A pawnless chess endgame is a chess endgame in which only a few pieces remain, and no pawns. The basic checkmates are types of pawnless endgames. Endgames without pawns do not occur very often in practice except for the basic checkmates of king and queen versus king, king and rook versus king, and queen versus rook. Other cases that occur occasionally are (1) a rook and versus a rook and (2) a rook versus a minor piece, especially if the minor piece is a bishop.
The study of some pawnless endgames goes back centuries by players such as François-André Danican Philidor (1726–1795) and Domenico Lorenzo Ponziani (1719–1796). On the other hand, many of the details and recent results are due to the construction of endgame tablebases. Grandmaster John Nunn wrote a book (Secrets of Pawnless Endings) summarizing the research of endgame tablebases for several types of pawnless endings.
The assessment of endgame positions assumes optimal play by both sides. In some cases, one side of these endgames can ; in other cases, the game is a draw (i.e. a ).
Terminology Major pieces are queens and rooks. Minor pieces are knights and bishops. A rank is a row of squares on the chessboard. A file is a column of squares on the board. If a player has two bishops, they are assumed to be on opposite colors unless stated otherwise.
When the number of moves to win is specified, optimal play by both sides is assumed. The number of moves given to win is until either checkmate or the position is converted to a simpler position that is known to be a win. For example, with a queen versus a rook, that would be until either checkmate or the rook is , resulting in a position that leads to an elementary checkmate.
Basic checkmates
Checkmate can be forced against a lone king with a king plus (1) a queen, (2) a rook, (3) two bishops, or (4) a bishop and a knight. Checkmate is possible with two knights, but it cannot be forced.
Queen versus rook
A queen wins against a lone rook, unless there is an immediate draw by stalemate or due to perpetual check (or if the rook or king can immediately capture the queen). In 1895, Edward Freeborough edited an entire 130-page book of analysis of this endgame, titled The Chess Ending, King & Queen against King & Rook. Normally, the winning process involves first winning the rook with the queen via a fork and then checkmating with the king and queen, but forced checkmates with the rook still on the board are possible in some positions or against incorrect defense. With perfect play, in the worst winning position, the queen can win the rook or checkmate within 31 moves.
The third-rank defense is when the rook is on the third or from the edge of the board, his king is closer to the edge and the enemy king is on the other side (see the diagram). This defense is difficult for a human to defeat. For example, the winning move in the position shown is the counterintuitive withdrawal of the queen from the seventh rank to a more central location: 1. Qf4 From here the queen can make checking maneuvers to win the rook with a fork if the rook moves along the third rank. If the black king emerges from the back rank, 1... Kd7 then 2. Qa4+ Kc7 3. Qa7+ forces Black into a second-rank defense (defending king on an edge of the board and the rook on the adjacent rank or file) after 3... Rb7 when this position is a standard win, as White heads for the Philidor position with a queen versus rook (see the next section). A possible continuation: 4.Qc5+ Kb8 5.Kd6 Rg7 6.Qe5 Rc7 7.Qf4 Kc8 8.Qf5+ Kb8 9.Qe5 Rb7 10.Kc6+ Ka8 11.Qd5 Kb8 12.Qa5 [Philidor—mate in 7].
Philidor position
The Philidor position is a queen vs rook position.
If Black is to move in this position, he quickly loses his rook by a fork (or gets checkmated). For example,
1... Rb1 2. Qd8+ Ka7 3. Qd4+ Ka8 4. Qh8+ Ka7 5. Qh7+ thus forking the rook on b1.
If, on the other hand, White is to move in this position, he would like to be in this position except with Black to move. This can be accomplished by triangulation:
1. Qe5+ Ka8 2. Qa1+ Kb8 3. Qa5 and now it is back to the same arrangement, but Black has to move and is in zugzwang. Nunn describes that with the pieces in the center of the board the queen ought to force the rook towards the Philidor position. Nunn describes the various retreat positions for the rook, the "fourth, third, second" rank defenses, then the "Philidor position". It is usually easy for White to force Black into the Philidor position. When it is Black's turn to play in the Philidor position, the rook can be won in a few moves.
Example from game
In this 2001 game Gelfand vs. Svidler between Boris Gelfand and Peter Svidler,ChessBase and ChessGames.com give Gelfand as White but Makarov gives Svidler as White. Makarov also makes a White/Black error in discussing the game. the player with the queen should win, but the game was drawn because of the fifty-move rule after Black was unable to find the winning maneuvers to fork and capture the rook.
The same position but with colors reversed occurred in a 2006 game between Alexander Morozevich and Dmitry Jakovenko – it was also drawn.Morozevich vs. Jakovenko At the end of that game, the rook became a desperado, and the game ended in stalemate after the rook was captured (otherwise, the game would have eventually been a draw by threefold repetition).
Browne versus Belle The queen versus rook endgame was one of the first endgames completely solved by computers constructing an endgame tablebase. A challenge was issued to Grandmaster Walter Browne in 1978 where Browne would have the queen in a difficult position, defended by Belle using the queen versus rook tablebase. Browne could have won the rook or checkmated in 31 moves with perfect play. After 45 moves, Browne realized that he would not be able to win within 50 moves, according to the fifty-move rule.Browne vs Belle, game 1 Browne studied the endgame and, later in the month, played another game from a different starting position. This time, he won by capturing the rook on the 50th move.Browne vs Belle, game 2 + Browne versus Belle
Queen versus two minor pieces Defensive fortresses exist for any of the two minor pieces versus the queen. However, except in the case of two knights, the fortress usually cannot be reached against optimal play. (See fortress for more details about these endings.)
: A queen normally wins against a bishop and knight, but there is one drawing fortress position forming a barrier against the enemy king's approach. In general, whether a position in this endgame is drawn boils down to whether the defender can reach Karstedt's fortress. Another position given by Ponziani in 1782 is more artificial: the queen's king is confined in a corner by the bishop and knight, which are protected by their king. : A queen has a theoretical forced win against two bishops in most positions, but the win may require up to seventy-one moves (a draw can be claimed after fifty moves under the fifty-move rule); there is one drawing fortress position for the two bishops. Lolli's draw (the only fortress in Q vs BB) requires more care for the defender than Karstedt's draw in Q vs BN; the defender must avoid getting a bishop pinned. This ending was thought to be a draw before the advent of endgame tablebases. With that said, the win is quite complicated. : Two knights can generally draw against a queen if the king is near its knights and they are in a reasonable position by setting up a fortress. The best defense is for the knights to be side by side, with their king placed between them and the enemy king (Lolli's defense). The next-best arrangement of the knights is for them to be diagonally adjacent. The third and riskiest defense is for the knights to be protecting each other. If the knights are cut off from their king, the defender is usually doomed, except in certain unusual positions where the knights trap the enemy king in the corner.
Common pawnless endings (rook and minor pieces) John Nunn lists these types of pawnless endgames as being common: (1) a rook versus a minor piece and (2) a rook and a minor piece versus a rook.
: This is usually a draw. The main exception is when the defending king is trapped in a corner that is of the same color square as his bishop (see ). If the defending king is trapped in a corner that is the opposite color as his bishop, he draws (see ). See the game of Veselin Topalov versus Judit Polgar, where Topalov defended and drew the game to clinch a win of their 2008 Dos Hermanas match.Topalov vs. Polgar In general, the attacker can force stalemate but not checkmate. : This is usually a draw. There are two main exceptions: the knight is separated from the king and may be trapped and won or the king and knight are poorly placed.This ending was the subject of the oldest documented endgame study, by al-Aldi in the 9th century AD. Studies from this period involving other pieces are no longer valid because the rules have changed. Hawkins, Jonathan, Amateur to IM, 2012, p. 179, Kamsky versus Bacrot, 2006 is an example of a rook versus knight ending which resulted in a win. In this game, Black underpromoted a pawn to a knight to avoid a checkmate and eventually lost the game after allowing his knight to be separated from the king. : This is one of the most common pawnless endgames and is usually a theoretical draw. However, the rook and bishop have good winning chances in practice because the defense is difficult. There are some winning positions such as the Philidor position, which occurs relatively often. There are two main defensive methods: The Cochrane Defense and the "second rank defense". Forced wins require up to 59 moves. As a result, FIDE extended the fifty-move rule to 100 moves and then to 75 moves for this endgame, before returning to 50 moves. See rook and bishop versus rook endgame for more information. : This is usually a simple draw with few winning positions. The winning positions require the defending king to be badly placed near a corner; this can not be forced in general. The Cochrane Defense can be used.Incidentally, the longest decisive game (210 moves) between masters under standard time controls ended with this material, see Neverov vs. Bogdanovich. Andy Soltis, "Chess to Enjoy", Chess Life, p. 12, Dec. 2013, and chessbase article: "210-move drama in Kiev".
+ Rook versus knight
+ Rook and bishop versus rook
+ Rook and knight versus rook
Miscellaneous pawnless endings Other types of pawnless endings have been studied. Of course, there are positions that are exceptions to these general rules stated below.
The fifty-move rule is not taken into account, and it would often be applicable in practice. When one side has two bishops, they are assumed to be on opposite colored squares, unless otherwise stated. When each side has one bishop, the result often depends on whether or not the bishops are on the same color, so their colors will always be stated.
Queens only
: usually a draw, but the side to move first wins in 41.75% of the positions. There are some wins when one queen is in the corner, e.g. as a result of promoting a rook pawn or bishop pawn. : Almost always a win. A cross-check may be necessary, see for an example. A draw is possible in a few exceptional positions if the weaker side has an immediate perpetual check, e.g. with a white king on a1 and white queens on a2 and b1, the black king on e8, and the black queen giving check on d4. Black has an unlimited supply of checks on d4, a4, and d1, and the white king cannot escape the corner. : The first to move wins in 83% of the positions (see the Comte vs. Le Roy diagram for an example). Wins require up to 44 moves."In a battle where both sides have two queens and nothing else, the player who begins with check can win because the queens are of overpowering strength against a naked king." .
Major pieces only
: see above.