Dvoretsky's Endgame Manual

Product Information

In the final position, it’s very important that White’s king is on d7. This is why 1 Bd1? c5! would have been a mistake, since the king can’t get to d7. And 1 Bc2? f2 2 Bd3 Kf3! (2...e4? 3 Be2=) 3 K×c6 e4 4 Bf1 e3 5 c5 e2-+ is also hopeless. Finally, there is no better way to close than quoting grandmaster Artur Yusupov, considered by many to be Dvoretsky’s most successful student: I am sure that those who study this work carefully will not only play the endgame better, but overall their play will improve. One of the secrets of the Russian chess school is now before you, dear reader! You might ask how this compares to Karsten Mueller's equally seminal DVD series on the endgame. Frankly they may purport to teach the same things, but they are quite different. One is essentially a book after all, with all the examples and texts you would expect, while the other is a series of video lectures that are incredibly friendly to digest, but not nearly as exhaustive as this work. Even if you already own Muller's DVDs, this work will complement and supplement them perfectly. Dvoretsky's Endgame Manual is quite simply a masterpiece of research and insight. It is a tremendous contribution to endgame literature, certainly the most important one in many years, and destined to be a classic of the literature (if it isn't already one). The famous trainer Mark Dvoretsky has put together a vast number of examples that he has not only collected, but analysed and tested with some of the world's strongest players. This is a particularly important book from the standpoint of clarifying, correcting, and extending the theory of endings. Most of all, Dvoretsky's analysis is staggering in its depth and accuracy." -- John Watson, reviewing DEM at The Week In Chess Of course, it does not often happen that a precise position from the book appears on the board. But your endgame technique is certain to improve, as well as your defensive abilities. The fact is, if you know which theoretical endings you should enter and which you should not, depending on the result you are trying to achieve, this is a tremendous help in making the correct decisions in many other endgames not covered here.

With the untimely passing of the great Russian trainer and author Mark Dvoretsky, the question of how his Endgame Manual should be continued was raised. The book has been recognized worldwide as one of the classics of chess literature.Note that these paired squares we have found are not corresponding squares, since no zugzwangs exist; but our calculations now allow us to begin the search and analysis of correspondences. Note that the game position is not new - in 1979, C. Costantini composed it as a study. Of course, GM Gulko didn’t know it - but he was acquainted with the idea of corresponding squares and was able to put the method successfully into practice. Exercises IM John Watson has a fantastic review of Dvoretsky's work which I recommend you read before committing either way. Kf4? Ke7! (it will become clear later why the king goes to this square, and not to f7) 2 Kf5 Kf7 3 e4 (3 Kf4 Ke6 4 Ke4 h4 5 Kf4 Kd5!-+) 3...h4! 4 Kg4 Ke6 5 K×h4 Ke5-+.

Dvoretsky's Endgame Manual ... may well be the chess book of the year... [It] comes close to an ultimate one-volume manual on the endgame." -- Lubomir Kavalek in his chess column of December 1, 2003 in the Washington Post. Dvoretsky's Endgame Manual ... may well be the chess book of the year … [It] comes close to an ultimate one-volume manual on the endgame." - Lubomir Kavalek in his chess column of December 1, 2003 in the Washington Post Dvoretsky’s Endgame Manual ... may well be the chess book of the year … [It] comes close to an ultimate one-volume manual on the endgame.” – Lubomir Kavalek in his chess column of December 1, 2003 in the Washington Post Who should have one this ending. How should I have played this one. What piece material does it take to win certain endings are all answered once you get the hang of his writing. The New York tournament of 1924 was a major success for Emanuel Lasker. He outscored a galaxy of chess stars, including World Champion José Raúl Capablanca and future champion Alexander Alekhine.

Discuss

Firstly, the notes are definitely not laconic, after all, this is a manual, not a handbook. In a handbook, a solution of a position is all one needs; in a manual, it should be explained how one can discover the correct solution, which ideas are involved. There is nothing wrong with this analysis, just to be clear. However, in the comments above Dvoretsky analyzes one line (completely correctly) and concludes "is also strong". Want some peace of mind on that conclusion?