Paul Keres, (1916-1975). Estonian and Soviet Grandmaster. World Championship Candidate. After World War II, Keres became a Soviet citizen due to Estonia being returned to the USSR. He won the Soviet Championship three times: 1947, 1950 and 1951 and was runner up in the Candidate tournaments of 1953, 1956 and 1962. In the 1955 Soviet Championship Keres was not in his best form, just finishing behind Geller, Smyslov, Botvinnik, Petrosian and Spassky but he did produce this fine ending shown below. The 1955 championship is chiefly remembered as the passing of the Botvinnik era as it was the last time he would play in the Championship.

Keres' own book on the Endgame: Practical Chess Endings (1974), offers good study material for any serious student of the game.

Here we have an exception to those rules of thumb which are supposed to help and guide us through the difficult game of chess. A quick glance might indicate that White has the better ending with his centrally placed Bishop and the Black Knight is rather "grim at the rim " of the board. but it is an illusion. In most endings the final result often depends on the quality of the pawns in respect to the placing of the pieces. Here the Black pawns are stronger than their counterparts. The White pawn at "a4" is blocked by the Knight which also attacks the enemy pawn at "c4" tying down the White King to defence. The passed pawn at "f5" is weak and will soon fall whereas the Black passed pawn at "b4" and the potential passed pawn on the h-file will decide the result in Black's favour. The White Bishop will find itself "overloaded" as it tries to defend both the advanced f-pawn and tackle the enemy h-pawn

7.Ke3 Nxf7 8.a5 Nd6 9.a6 Nc8 10.Be4 Kd6 11.Bc2 (if 11.Bf5 Kc7 12.Bc2 Nd6 13.Bb3 Nf5+ 14.Kf2 Kb6-+) 11...Kc6 12.Kf4 Kb6 13.Kg4 Nd6 14.Bb3 Kxa6 15.Kxh4 Ne4 16.Kg4 Nd2-+

(a) Basic Endings. These are theoretical positions in which we know the correct result with optimum play by both sides. They may consist of three pawns or less and also include all the non-pawn and five piece endings which have now been extensively analysed by computer and of which we have tablebases. In the days when we had adjournments some of these endings could be looked up in text books to give us some idea how to play the position. As we no longer can do this, knowledge and memory of these endings has become important in practical play. Fundamental Chess Endings (2001) by Muller and Lamprecht and Basic Endings (1992) by Balashov and Prandstetter and the earlier A Pocket Guide to Chess Endgames (1970) by David Hooper are good introductions to these endings.

(b) Practical Endings. These occur in over-the-board play where usually more pawns are present. The above ending is an example of this type. Some of these endings are in the process of being transformed to basic endings but often they finish before this stage is reached. Endgame strategy is very different from the middlegame and has its own set of rules and exceptions. Fine's book Basic Chess Endings (1941,2003) recently revised by Pal Benko and Batsford Chess Endings (1993) by Speelman, Tisdall and Wade are about basic and practical endings and both can be recommended.

(c) Endgame Studies. These are positions which have been composed and will contain elements of one or both of the above types of endings. But there are important differences between these types and the study, such as artistic form and economy of construction. An endgame study has to follow strict rules of composition, especially if it is entered into a composing competition. One of these rules states there should only be one solution. If there is an unintended second solution then the study is unsound and said to be "cooked".