1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 e6 3. g3 d5 4. Nf3 Bb4+ 5. Bd2 Be7 6. b3 O-O 7. Bf4 Nh5 8. Bc1 dxc4 9. bxc4 c5 10. e3 Nc6 11. Bb2 cxd4 12. exd4 Nf6 13. Bg2 Bb4+ 14. Nc3 Ne4 15. Rc1 Qa5 16. Qb3 Nxc3 17. Bxc3 Bxc3+ 18. Qxc3 Qxc3+ 19. Rxc3 Rd8 20. Rb3 Nxd4 21. Nxd4 Rxd4 22. Bxb7 Bxb7 23. Rxb7 Rxc4 24. O-O Ra4 25. Rfb1 g5 26. R1b2 Kg7 27. Rc7 a6 28. Rbb7 Rf8 29. Rb6 Kg6 30. Ra7 Rxa2 31. Rbxa6 Rxa6 32. Rxa6 h5 33. h3 Rb8 34. Kf1 Rb4 35. Ke2 h4 36. gxh4 Rxh4 37. Ra3 e5 38. Kf1 Rb4 39. Kg2 Rb2!

Black must prevent f3. “Once the [defending side's] Pawn is at KB3 with any normally active Rook position, [the attacking side] has no real winning chances at all”, Reuben Fine (1941). Now 39... Rb2 40. Kg3 f5 41. f3?? f4+ 42. Kg4 Rg2# is disastrous, and more seriously it is not easy for White to prepare the advance in other ways.

40. Re3?

White needs to act quickly to exchange a pair of pawns, or otherwise avoid the Capablanca - Yates position. Here 40. Ra4! draws, e.g. 40... f5 (40... Kf5 41. Kg3 e4 42. f3!) 41. Ra6+ Kh5 42. Rf6 f4 43. Re6 Re2 44. Kf3=.

40... f6 41. Kg3 Rd2 42. Kg2 Kf5 43. Rf3+ Ke6 44. Ra3 e4 45. Ra6+ Kf5 46. Ra5+ Kf4 47. Ra4 f5

Duras - Capablanca, Rice C.C. Masters, New York 1913 reached the same position and finished 59. Rb4 Ke5 60. Rb5+ Rd5 61. Rb8 f4 62. Rg8 Kd4 63. Kf1 Kd3 64. Ra8 e3? (‘!!’ Fine, but this throws away the win. It was discovered much later that 64... f3! wins, though there are many difficulties against the best defence) 65. Ra3+? (65. Re8! draws (Kopaev)) 65... Ke4 66. fxe3 f3 67. Kg1 Rd3 68. Ra8 Kxe3 69. Re8+ Kf4 70. Rg8 Rd1+ 71. Kf2 Rd2+ 72. Kf1 Rh2 73. Kg1 Rxh3 74. Rg7 g4 75. Rg8 Kg3 0-1.

This ending has been extensively studied, based on the classic game Capablanca - Yates, Hastings 1930-31 (#), and is winning. “The winning plan is a rook transfer to the eighth rank followed by f4-f5-f6+. If the Black rook takes aim at the e5-pawn, White defends it with the rook from e8.” Dvoretsky (2008). This makes the ending seem much more straightforward than it is; see references to Poghosyan's analysis in the Note.

Capablanca - Yates continued 61. Rb6 Re3 62. Rb4 Rc3 63. Kf2? Ra3? (63... h5!= (Dvoretsky)) 64. Rb7 Kg8 65. Rb8+ Kg7 66. f5 Ra2+ 67. Ke3 Ra3+ 68. Ke4 Ra4+ 69. Kd5 Ra5+ 70. Kd6 Ra6+ 71. Kc7 Kh7 72. Kd7 Ra7+ 73. Kd6 Kg7 74. Rd8 Ra5 75. f6+ Kh7 76. Rf8 Ra7 77. Kc6 Kg6 78. Rg8+ Kh7 79. Rg7+ Kh8 80. Kb6 Rd7 81. Kc5 Rc7+ 82. Kd6 Ra7 83. e6 Ra6+ 84. Ke7 Rxe6+ 85. Kxf7 Re4 86. g5 hxg5 87. Kg6 1-0

48. Rb4 Rd5 49. Ra4 Ke5 50. Kg3 Rd3+ 51. Kg2 f4 52. Ra5+ Rd5 53. Ra3 Kf5 54. Ra2 Rd1 55. Ra5+ Kg6 56. Ra6+ Kh5 57. Ra2 Re1 58. Ra3 Re2 59. Kf1 f3 60. Ra5 Rb2 61. Ke1 Rb1+ 62. Kd2 Rf1 63. Ke3 Re1+ 64. Kd4 e3 65. Ra2 e2

0-1

Source(s): Lichess (https://lichess.org/study/UzPcthIy/i6yHxSnZ).

Reference(s): Reuben Fine, Basic Chess Endings (David McKay Co., 1941), pp. 373-76; Mark Dvoretsky, Dvoretsky's Endgame Manual, second edition (Russell Enterprises, Inc., 2008), pp. 180-81.

Event information: Tournament report.

Note: Vardan Poghosyan provided deep analysis of this ending, correcting several previous misapprehensions, in Capablanca-Yates (Hastings 1930) and Duras-Capablanca (1913) revisited, ChessPub Forum, May 12, 2012–April 16, 2014 and January 9–April 8, 2013 respectively. His analysis of rook endings for the fourth edition of Dvoretsky's Endgame Manual was acknowledged in the introduction to the fifth edition.

Note: Photo of game in progress, via Sligo C.C. web site.