This week I had a few interesting games that I played in a small 5-round open tournament. Instead of writing my analysis here, this time I have a new video on my channel looking at my games from that event:
Rochester Chess Club Blog
Welcome to the official Community Chess Club of Rochester (CCCR) blog which includes chess news and event information. The Rochester Chess Center is a separate USCF affiliate. You are encouraged to visit the Rochester Chess Center where both affiliates run a variety of excellent tournaments. Both chess clubs work together to promote chess. Tournament announcements will be posted here. Contact us at 585-442-2430. Our Address is: 221 Norris Drive, Rochester New York 14610. Thanks for visiting!
Monday, June 9, 2025
Monday, May 26, 2025
Lessons from my games - converting winning positions
"The hardest game to win is a won game."
- Emanuel Lasker
This quote exists for good reason. Almost every chess player has undoubtedly had those painful experiences of being completely winning, knowing that you are completely winning, but then somehow failing to actually win the game - or even worse, losing! In fact, this is a universal struggle, no matter what your rating is. As it turns out, even though it sounds like it should be easy, converting winning positions can be very challenging - both because chess is a hard game, and also for psychological reasons.
In what is a long overdue post, I will try to share some wisdom and practical advice, giving many examples from my own games so we can learn from not just my own mistakes, but those of my opponents as well.
And you have been warned - since this is an important topic, this will be an extra-long post!
Let's start with some basics - the way I think about it, there are a few different types of "winning" positions:
- Positions you can win very easily, practically in your sleep, against any player no matter how strong they are. I'm talking about the completely trivial situations where you are up an overwhelming amount of material (as in, you've taken all your opponent's pieces) with absolutely zero counterplay, or you are, for example, mating with queen and king versus king, or you have a theoretical king and pawn endgame or Lucena position that you know stone cold is winning, and you know exactly how to win it.
For example:A very easily winning position
As long as you have just a basic understanding of king and pawn endgames (which hopefully the majority of readers do), you can win this position with 5 seconds on your clock (plus some increment or time delay) against anyone, even an engine. There's basically no calculation required. - Positions where you know that you have a decisive material advantage, but there is still some "technique" left to do.
These types of positions will range in difficulty, depending on how much of a material advantage you have and how simplified or imbalanced the position is.
An easier example:A little technique still needed, but fairly easy
Here white is simply up a bishop for only one pawn, and there's not much else going on. White still has to show some technique - i.e., not carelessly letting black's rook take all of your pawns. But winning this should not be too difficult.
A somewhat harder example:Some more technique needed, please
You can look at this position and see that white has a queen for a rook and knight, and even an extra pawn too, and conclude that this surely must be (easily?) winning. And you would be correct - this is a winning position. And you would think that it should be easy. But you might be surprised to know that I actually failed to convert this against someone 300 points lower rated! More on that game later.
But, however easy you think this position with the Q+P vs. R+N should be, you probably can appreciate that it isn't quite as simple as the previous example where we just had an extra bishop with more limited material. And I think it is good to be aware of exactly why it is not quite as straightforward:
(a) Material is not as simplified - i.e., not as many pieces have been traded off
(b) There is more of an imbalance
The following position can be even trickier:Those queenside pawns surely will never be dangerous ... right?
Black is up a "clean" exchange for no pawns, but the structural imbalance makes this not completely trivial. This is exactly the kind of position where if you get sloppy, strange things can happen. And in fact, this position came from a blitz game I had against another player 300 points lower rated, where I even managed to lose this as black!
Rule #1: In general, the more simplified and less imbalanced a winning position is, the easier it is to convert.
That may sound obvious to some, but we forget this rule more often than we realize, which can lead to horrible mistakes. - The third type of winning position is a little more advanced. These are the positions where you know you have some decisive positional advantage, but you are not up any material.
Here's a prime example, also from one of my own games (white against a 2000 player in a rapid time control):White has a dominating position, but it still has to be converted
White has a decisive advantage, despite not being up any material. (I think this should be clear to anyone over 2200, but if you are not convinced, you can check with an engine to confirm this is between +2 and +3.) Now, I am a strong enough player that during the game, I understood I was winning here. However, just understanding that doesn't automatically give you the full point. White needs to act with some urgency here to win material before black eventually organizes his pieces to better squares.
A strong move here is 24.e5!, aiming to trap the Nh5 next move with g3-g4 and hitting the c6 pawn. Of course I saw that idea, but I didn't want to calculate the ramifications of 24. ... f6!? or even 24. ... g5!?, when I thought there may be some tricks against my loose minor pieces on the e-file or my Rd6 and Kh2 being on the same diagonal. However, accurate calculation will establish that white is maintaining control and close to winning material after 24. ... f6 25.Nc5! or 24. ... g5 25.Nbd4! (although I wouldn't say it is completely trivial).
Instead, I played the prophylactic 24.Kg1?! and after 24. ... Rc7 25.e5 Bf8 made the further mistake 26.R6d2? when suddenly after 26. ... Rac8! black was well on his way to generating some activity with ...c5-c4, and the game became unclear. Later I was even losing before eventually winning on time. (Instead of 26.R6d2?, white keeps a decisive advantage with 26.g4! Nhg7 27.Ng3! +- offering the exchange to prevent black from organizing ...c5-c4. But I did not sense the urgency in preventing black from activating his pieces.)
In this situation, I find it helpful again to clearly put into words why white was winning here. It's not an advantage in material, nor is black's king permanently weak. No, it's because white had an overwhelming advantage in piece activity. But this is, strictly speaking, not a permanent feature like being up a bishop, which is the important distinction between Type 3 and Type 2 winning positions. More on this later.
Paciorkowski-Smith, Albany 2018 |
This came from the final round of the 2018 New York State Championship, and my opponent is a strong player - a grandmaster - who I knew would not go down without a fight. I would describe this as a Type 2 position which is not that easily winning. How did this game go? Well, I converted this without giving my opponent a single chance to save the game, despite his very stubborn defense.
Paciorkowski-Kharroubi, Rochester 2021 |
"How can that have happened?", you might wonder. Well, against Smith, I was not relaxed at all; rather, I calculated variations almost every single move to make 100% sure I was controlling all of black's possible counterplay. I never assumed I would "just win" until he stopped the clock and shook hands.
Paciorkowski-Kharroubi, Rochester 2021 |
Incredibly, black has a fortress, and I had to acquiesce to a draw eventually. This debacle was entirely psychological! Had I not relaxed, and instead calculated variations with the same rigor and precision as I had against Smith, my game against Kharroubi almost certainly would have gone differently.
Stolyarov-Paciorkowski, New York 2022 (white to move) |
This was a 25-minute game (I was black), and my opponent is rated around 1950. It doesn't really matter what happened earlier in the game, but white is winning here. And I mean really winning, with an extra rook and no obvious threats against the king on g1 (engine gives about +6!). However, despite the huge material advantage, this still counts as a decidedly tricky Type 2 position. You will not be able to win this without calculating, as black still has many dangerous ideas to try and attack the king (i.e., counterplay). And you'd better believe that I will throw the kitchen sink at the king on g1, pulling every trick I know of trying not to lose. Black's attacking ideas ultimately do not work, but you must calculate variations to find the proper defenses.
Black now has a perpetual (although I still wanted to win this game). I continued with the last-ditch attempt 44. ... a3!? and after 45.c7?? (45.bxa3 and I would have had no choice but to make perpetual check) 45. ... axb2 black is suddenly winning. 46.Rb3 b1=Q+ 47.Rxb1 Qxf3+ 48.Kd2 Qd3+ 49.Ke1 Qxb1+ 50.Ke2 Qd3+ 51.Ke1 Bg4 0-1 and white had to resign.
Nikolayev-Paciorkowski, Rochester 2013 (white to move) |
I played this game (as black) when I was 14 years old, with a rating around 1800. My opponent is a strong FM who out-rated me by about 600 points. Somehow, I had managed to outplay him earlier and reached what I knew should be a completely winning endgame (although I had missed multiple knockouts earlier), up an exchange and several pawns.
- You have a clearly overwhelming material advantage with absolutely zero counterplay (i.e., you captured all your opponent's pieces), or you have a theoretical endgame position which you 100% know how to win.
- You have a decisive material advantage, but it's not so simple that you can just win it with your eyes closed. Your opponent still has some pieces which could create counterplay.
- You have a decisive non-material advantage which is often temporary in nature (e.g., more active pieces or a safer king).
Black to move |
Although material is equal, black has a decisive advantage because of white's passive pieces and weak king. We should feel some sense of urgency to win material, but we also do not want to settle for too little. In the game, black found a way to win a pawn: 28. ... Rxd4? 29.Bxd4 Qc2+ 30.Kf1 Qxb3 31.Qh3! suddenly white's pieces have new life, with a strong bishop on d4 and the queen ready to invade on d7.
- In general, the more simplified and less imbalanced a winning position is, the easier it is to convert.
- Unless you have a Type 1 winning position, never expect to win without having to calculate "potential" counterplay, which will invariably be connected with either creating/promoting passed pawns or attacking your king.
- Good time management is a necessary part of conversion technique.
- Don't beat yourself up too hard for failing to convert in fast time controls.
- Forget about your opponent's rating; focus only on the position in front of you.
- Your goal is always to convert a winning position to one of "lower type".
- Feel some sense of urgency in Type 3 positions, but at the same time, do not "cash in" too early.
- Do not hurry in Type 2 positions, and prioritize calculating variations to limit your opponent's counterplay.
- Improving your knowledge of theoretical endgames will expand the range of positions that are "Type 1" to you.
- In Type 2 positions with reduced material, look out for unexpected fortresses or stalemate tricks.
Monday, May 19, 2025
Endgame Corner 2: R vs. B with 1 pawn each
Welcome to the second edition of Endgame Corner, where we will be taking a deep dive into a different fundamental theoretical endgame each week. As with last week, our goals are to:
- Learn key positions for each endgame, and their evaluations
- Know which fortresses can be constructed by the defending side, and how to break any apparent fortresses.
Position 1 (white to move) |
This is a very easy draw to hold. Black can just sit and do nothing, moving the bishop back and forth along the a2-e6 diagonal. White can never force a mating net, nor be able to force the promotion of the h-pawn. The only thing black should be mindful of is not to carelessly allow white to achieve a pawn on h7 + king on h6 (which you already have to be quite cooperative for), but even then, as long as you can meet Kh6 with moving the bishop to the b1-h7 diagonal, the h7 pawn will be lost.
Position 2 (white to move) |
All black needs to do is not to allow the white king to touch the g6 pawn. The bishop can control f6 and g5 when needed, and f5 and h5 are covered by the pawn itself. This means that black must maintain control of f7 using the king. So after 1.Rc7+ Kg8! (or 1. ... Kf8) 2.Kd5 Bf6 3.Ke4 Bg7 4.Kf4 Bf6! black can always make sure that the white king is not allowed to directly attack the g6 pawn.
Position 3 (white to move) |