Why study the endgame first?

[whiskeytown]

Originally Posted by KyleJRM82

Oooh, that makes more sense.

If you ever have a chance and ability to win an opening like that in time trouble, it'd be pretty epic.

forgot how much time I had - I think two minutes but I guarantee I would do better next time - it's pretty easy to pick off the pawns and I know N+B endings pretty well now - in fact, that would have been the first time I would have used it which makes this a pretty bad waste in retrospect

RB

[AmarilloJim1]

When I first started playing, I learned some basic endgames, then studied openings and tactics....I built an opening rep, learned some middlegame plans in my rep, and solved a lot of puzzles...

Now I'm 1790 USCF...my biggest weakness I think is my technique...what I'm working now is:

Still middlegame plans...
Still tactical puzzles...

Endgames...which I break down into two parts...

Theory...I'm currently reading Silman Endgame Course...
Practice...I play positions on chesstempo against the computer...

I play positions that:

A) Come from OTB tournaments...positions I drew but should have won, and positions I lost, but could have drawn...

B) Positions from master games in my rep, where one side resigned or the game was drawn...I play against the computer and try to hold a draw or win if the position is won...

I think in the past I focused more on endgame theory instead of practice...

FWIW solving these positions against the computer has a lot of value IMO.

[AmarilloJim1]

Also, I think the endgame is important because a large part of the middlegame is calculating variations and evaluating the resulting endings....how can you be good in the middlegame if you don't know how to play the positions you're trying to reach?

FWIW I know I'm a chess noob, but I'm just spewing off what I think...

[mcteague]

I am fairly certain this idea originates with Tarrasch. It is quite logical. You can learn much about the basic power of each piece and how to coordinate them from studying fundamental endgames. That does not mean you have to master 2 Knight vs Pawn endings before acquiring knowledge in other parts of the game. But you should be able to mate with B&N vs K against anyone.
However since chess should really be studied as an organic whole, after you get the basics analyzing complete games is the best method.

[KyleJRM82]

Originally Posted by AmarilloJim1

Also, I think the endgame is important because a large part of the middlegame is calculating variations and evaluating the resulting endings....how can you be good in the middlegame if you don't know how to play the positions you're trying to reach?

Most of the time, if my middlegame plans go well, there won't be an endgame. But I'm a bit optimistic.