You can easily recognize those by simply taking a broad look at how much text there is in a chapter. I'm a big fan of the book, but even I have so far skipped those fh-pawn rook endgames. The bishop endgame draw might not be likely to appear on the board but it's satisfyingly beautiful and as you said, not too difficult.
It's fair to argue that doing tactics training profits you most in short term, after you've learned KPk and Lucena and other basic stuff. You can get away with not knowing rest of the stuff. But the book is enjoyable to study, themes are so clearly selected and presented. And the content isn't entirely useless, either.
Yep I agree, certainly not all of them are too difficult, and many of them should be solidified in one's repertoire - but if we were to apply the 80/20 rule to endgame study, I think the practical element is probably moreso whats gets 80% of the results, and the theoretical ones the other 20%. Of course they can blend together at some point though.
The prologue of the book itself displays an approach with the 30 more important games to know before you attempt the whole thing. It is as much a motivation as a high quality curated selection to start of. That said I'd wish I had a starting point to approach practical endgames in an ordered manner, but I haven't found that yet, maybe Silmann's book is the one doing that task.
Loved this vid. Great real life examples. I enjoyed when you asked what would white do? I paused the vid and made my guesses. Just a very instructional video. Thanks Sam. More endgame vids please 💯💪👍
Never said what to study to get good at endgames if not DEM/100 EYMK!
Shereshevky's 'Endgame Strategy' is probably a good place to start. I picked up a lot studying players like Karpov (edit: and from getting beat up several times by stronger players in endgames)
Nice topic Sam 👍 I think at least basic end games you should know how to win or draw - rook pawn end games. I have messed up several rook end games where either I could have won or at least hold it.
Yep for sure, need some basic theoretical endgame knowledge
It's interesting to see the mindset of these players, I'm not particularly high rated (1740 DWZ), but I usually try to avoid endgames against higher rated players, unless I am very confident and have a clear and concrete plan on how to play it out. I know when I'm facing a lower rated opponent like 1400-1500 I want the game to be calm and chill where we get into an endgame where I can just grind slowly until they crack and win without any complications. The last thing I want is some crazy middle game position with all kinds of positional and material imbalances where I am highly likely to miss something and give my lower rated opponent a chance to win. And I figure that when I'm playing a higher rated opponent they are thinking the same. So if I'm playing someone 1900-2000+ I always always try to complicate, make the position as sharp as possible, sac pawns for activity, if it gets to the endgame I probably would have lost anyway so I just try to be active and cause as many problems as possible.
thank you! Highly instructive!
Endgames make me cry. Are endgames harder than openings? For me, yes. But for the master level too?
Openings require more variations to calculate while endgames require deeper calculation. Generally but not every time
@@TriedNot2Hate I think maybe in the endgame you have five moves and only one good one. But in the opening you have five good moves.
@@walterbrownstone8017 We have exactly the same point.
1. In the opening, there are a lot of good moves. You have to calculate all possible variations they could play.
2. In the endgame, There are not a lot of variations but you should be able to determine the result (especially before entering this game stage) hence why I said you need deeper calculations
Openings seems easier because you can learn some variations, or be familiar with typical pawnstructures and get habits.
If you play logiclally, just develop your pieces thought the center, there are a lot of good moves, or at least moves that are not so bad.
In endgames, there is no mercy. If you are not good at calculating, playing actively and evaluate positions correctly, it will be seen imediatly.
You can't hide yourself behind theory.
@@Jean-BaptistePOQUELIN On the other hand, endgames are already based on theories. Their results are mostly predetermined while openings can still be tricky and stronger players can get an advantage.
For example, no matter how stronger my opponent is, if it is a theoretically known drawn endgame, then it will be a drawn endgame. Whilst in the opening, Just a minor tempo or a wrong order of move(even following the same structure) could get you in trouble
Nice example, I blundered with kg2 as well lol
Hey, great video. as a 2100 lichess rated player, I've been drilling the 100 endgames you must know and yeah I feel like I am barely better at actual endgames, how do you suggest actually training them, especially for someone who plays aggressive openings and rarely reaches the endgame in my games ?
Practice them against a training partner, if possible
Or practice them against yourself, and use an engine to ‘guide’ you (to make sure you’re not blundering/overlooking stuff)
That’s the best way to do it, that’s a lot better than just reading, in my opinion
I would agree with this. Also if you say you rarely reach endgames, they might just not be of huge importance for you to study right now. For a lot of players when they reach an endgame it is already a decisive advantage for one side, as opposed to the endings shown in this video which were for the most part were only a pretty small advantage starting out for the eventual victor.
So, when those endgame books are being dismissed, what is the best approach to study endgames?
Depends what level you're at to begin with. For a lot of players they're not at a level where they really need that much direct work on their endgames. For improving endgame understanding, something like 'Endgame Strategy' by Shereshevsky is good. Practicing endgames vs training partners is also great if you can. I got a lot of my practice through actual playing experience OTB, which helped me a lot.
but there are many, many, helpful techniques in100EG that i've applied directly to endgames with more pawns or pieces. (Also I think de la Villa took most of his 100 endgames from DEM...)😂
Whats your top opening recommendations for black
I mainly have played Caro vs 1.e4, and Nimzo/Ragozin vs 1.d4
Chess is scary.
Chess is hard
And it gets more and more difficult to incrementally improve, the higher your rating gets
Sometimes
Chess is hard!!
Thanks for that!
your voice reminds me of thoughty2
Amazing!
What is this accent?
Seems like a mix of Japanese and Australian English