UNDERPROMOTION IN GAMES

In 1912, in The Theory of Pawn Promotion, Alain White wrote that he had 'never heard of a game where victory was won by a promotion to Rook or Bishop'. In 1936 the great endgame connoisseur Harold Lommer wrote something to that effect too. In my own Chess Curiosities (1985) I mentioned the 'extreme rareness of such promotions', and quoted 12 examples from all of chess history, including trivial ones. Ten years later Harold van der Heijden, in his Pawn Promotion, extended the list to 27. We had entered the database era - he had used a 400,000 game one. Over the following two years, in the magazine EBUR, he showed some 15 new cases. My turn again - in the meantime the databases have grown to almost 2,000,000 games, and if I used the same criteria as in 1985, I could show over 60 examples now.

It's beginning to spoil the fun. We shouldn't know that much. Sometimes, letting my computer hunt in the databases, I feel like a peeping Tom of chess history - as if I were reading a loved one's secret diary.

But even now, Alain White's question pops up in the newsgroups: has ever a game been won by a promotion to Rook or Bishop? Why, yes - maybe it's time to rephrase his remark: has ever a game been drawn by a promotion to Rook or Bishop? Not that I know of, but it could happen - it doesn't take more than 5 minutes to set up a crude idea that might occur in a game. In the diagram on the left, White must promote. 1.g8N and g8R allow Qe5 mate, and 1.g8Q+ K- 2.Qxb8 Qxb8+ is a simple win for Black. But after 1.g8B+ Black must make a King move and White is stalemate.

Or take the following two examples from endgame studies. Neither are the initial positions; I just want to show the ideas, which are imaginable in games.







White to play

F. Lazard, 1935 1.d8R! If 1.d8Q, then Bf4 2.Qd2+ Kf3 3.Qxf4+ Kxf4 and Black wins. 1...Bf4 (Bxh2 2.Rd3+!) 2.Rd2 and Black's King cannot move without causing stalemate, e.g. 2...Bg5 3.Rd5 Kf4 4.Rd2 Bh6 5.Rd6 Kg5 6.Rd2 etc.







White to play

V. Vlasenko, 1967 If 1.h8Q, then Nf6 or Nc5 followed by Nd7 mate. And if 1.h8N Ng5! 2.Nf7+ Nxf7 and Black wins. But: 1.h8B! A brilliant idea: self-paralysis. If now Nf6 or Nc5, it is stalemate. And after moves that relieve the bind, a drawn endgame of 2 minor pieces vs. 3 remains. PS 14 January 2000: As reader Gerhard Josten informs me, the tablebases say Black is winning after 1...Bg4 - and that therefore this study is incorrect. A pity for the beautiful idea.



Black to play

Simonson - Em.Lasker

New York sim 1892

Black to play

Alapin - Rubinstein

Vienna 1908



White to play

Jansen - De Greef

Dieren 1990



White to play

Makogonov - Dubinin

USSR 1940

Black to play

Jordan-West

Australia 1980





White to play

Steiner - Morton

USA 1936

White to play

Roehrl - Wittmann

Austria 1981

White to play

Flores - Letelier

Santiago 1959

White to play

Malishauskas-Donchenko

USSR 1988



Another theme with this configuration, and which is sometimes used in endgame studies, was first seen in Badestein - Otto, Wernigerode 1952 (diagram on the left.) After 66...f1R White resigned; f1Q? and White has a 'Rambling Rook' which will check forever along the 8th rank.

In contrast, in all of the following examples promotion to Queen would also have worked. But sometimes it would have been tricky, and in most cases the Rook promotion was the most sensible and practical thing to do: why think if you don't have to.







Black to play

Rajna - Lengyel

Budapest 1982

Black to play

Jacobowitz - Grosse

Dresden 1993

Black to play

Wolf - Hartmann

Germany 1991

White to play

Istratescu - Bancod

Biel 1993



Black to play

Dehmelt - Fedorowicz

Reykjavik 1986



White to play

Beni - Littlewood

Lucerne 1963

Black to play

Schichtel - Abend

Germany 1987

Black to play

Apicella - Bellia

Vinkovci 1989

White to play

Kreiman - Salman

Philadelphia 1992



Black to play

Lacroix - Bolzoni

Brussels 1986

Black to play

Fallone - Vranesic

Havana ol 1966

White to play

Wicker - Way

Copenhagen 1987



White to play

Sajtar - Benko

Budapest 1954

Black to play

Garcia - Bellon

Torre Grande 1990

White to play

Torre - Gufeld

Kuala Lumpur 1994



White to play

Stahlberg - Czerniak

Buenos Aires 1941

Black to play

Chan - Depasquale

Laoag 1985

Black to play

Serper - Navrotescu

Oakham 1988

We come to more diverse cases. In ascending degree of interest:





Black to play

Pinzon - Del Pozo

Lima 1959

Black to play

Grishchuk - Hua

Szeged 1994



White to play Gluzman - Sabic

Sydney 1992 Black had already played on for too long. Not even 91.g8R made this clear; after Rxc6 he played on seven more moves. 91.g8Q was possible; 91...Rd1+ 92.Kc5 and already the good checks are over.







Black to play

Ashley - Bezold

Bermuda 1997 Just about every legal move would win here, and I would have expressed my dismay over White's for playing on with simply 74...f1Q 75.Re3+ Kc2 76.Rc3+ bxc3 and mate next move. Black chose 74...f1R and White resigned.







Black to play Ahlander - Krasenkov

Malmö 1994 White resigned after 50...g1R; 50...g1Q 51.Qxd7+ would have been stalemate.









White to play Tomic - Winzbeck

Dortmund 1993 White decided the game with the nice little trick 43.Rd8 Rxd8 44.cxd8B and Black resigned.









Black to play Nedela - Schmaltz

Stockerau 1992 After 54...b1R (54...b1Q? 55.Rb6+ is a draw) White resigned, but 54...Rc4+ and 55...b1Q would have won more easily; Rh7+ is met by Rc7.









Black to play Weitthoff - Maki

USA 1988 58...b1R and White resigned two moves later; 58...b1Q 59.Rxf5+ would have been a draw.

(PS May 2016): The rook promotion is the simplest win, but as Ricky Demer shows, 58...b1Q is also winning: 59.Rxf5+ Kh6 and now 60.Rh5+ (60.Rf6+ Qg6) Kg7 61.Rh7+ Kf6 and regardless of White's checks, the Black King goes to a1 and the Queen can interpose on a2.











White to play Boniface - Pugh

Bristol 1995 A study-like intermezzo: after 63.Nd1, Black had to play 63...b1B, because 63...b1Q or b1R 64.Nc3+ Bxc3 would be stalemate. Although the position was then technically won for Black, he did not manage to win, and a draw was agreed at move 92.







White to play Kholmov - Ehlvest

Wolgodonsk 1983 After 72.Ra1, there followed h1B! (72...h1Q 73.Ra8+ Qxa8 would have been stalemate). Now it was easy; after 73.Rf1 Rh8 74.Rf7 Re8 75.Kc5 e5 76.Kd6 Bb7 White resigned.









White to play Bremel - Kertis

Budapest 1948 Again a finish that is doubtless also the finish of some endgame studies. 1.a8R+! and Black (probably; I do not have the score of the whole game) resigned. 1.a8Q+ would have been stalemate after Kb4 2.Qb7+ Kc3 3.Qxb1







White to play Reshko - Kaminsky

Leningrad 1972 61.a8Q (or a8R) Qf7+ 62.Qxf7 would be stalemate. After 61.a8N Qa7 it is very hard to see how White can make progress. What else? 61.Qb8 or 61.g5 allow mate in 1. But 61.a8B, which White played, is a fairly easy win. There followed: 61...Qb3 62.Qd7 Qg8 63.Bd5 Qf8 64.Bf7 Kh8 65.Qe8 Qxe8 66.Bxe8 Kh7 67.Bf7 Kh8 68.Kg6 h5 69.Kxh5 Kh7 70.Be8 Kg8 71.Kg6 and Black resigned.



White to play



White to play



Black to play

In summary: 66.a8=B is winning, and is White's only winning move in Sokolsky - Ravinsky.



IN CHESS CURIOSITIES, in 1985, I gave 12 examples of underpromotion in games, of which 5 were 'above triviality as well as of uncontested authenticity.' In this survey, I gave 47 examples, of which perhaps half could be called interesting.

We're waiting for that drawing underpromotion now.



(c) Tim Krabbé 1999

With many thanks to Harold van der Heijden.

Comments and suggestions

Top of the page | Main chess page | Main page