The Stress of Chess (Walter Browne)

page 29, bottom: WB won the Australian Championship with a 13-2 score, not 13,5-1,5.

page 30, above: the Gold Coast is below Brisbane, not above.

page 48, bottom: should read: 'just missing a medal' instead of 'had to settle for silver'.

page 53, 3rd paragraph right: 'had to settle for the bronze board prize' instead of 'silver'.

pages 190, 258, 259: due to a program error (a problem with taking en passant) pawns have remained on e5 in the diagrams here, which should not be there.

page 229: Browne did not beat Rogers in Bath, but Chandler; and Miles played 1...a6 vs Karpov not in Bath 1983, but in Skara 1980.

page 245: the Karpov picture is from 1980, not 1981.

page 249: Seirawan-WB was played in Berkeley, not in Lone Pine.

page 266, end of note after 18.f4: Nc4 should be Ne4.

page 311, end of note after 13.Qd6: not f4-f5, but 'e4xf5 followed by Nh5'.

page 344, bottom: 'equal until move 27' instead of 'move seven'.

page 349, below the extra space: November 1997 should be July 1997.

page 363, 3rd paragraph: instead, WB played Onischuk in round 1, and Akobian in round 5.

page 385, above diagram, right: (12...)dxe4 13.Nd2 are moves from the game, should not be in the comment.

page 446: the game WB-Wojtkiewicz was played in 2004 not 2003, and the intro should read: 'I had to play five games...' instead of 'four'

The Art of the Endgame (Jan Timman)

Unfortunately a number of diagram errors have crept into this book:

page 16, second column, lowest diagram: white pawn on f3 should be on f2, and the white bishop should be on g3 instead of f2.

page 36, first column: black pawn on e7 should be removed

page 45: in both diagrams the black king should be on h8 instead of g8, so White's 1.Ng6 is with check

page 70, first column: black king should be on a7 instead of b7

page 73, second column: here a black pawn should be added on g7

page 74, first column: black pawn should be on b5 instead of d5, like in the next study

page 75, first column: here a black pawn should be added on b3

page 101, first column: in the study by Rokirovkin the black rook should be on h4, not a4.

page 105, second column, solution: move 1 and 3 by White should be swapped: it is first 1.c6 and then 3.d6

page 114, second column: in both diagrams a white pawn on c2 should be added

page 126: in both diagrams the white pawn on h4 should be removed

page 137, first column: White's pawn should be on f5 instead of f3 (as in the diagram on page 138)

page 201: in both diagrams there should be a black knight on g7, so White's 1.Bf6 is without check

page 214, lower right: White's e4 pawn should be on c4, therefore his first move becomes 1.c4-c5, with the remark: 'Covering the e4-square...' And Black's reply 1...Be3xc5 becomes a capture. In the second diagram, there should be no pawn on e5.

page 215, right: A white pawn on h3 should be added. 

The Ragozin Complex (Vladimir Barsky)

page 9:
Unfortunately the picture given here is not of Viacheslav Ragozin, but of Isaac Boleslavsky.

Invisible Chess Moves (Emmanuel Neiman & Yochanan Afek)

From John Bleau we received the following corrections, which we reproduce here with thanks:

Position 5, page 192, should be White to play

Position 20, page 195, should be White to play

Position 42, page 201, should be White to play

Position 51, page 203, the black queen should be on d1

Solution to position 50, page 233, second diagram, after 6.Qb1-a2: the g5 pawn should be on h4.

A few more corrections we received from GM Frank Holzke:

page 14: Miles lost to Kasparov with 5,5-0,5 instead of 4,5-1,5.

page 53: In fact Kortchnoi asked whether he was allowed to castle kingside when his rook h1 was attacked by a black bishop (21st match game vs Karpov, 1974)

Page 122: Black is not a pawn up here, as it says in the text.

Page 186: not Tarrasch but Nimzowitsch was surprised by the Zwischenschach

Exercise 29, page 219: Black has not won the white queen, but bishop + knight for a rook.

The Joys of Chess (Christian Hesse)

page 18:
left column, line 7: 12.Rg3 should be 12.Ng3.
This was pointed out to us by Allan Beardsworth, as were the mistakes on pp. 247, 316, 339, 360 and 373.

page 31:
column 1, appr. halfway: should read 'approximately 1/8 of a pawn' instead of '1/2

Same page, 13 lines down: '1/8 (instead of 1/2) to 1/16 of a pawn'

page 32:
column 1: 'the bishop has an advantage of roughly 1/8 of a pawn' instead of 1/2

page 35:
col. 2 (the strength of the knight) 'lies according to this list in the vicinity of 3 1/3' instead of 3 1/2

page 166:
Diagram 206: As Nadav Gruengard pointed out to us, Steinitz couldn't have commented on a problem made in 1907 as he passed away in 1900. Pulitzer's problem turns out to be from 1894.

page 172:
col. 1: as Johan Hut pointed out to us, in 1964 Tal was already ex-World Champion.

page 247:
left, line 6 under diagram should read: 'doubling of the white rooks' instead of 'black rooks'

page 316:
right, line 5: Bill Hartston is an IM, not a GM

page 339:
right, line 6: 'g4 bishop' should read 'g4 pawn'

page 343:
Diagram 488: As Nadav Gruengard pointed out to us, the player with the black pieces was Edward Lasker, not Emanuel Lasker.

page 360:
diagram 515 should come after the next variation, starting with 2.Qh3+ and ending with 7...Kb5.

page 373:
right, under B: at the end it should read: 'but not a strategy as in A'

page 404:
as Ken MacDonald pointed out to us, in paragraph 3 on the right, the number 562 is wrong; it should be 526.

Grandmaster Chess Strategy (Jurgen Kaufeld & Guido Kern)

We have omitted to make a final update of the Index of Players, which means that several entries ended up wrong in this version.
The correct Index of Players can be downloaded here:

Improve Your Chess Tactics (Yakov Neishtadt)

Position 5, page 11:
Patrick Groenendijk wrote the following to us:
At the end, Neishtadt writes: 7.Qd8+ and 8.e6# does not change things.
The correct variation is: 7.Qc8+ Kf7 8.Qxc7+ Kf8 9.Qd8+ Kf7 10.e6#.
Of course Mr Groenendijk is right. There is even a quicker mate, as Chee Hui Tan points out: 4.Qg8+ Kd7 5.Bf5+ Qe6 6.Qxe6+ Kd8 7.Qd7#.

Position 23, page 19:
Marcelo Carpinetti wrote to us:
Here the author says that 1...Qb6 is played because 'it is easy to see that there is no other move'.
However, the move 1...Qe5 looks like the best, ending the attack. Two possible lines are:
1) 2.Rb7 Re8 3.Be4 and Black is just slightly worse;
2) 2.Qd8 Qe8 3.Qe8 Re8 4.Bd7?! Rd6! 5.Rc1 Rd8 and now Black is even better.

Position 139, page 45 and 202:
Jack Appelmans wrote to us that the position given is wrong. In the actual game Von Scheve-Rubinstein, Ostend 1907, there was no white rook on g2 and no black bishop on c8. In the actual game White could not win with 1.g5 without the rook on g2. So Von Scheve forced a draw with 35.Qxh7+ Kxh7 36.hxg6+ Kxg6 37.Rh6+.

Position 352, page 112:
In the comment after 1.h4!!, White is not threatening mate but stalemate with 2.Qg8+.

Position 418, page 253:
Mauro Barletta informed us that he has found a saving clause for Black after 1.Rc5!, namely 1...Qe4! (or 1...Qd3 with the same idea of covering h7 and retreating to g6), e.g. 2.f5 Nh5! and there is no win for White. The immediate 2.Rxf7 Qg6 3.Qxg6 hxg6 4.Rxc8 Rxc8 also appears tenable for Black.

Position 635, page 320 (solution):
Andy Catlin wrote to us that the outcome of the game is not clearly given here. Indeed, White wins, but it still takes some work: 5...Ne2 6.e7 Ng3+ 7.Ke1 f2+ 8.Kxf2 Ne4+ 9.Ke3 Nf6 and now 10.Kf4! Nd5+ (otherwise 11.Kg5 and 12.f6 wins) 11.Kg5 Nxe7 12.f6 and the f-pawn cannot be stopped, viz. 12...Kd8 13.f7!.

The Modern Scandinavian (Matthias Wahls, Karsten Müller & Hannes Langrock)

Page 92:
The white player in this game was Klaus-Jürgen Lutz, not Christopher Lutz.

The Complete c3 Sicilian (Evgeny Sveshnikov)

The translators of this book (Russian to English) have not been mentioned. They are:
Part 1: Phil Adams
Part 2: Steve Giddins
Our apologies to Mr. Adams and Mr. Giddins for this omission.

Botvinnik - Petrosian (Mikhail Botvinnik)

page 124: in the left-column diagram the white bishop should be on g5 instead of e3.

Bobby Fischer (Karsten Müller)

page 68, Match gegen Max Euwe, März 1957:
Chess Life ii (2011) has published the complete score of the second game of this match, which was recently rediscovered. A possible second edition of 'Bobby Fischer' will feature this game with new analysis by Karsten Müller.

page 250, game Saidy-Fischer:
Anthony Saidy has confirmed that 47...Ne4  was played and not 47...Nh5 as given by Kasparov and in the first edition of this book. Then 48.Be1 Kg4 48.Ke2 Ng3+... etc.

page 362, game Fischer-Larsen:
Erik Osbun has pointed out that Fischer's 13th move was 13.Qd3 instead of 13.Qf3, which means that the comments to moves 14 and 15 are irrelevant. 

The Sorcerer's Apprentice – David Bronstein & Tom Fürstenberg
(revised & expanded edition)

Page 34, comment under diagram:
As Andrei Olsen has pointed out, in the given line 23...Kg8 24.Nxe6 fxe6 25.Qxe6+ Qf7 26.Rh8+ something is missing. It should read: (23...Kg8) 24.Nxe6 fxe6 25.Rxd7 Nxd7 26.Qxe6+ Qf7 27.Rh8+.

page 38, comment, last paragraph:
As Sean Marsh has pointed out on his blog Marsh Towers, Frank Marshall did introduce his Marshall Attack 8...d5 in 1918 against Capablanca, but this was in a tournament in New York. The match between these two was in 1909.

Page 42, comment under diagram:
From Andrei Olsen we received the following correction, which appears to be right:
'Bronstein mentions that the reason he didn't play 16.Nc6, which looked very promising, was the fact that Black could defend with either 16...Bd7 17.Nfe5+ Kg8 etc. or by playing 16...Nd5, defending the c7 pawn and the e7-square. An interesting thing here is that both 16...Bd7 and 16...Nd5 lose to 17.Nce5+!.

For example, after 16...Nd5 17.Nce5+! Kg8 (the only move) 18.Qe8 h6 (otherwise White mates with Qf7) 19.Qf7+ Kh7 20.Bxh6! (Ng5+ and the mate is coming, so Black is forced to give up the Queen) 20...Qe7 21.Ng5+ Qxg5 22.Bxg5 or 20...Ne7 21.Bf4 Qxe5 22.Bxe5 and of course 20... Be7 will be met by 21. Qxg7 mate). So c7 and e7 are the least of Black's problems.

After 16...Bd7 White would continue with 17.Nce5+! Kg8 18.Nxd7! and after, let's say, 18...Qd6 19.Qxa8! Nxa8 20.Rad1! I cannot see anything better than h6, since 20...Qb4, for example, will be met by 21.Nxf8. Black
cannot save the queen and will end up a piece down.

Perhaps Black can defend better with the clumsy-looking 16...Nd7, defending the vital e5-square. Despite losing the c-pawns, it looks like the best chance for Black.'

As Sean Marsh has also pointed out, in the photos part (9th page), C. Hugh O'D. Alexander is wrongly depicted as a GM; he was an international master. 

Revolutionize Your Chess (Viktor Moskalenko)

page 108, the two lower diagrams:

The text 'The material is unbalanced on one part of the board (+T1 vs. -T3)' under the left diagram should be the header for the diagram on the right.

Chess Strategy for Club Players (Herman Grooten) (2nd edition)

From Hans Larooij we received the following corrections:

page 140, comment after 17.Qf7: '18th move' should be '4th move'

page 141, comment after 19.h4?!: 24.Bf5+ does not win the queen - this should be 24.Qf7+ Kh8 25.Qxf6+ Kh7 26.Bg8+.

page 187, comment after 22...Nc8, variation 22...Re8 23.Qg6+ Kg8? (between brackets): the order should be 24.Bxf6! Bxf6 25.Nxf6+ Qxf6 26.Rxe8+ (as after 24.Nxf6+? Bxf6 25.Bxf6 Black has the Zwischenzug 25...Rxe1+!

page 216, after the game move 16...Kg8 the moves 17.Ng4 Kf8 18.Ne3 Kg8 should be included. So in the following 2 diagrams, the white knight is not on h2 but on e3.

page 236: game move 26...Rc8 should be 26...Bg7, and game move 28...Rc7 should be 28...Bd4 (a different repetition. So in the first diagram the black bishop should be on g7 instead of d4, and the black rook should be on c7 instead of c8.

page 288, comment after 11.Be2, line A: instead of 15...Red6 Black can simply play 15...Rxe2, so 14...Qe7 is a viable alternative.

page 322: Karpov-Westerinen was played in round 10 instead of 11

page 364, comment after 28...Qc5!: the move numbers should be 29 instead of 30 (5 times)

page 365: Alekhine-Euwe was the 2nd match game instead of the first.

Hans Reusink came up with the following idea on page 141, comment after 19.h4?!
After Grooten's suggestion 19.g4 Black can instead of 19...Kh8 also try 19...f5 20.exf5 Qf6. Here Grooten found the following pretty, difficult-to-find win for White: 21.Qe8 Bc7 22.g5!! (opening up the kingside) 22...hxg5 23.h4!!, simply threatening to win with 24.hxg5. Now, on 23...gxh4 24.Qh5+ wins the queen, and 23...Nxf5 is refuted by 24.Bg8+ Kh6 25.hxg5+ also winning the queen.

And for page 315, end of line B) on the right, Reusink adds: White wins not only a piece but also the queen on the next move.

Chess Strategy for Club Players (Herman Grooten)

page 7, Foreword Timman:
The full title of Timman's work is 'The Art of Chess Analysis'

page 21, right, line 6/7 from top:
'does not protect the squares d3, f3, d3 and d4 any more.' should read: 'cannot protect the squares d3, d3, d4 and f4 anymore.'

page 46, analysis diagram upper right:
This diagram is wrong; the white knight on g5 should be on e4, and the black queen on d7 should be on c6.

page 65, Relativity example 10:
The black king cannot just walk to e8 - as soon as the black queen leaves e8, White promotes. The only thing White has to do is avoid checks by the black queen, e.g. by playing his rook from e2 to e3 and back.

page 95, under second diagram left:
the actual move order of this game was: 30...Rd8 31.Rd1 a5 32.Rd3 Rc8, so the question marks after 30...Re8 and 31.Rd1 and the comments are not correct.

page 99, Exercise 99:
This exercise (and, of course, also the solution on pp. 348-350) was already discussed on page 97/98. A new exercise will be given under 6.3 in the next edition.

page 130, left:
Black is not 'ready' for ...Rg8 as this fails to the knight fork on f6, but this is his long-term plan. He will have to move his king first.

page 194, Fischer-Taimanov: Karsten Müller has pointed out the following:
'18...Kd8? is a mistake and deserves a ? as Fischer is allowed to simplify into a won B vs N ending. Black should play 42...Rf6! 43.Kd3 Kd8 44.Kc4 Kc7 45.Re8 Rd6 46.Rg8 Ne7 47.Rg7 Kd8 (Andrew Soltis in Bobby Fischer Rediscovered, p. 248) with drawing chances.'

page 195, comment after 34...Ne7:
This remark doesn't belong here and will be skipped

page 199, right column, top:
'After 1...Bxd6 2.exd6, the main threat is 3.Qc2' should be 3.Qc3.

page 261, final remark after the first game Donner-Hartoch:
'the knight manoeuvre to c3' should be 'manoeuvring the knight from c3'

The next remark also comes from Karsten Müller:
page 301, Smyslov-Fischer:
'26.Rc1? activates the wrong rook. The other rook should be brought into play with 26.Rh4 Ne5 27.Rd4 Rb2 (Soltis) 28.e4 with drawing chances.'

page 339, solution 4.1:
Mark Huizer suggests a 3rd method: white plays his rook to e5, preventing the black king from crossing the 5th rank, then plays his king on c5 and takes the pawn on d5. A sample line: 1.Re8 Bf5 2.Re5 Be4 3.Ke2 Bf3+ 3.Kd2 Be4 4.Kc3 Ke3 5.Re7! Kf4 6.Kb4 Kf5 7.Kc5 Kf6 8.Re5.

Fischer World Champion – Max Euwe & Jan Timman (2nd ed.)

Page 14:
Comment after move 37 should read: ‘This passive move allows Black to grab the advantage’ instead of ‘White’.

6th Game:
1. Comment after  20…d4, at the end the following has been added:
’A better defence is 21…Rc6, as given by Kasparov. It is not easy to break through Black’s defence. Therefore, 20…c4 was preferable. After the text, Black is in serious trouble.’
2. Comment after 21…De7. After ‘with 22..Nb6’, the old text has been replaced by:
‘White continues with 23.Bg4 Qe7 24.f5 exf5 25.Bxf5 and White will get an
attack that is virtually irresistible’ (Kasparov).’
3. New Comment after 22…Rb8 (instead of the old text):
’The best defence is 22…Nb6 to keep the White bishop from c4. Originally I
gave the following line as winning for White: 23.f5 c4 24.Qa5 Qc5 25.b4 Qb5 26.a4 Nxa4 27.Rxc4 Rxc4 28.Qd8+ Kh7 29.f6, but now 29…Rc8!! (Burgess) leads to an advantage for Black.Therefore White’s best option is Kasparov’s recommendation 23.Qd3!, in order to create a battery of queen and bishop on the diagonal b1-h7. A beautiful line is: 23…Nd7 24.Qe4 Qf7 25.f5! Ne3 26.fxe6 Qxe6 27.Bd3 Rf7 28.Qh7+ Kf8 29.Rxf7+ Qxf7 30.Bc4! Nxc4 31.Rf1, winning the queen.’

10th Game:
1. Comment after 29…Re7, at the end the following as been added:
’Still, there is one more moment where Olafsson’s verdict can be challenged: in variation 3,
Black has 38…Ke7! (Kasparov ) to keep the knight from d7. White has no winning chances.’
2. Comment after 40…Kf7, the variation at the end has been changed into:
’45.Rd7 Re5 46.Rxe5 Bxe5 47.Rb7 Bd4 48.f3 and White will bring his king
towards the centre.’

13th Game:
1. Comment after 41…Bd5 has been changed into:
’Black had a hidden win here, pointed out by Kasparov. Indicated was 41…e5! 42.Bxe5 Rhd8! 43.Bf6 Be2 44.Re1 Rxd7 and Black reaches a double-rook ending that is easily won.’
2. Comment after 42…Ra3+, after the first 2 sentences, has been changed into:
’And in fact he did not. After 42…e5 43.Bxe5 Ke6 44.Bxh8 Rxh8 45.Rff1 Rd8 46.Re1+, White defends successfully.’
3. Comment after 52.Re6 has been removed.

19th Game:
1. Comment after 16…bxc5: in variation 2, 20.Re1 has been replaced by 20.Kh1.
2. Comment after 17…Qa5: in this variation, 20.Qa6 has been replaced by 20.Kh1.
3. Comment after 20.Bxf7+: in variation 2b), after 22…Qd2 the new variation goes: 23.Qxd2 Bxd2 24.Rf3 Bg5 25.Rd1 with some advantage for White.

Winning Chess Middlegames (Ivan Sokolov)

page 78: the intro below 'Structure 1.12' belongs before Game 5, Spassky-Hübner, on page 28.

page 89: the intro text part about the Tarrasch Defence belongs before Game 21, Kramnik-Illescas.

page 146: the intro text below 'Structure 2.10' does not belong here and will be removed.

page 222: diagrams 4.5 and 4.6 are in the wrong order: 4.5 should be 4.6 (without pawn e5) and vice versa.

page 226-228: classification of variations is wrong: 14...Rc8 is not line A1 but is a continuation of A; then on page 227, line B) should be 14.Rad1 (instead of the given A2) 14...Rc8), then 15.Bd3 is line B1, and on page 228 15.Bb3 is line B2.

The Black Lion – Jerry van Rekom & Leo Jansen

Page 5:
Under Chapter 2, Variations 2 to 3.4 should be replaced by:
Variation 2: 5.Nf3 (page 40)
Variation 2.1: 5…exd4 6.Qxd4 c6 (page 40)
Variation 2.2: 5…c6 (page 57)

Page 6:
Chapter 5 – The Lion’s Yawn: here the moves (3…e5) 4.dxe5 dxe5 5.Qxd8+ Kxd8 must be added

Page 6:
Below should be added:
Index of Players … 261
New In Chess Code System … 274
Index of Variations … 275

Page 40:
Nb5 should be on d4.

De Zwarte Leeuw – Jerry van Rekom & Leo Jansen

Page 5:
Chapter 4: 3…Bbd7 should be 3…Nbd7
1 line below: 5…Be7 instead of 5:Be7

Page 38: Nb5 should be on d4

Page 69: ‘Variant 3.4.1’ should be ‘Variant 2.2.4.1’

Page 157: ‘Variant 3.2.1’ and ‘3.2.2’ should be ‘Variant 1.3.2.1’ and ‘1.3.2.2’ respectively

The Flexible French - Viktor Moskalenko (2nd ed.)

Page 67, left column, line 6:

12...fxe6 should be 12...fxe5.

The Flexible French – Viktor Moskalenko (1st ed.)

Page 55, left column, line 4:
The phrase ‘and White has the initiative’ has been replaced to after ‘8.b3!’ on line 3.

Page 176, conclusion after Game 43, last line:
Game 49 instead of Game 10.

Page 275, Index of Variations:
Chapter 11, Game 70, is with 3.Nd2 not 3.Qe2.

100 Endgames You Must Know - Jesus de la Villa

page 51, below:
After 2...Kc3? White can immediately draw with 3.Ne4+. Therefore, it should read:
'And as 2...Kc3 fails to 3.Ne4+, the black king has no way to approach the knight. It is a clear draw.' 

From Jonathan Bryant we received the following corrections:
Page 63, Position 4.7
“2” is printed on g6 and e7. The number should be “1”.
Page 73, first of three diagrams:
Final sentence should read: 'With the rook on h1, White wins if he has the move.'
Page 94, Position after 4 Bh6!
“… victory comes easily, since White cannot offer the bishop exchange without obstructing his pawn ….”
The note should read “ … since White can offer ….”
Page 109, Conclusions
“When the two pawns are on the 5^th rank or further up, if the defending side reaches the right defensive set-up, the ending is drawn.”
The text should read, “… on the 5^th rank or further back …”
Page 112, Position 9.1
Is in fact Position 9.10.
Page 127, Section heading
“Section 2. Pawn on the 5^th rank or less” should read “… on the 5^th rank or further”.
Page 134, note to 1 Kd6+!, second to last sentence
After the variation 1 Ra1? Rb7+!, 2 Kd8 Rb8+!, 3 Kc7 Rb2 the text reads, “The pawn needs one tempo to reach the 7^th rank, so the black rook seizes the opportunity to recover distant effectiveness and save the game, as we will see in Ending 54.”
This should read, “ … recover distant effectiveness and save the game, as we saw in Ending 54.”
Page 145, note to 5 … Kg4 =
“White has to allow … Kf5 or suffer checks from the black rook.” should read, “ … allow … Kf4 or ….”
Page 154, note to 2 … Rg4!
“Dvoretsky considers 2 … Rg1?! losing, on account of 3 Kc6! … but in this line 3 … Rc8! holds.” should read “… in this line 3 … Kc8! holds.”
Page 159, labels under first three diagrams:
These should read:
1. White wins, no matter who moves
2. White to move wins, Black to move draws
3. Draw, no matter who moves.
Page 160, first Diagram
The position is assessed as a “draw”.
The label should read, “White to move wins, Black to move draws”. (… Rg1+! =).
Page 160
The fourth sentence of the text following the diagrams reads, “This resource does not work in the second position, as White can simply answer 2 f5, ignoring the threat on his h-pawn.”
This should read, “… simply answer 3 f5 ….”
Page 167, text after 10...Rb2+=:
Sentence 'Not even if White had doubled pawns on the h-file' is unclear and will be removed.
Page 168, note to 6 Kf4
“As soon as White pushes the a-pawn one step further, the black rook will be transferred to the rear of the pawn and we will reach Ending 76.” The text should read, “ … will reach Ending 75.”
Page 170, analysis to 5...Ka6!
After 8.b5! the text should read: 'is the quickest way to win, provided that on the next move White gives up the advanced pawn (8.Kc5! with the same idea also wins): 8...Ka7 9.b8Q! (not 9.Kc7?? stalemate) 9...Kxb8 10.Kb6 with a trivial win according to Ending 3.'
Page 174 text referring to Position 12.6 on page 173 should read:
'Were White to play, he would draw after 1.Kf2, taking care to play Kg2 against ...Kh4 and Kf2 against ...Kf4.'
Page 201 Heading: “Pawn majority on one wing, doubled pawn on the other”
This should read “ … doubled pawns, no majority”

From Angus French we received the following corrections and suggestion:

Page 61 (Ending 17 - Queen vs. 7th-rank rook's pawn)

Black can win more quickly with 1...Kf5+ 2.Kg8 Kg6 3.h8Q Qd8 mate. The black queen wil be moved to d6.

Page 113 (Chapter 9 - Opposite coloured bishops: Bishop + 2 pawns vs. Bishop; Ending 46 – Pawns separated by two files)
The conclusion box should read: 'The bishop’s pawns (c- and f-files) win unless the position belongs to the third draw scenario' instead of 'the second draw scenario'.

Page 129 (Chapter 10 – Rook + pawn vs. rook; Position 56 – Central pawns. Kling and Howitz defensive technique)
It's useful to add the text ‘or bishop’ to the title after ‘Central’ and before ‘pawns’ – since, of, course, the technique applies to both central pawns and to bishop pawns.

page 159, first diagram:
S. Kahrimanis from Greece has pointed out that the first diagram (above, left) is not a draw but White wins, as is in fact demonstrated by the author on page 157. 

Forcing Chess Moves – Charles Hertan (1st ed.)

Page 13: diagram Mieses-Chigorin:
White to move, not Black.

Page 15, Herta-Kelleher:
Comment after 5.f6 Kg8!!: …wins the pawn on g6 (not the knight).

Page 128, solution Benjamin-Seirawan:
Line 6: 2…Kb8 3.Bf4! – not bold.

Page 132 Geller-Novotelnov:
‘which justifies White's whole position, as otherwise the center falls’ should be replaced by ‘which justifies White’s piece-down position.’

Page 146, Spassky-Fischer:
After 1-0, new text: After 2...Kxf8 3.Qh8+ unpins the Nd5. Computer eyes should note that even with the black queen on b7, the 100% forcing 2.Rf8+ would still work due to the stock skewering idea 2...Kxf8 3.Qh8+ Kf7 4.Qxh7+.

Page 162, Ftacnik-Cvitan:
Comment after 2.Kxg2: ‘Chapter 2’ should be ‘Chapter 1’.

Page 253, Ivanov-Rogers:
Comment after 2.Qe3: ‘Clearly the intended refutation, as 2.Qb4…’

Page 255, Muffang-Alekhine:
After 1…f4!!: ‘The winning in between queen hit 2.Qxf4 hxg5! (or 2...Qd3!)’ (2...Qd3 is not a queen ‘hit’).

Page 281, Roos-Rubinetti:
2nd line solution: pawn on b7 instead of ‘Nb7’.

Page 306, Nielsen-Rogozenko:
Move 2.Qe8! (not 3.Qe8!) should be bold, and numbering should be: 2…Kf6 3.Qf8+.

Page 364, diagram Chan-Depasquale:
Black Kg8 should be on f7 (as on page 363)

Page 370:
New definition of ‘board sight’: ‘The ability to mentally envision where the pieces are, and what they can do, at each step of a calculation.’

In the 2nd edition, the following changes have been made with the Exercises:
Exx. 1.5, 1.6 and 1.12 from the 1st edition have been moved to Chapter 2, and in Chapter 1 the new Exercises Miroshnichenko-Svetushin, Lorenz-Orlov and Kruppa-Gladyszew have been added.
New Exercises in Chapter 2: Vesely-Adamkova, Schallopp-Gossip, Bataev-Feoktistov, Popovic-Cvitan and Marcinkiewicz-Zindel.

Hooked on Chess – William Hook

Page 16:
‘Max Pavey – immigrant from Scotland’ – Pavey was born in Boston (USA). He did win the Scottish Championship while doing graduate studies there.

Page 130:
Kasparov-Short match was in 1993, not 1990

Page 162:
Karpov-Kamsky should be ‘final match’, not ‘semi-final’

My Daily Exercise – Heinz Brunthaler

Page 17, Day 42:
White rook on h1 should be black

Page 62, Day 221:
White to move instead of Black to move

Page 68, Day 248:
Black to move instead of White to move

Endgame Virtuoso Anatoly Karpov – Tibor Karolyi & Nick Aplin (2nd ed.)

Page 89, comment after 51…Ne7, after ‘zugzwang’:
’54…Kc54Ke6 55.Kc5’
should read:
‘54…Kc6 55.Ke5, or 54…Ke6 55.Kc5, and White wins the race.’

Page 168, comment after 61…Nf5, the comment should be replaced by the following:
‘Filip mentions 61...gxh5, which he evaluates as equal. He is right, but not the exactly the way he thinks. 62.Bxe7 Kxd4 63.Ke2 Kc4 64.Kd2 Kb3 65.Kd3 (65.b5 Ka4 66.Kc2 Kxb5 and Black easily gets to the corner.)’
Here is the critical position of Filip’s line. Black needs come up with subtle moves.
(diagram)
a) 65...Kxa3? 66.Kc4 Ka4 (66...a6 67.b5+! wins. Here is the reason why the bishop must be diverted from e7) 67.b5 Ka5 68.Bb4+ Ka4 69.Be1 Ka3 70.Kd5 Kb3 71.Bg3 Kb4 72.Kc6 Ka5 73.Be1+ Ka4 74.Bh4 Ka5 75.Bg3 wins.
b) 65...b5? 66.Bc5 Kxa3; 66.Kd4 Kxa3 67.Kc5 Ka4 68.Bd8 h4 Black exchanges all the white pawns. It looks convincing, but after 66.Bd8! (Grandmaster Vescovi from Brazil found this hole in Filip’s analysis) 66...Kxa3 67.Ba5, White wins as he is able to keep his last pawn and take all of Black's pawns.
c) 65...h4!! Black has to play very carefully. The bishop must be diverted from e7.
66.Bxh4 Kxa3 67.Kc4 a6!! Now with the bishop on h4 it works. One can understand Karpov was not interested to find things like this unless it was really necessary. (67...Ka4? instead would not work, because of 68.b5) 68.Bf2 (68.Be7 Ka4; 68.Bd8 – now Vescovi's idea can't be accomplished as Black can force White's king to c5, to a square that is too far from the h-pawn. 68...b5+! 69.Kc5 h5 70.Be7 Ka4 and Black reaches the draw) 68...b5+ 69.Kc5 (69.Kc3 Ka4 70.Bb6 h5 – Black pushes his pawn in time)
(diagram)
69...Ka4 70.Be1 h5 71.Kd4 h4 72.Ke4 Kb3 73.Kf4 Kc4 74.Kg4 Kd5 75.Bxh4 (75.Kxh4 Kc6) 75...a5 76.bxa5 Kc6 and Black draws.

Page 220, right column, end of comment after 41.Ra7 Bd6: 43.Rxa4 should be 45.Rxa4

Endgame Virtuoso Anatoly Karpov – Tibor Karolyi & Nick Aplin (1st ed.)

On p. 22, after Game 1, the following was added:
‘Zlatoust, where Karpov was born and where this game was played, means ‘gold’. Gold-diggers often have to dig deep. In this game Karpov’s skill lis right below the surface, it shines through like gold.’

On page 33, in Game 5 in the comment after 37.Rd4?, the following fragment was added:
‘This manoeuvre is remindful of a famous game between Efim Geller and Bobby Fischer, played one year earlier. The great Russian grandmaster found an impressive way to improve his rook against the young American genius, who was just 1 year old when he got this positional lesson.
 
                        Geller - Fischer 
                         Curacao 1962

22.Ra1!! Rd8 23.Ra4 Bf5 24.Rb4 Bc8 25.Rb6
And Geller went on to win in great style. I wonder if Karpov already knew this positional masterpiece.’

Page 37: Under ‘International Debut’ the following was added:
‘He became the youngest Soviet master ever, which was an incredible achievement.’

Page 51, under ‘Rise to the Top’ the following was added after ‘a tremendous feat’:
‘This was the first time that Karpov showed the level of a World Champion.’

Page 74, in the introductory text to Game 24 (Karpov-Parma), the following sentence was added:
‘In 1971, he became the youngest grandmaster in the world at his first shot.’

Page 97, under ‘The Road to the World Title’:
‘… he overcame Spassky, whose style suited Karpov very well, with the best result ever made against a former World Champion: +4 =6 –1. This match was one of the peaks of Karpov’s career.’
was changed into:
‘… he overcame Spassky, whose style suited Karpov very well. Their overall score is 15-2, an incredible achievement and a record against a World Champion. This match was the most impressive of the cycle.’

Page 122, left column, above: after ‘the move 57…e4 is a sad necessity for Black…’ the following phrase was added:
‘… as he is in zugzwang and has to play his pawn to e3, giving the white king the f3-square; …’

Page 129, under ‘First Reign (1975-1977)’, end of first paragraph, the sentence:
‘In 1976, the year he turned 25, Karpov played an impressive and much-anaysed endgame against former Junior World Champion Bojan Kurajica.’
was removed.

Page 130, above game Grigorian-Karpov the following introductory text was added:
‘Karpov’s opponent was an Armenian player who died tragically at a young age.’

Page 133, comment after 41.a6 Nc7!?:
‘At a lower level of performance players often forget about fortresses. Maybe in this position just very few would take the knight, but people tend to forget about this motif.’
was changed in:
‘Maybe here very few players would take the knight, but many players, especially at a lower level, tend to forget about the fortress motif. Kasparov was very good at this and spotted it in his My Great Predecessors book. In his first World Championship game with Short he found it within a minute.’

Page 139, introduction to Game 45 (Uhlman-Karpov), the phrase ‘perhaps sensing Fischer’s spirit’ was replaced by:
‘Even though runner-up Uhlmann was a point behind and a draw sufficed to win the tournament, Karpov went for the win.’

Page 164, under ‘Second Reign (1978-1980)', after ‘Karpov missed Furman’ the following phrase was added between brackets:
‘(his highly successful trainer who had beaten seven World Champions – his passing away didn’t do Karpov’s chess any good)’

Page 167, after the game Karpov-Miles, the following sentence was added:
‘In Torquay 1998 for instance, he (i.e., Miles) beat Nigel Short from a totally drawn position.’

Page 170, comment after 91.Bf6 Kh5, 2nd paragraph:
‘Interestingly, some current computer programs cannot handle the position. Yet…’
has been replaced by:
‘Current computer programs, by the way, have already learnt how to handle this position as well.’

Page 202, game Karpov-Ivkov, above left:
As an alternative to 48…h5!, the following was added:
‘(waiting passively with 48…Ne5 does not help Black: 49.Kd5 Kf7 50.h5! Ke8 51.Kd6! Kd8 (51…Kf7 52.Kc7; 51…Nxg4 52.Kc6 Ne5+ 53.Kxb5 Kd7 54.Lf8) 52.Lb6+ Kc8 53.Ke6 and White wins)’

Page 202, right column, under B1, after 53.Kc5 the following line was added:
‘(with the surprising 53.Ke6!! White can hunt down the knight; Ivkov misses this unique switch, for example: 53…g6 (53…Nxh4 loses to 54.Bxh4 Kxh5 55.Bxf6) 54.hxg6 Kxg6 55.Kd5 Kh5 56.Kc6 Nxh4 57.Kxb5 Ng6 58.Kc5 Ne5 59.b5 Kg4 60.Bd4 and White wins)’

Page 202, next, after 56.b5 Ke6, the following new lines have been added:
‘B11) 57.Kc7 Ne7 58.Bc5 Nd5+ 59.Kc6 f5 and Black survives;
B12) 57.Bc5 Nxh4 58.b6 Nf3!! Ivkov missed this great saving move; after 58…Ng6 59.Bd6 White promotes the b-pawn) 59.Kc7 Ne5 60.b7 Nd7=;
B13) 57.b6!. This is the right way to play: 57…Ne7+ 58.Kc5 (only move) 58…Kd7 59.h5! (59.Kb5 Nc8! And Black can destroy the b-pawn with the knight) 59…Nc6 60.Bg3 Nd8 61.Kd5 and remarkably, White now invades on the kingside: 61…Nb7 62.Be1 Nd8 63.Bb4 and White wins.’

Page 203, right, after 47.h4 Bc6, in line B1 the following has been added after ‘according to Ivkov, Black holds’:
‘… with the help of a witty pawn sacrifice. Still, worse positions usually lose in same-coloured bishop endings. Black can fight to survive with the move 52…Nd6. After 52…Ne5? there follows 53.Bxe5 fxe5+ 54.Kxe5 Kg8 55.Bd5+ Kf8 56.Kf4 Ke7 57.Bf3 Bc4 58.Ke3!! (this move was probably missed in the post mortem) 58…Kd6 (58…Bf7 59.Be2 Be8 60.Kd4 Kd6 61.Bd3 Bd7 62.g5! Ke7 63.f6+ Kf8 64.fxg7+ Kxg7 65.gxh6+ Kxh6 66.Kc5 Kxh5 67.Bxb5 and White wins) 5.Be2! Bxe2 (59…Kd5 60.Bxc4+ Kxc4 61.g5) 60.Kxe2 Ke5 61.Ke3 Kd5 62.g5 and White wins.’

Page 204, comment after 48.h5!!, 2nd paragraph:
after … 52.h5, the line ‘or 49…Ne5 50.Kd5 Kf7 51.h5 Ke8 52.Kd6’ has been added.

Page 213, Game Van der Wiel-Karpov, comment after 52.Ne4+;
‘… as he does after 52.Rg6 Ke5.’ has been replaced by the following:
‘This also seems the case after 52.Rg6 Ke5, but White keeps drawing chances with the surprising 53.Ng8!!. It’s really hard to trust a move like this and even if John saw it, one can understand that he did not like to play it: 53…Kxf5 54.Ne7+ Ke5 (Black can try 54…Kg4 55.Rg7 Rh3+ 56.Kd4 as well, but it’s hard to tell whether he can win with the extra pawn, as there are very few pawns left) 55.Nc8 g4 56.Nxa7 Rh7 and now:
A) 57.Nb5 Bxb5 58.Rg5+ Kf4 59.Rxb5, leaving Black three choices:
A1) 59…Rg7 60.Rxb6 g3 61.Rf6+ Kg4 62.Rf1 g2 63.Rg1 Kf3 64.a4 Kf2 65.Ra1 g1Q (65…Re7 66.b4) 66.Rxg1 Rxg1 is only a draw;
A2) 59…g3 60.Rb4+! (forcing the king away or blocking the third rank; 60.Rxb6 loses to 60…g2 61.Rg6 Rh3+ 62.Kc4 Rg3) 60…Kf3 (60…Kf5 61.Rb5+ Kg4 62.Rxb6 Rg7 63.Re6 g2 64.Re1 and White can again sac the rook) 61.Rxb6 g2 (after 61…Rg7 62.Rf6+ Ke2 63.Re6+ Kd1 64.Rd6+ Kc1 65.Re6 White holds) 62.Rg6 Rh3 63.Rxg2 Kxg2+ 64.Kc4 is a draw. Interestingly, 64.Kb4 would lose, but shouldering with 64.Kd4 would also hold;
A3) 59…Rh6! (not that hard to find, but there are several tempting possibilities) 62.Kd2 Re6! (decisively cutting off the king) 61.a4 g3 62.a5 bxa5 63.Rxa5 g2 and Black wins.
B) 57.Rxg4!. White has only one pawn left and his king is standing well. Maybe this is an objective draw, it certainly offers reasonable drawing chances over the board, for example: 57…Rxa7
B1) 58.Rg6 Ra6 (58…Rb7 59.Kb4 Be8 60.Rh6 Kd5 61.a4 and White probably holds) 59.Kb4 Be8 60.Rh6 Ra4+ 61.Kc3 b5 – probably Black can win this;
B2) 58.Kb4! Be8 59.b3 Rh7 60.a4 – this is very close, maybe it’s a draw.’

Page 214 (Ribli-Karpov), right column, comment after 20.Kxg2 f6:
‘24.Nd8! and White is clearly better.’ has been replaced by:
’24.Rd8! (after 24.Nd8! White is also clearly better) 24…Rxd8 25.Nxd8 Bd6 26.Nxe6 Kf7 27.Nc5 a5 28.Nb3. White keeps his extra pawn and Black’s activity probably doesn’t give enough compensation.’

Page 216, left column, comment after 24…Kf8:
at the end, the following has been added:
’24…Ba3 would lead to lines similar to the ones with 23…Ba3.’

Page 216, right column, comment after 28.Rc4!, the following has been added:
‘Ribli writes in his analysis that he likes this move.’

Page 216, after the move 29.Rxc8, the following new comment has been added:
‘With 29.Nc6! White could have limited Black’s freedom of movement. Possibly this was even stronger than the text, for example: 29…Ke8 30.Rb1! and White keeps his advantage here as well.’

Page 217, right column, comment after 40…Bf8?!:
The sentence ‘Karpov goes down without giving Ribli the opportunity to go wrong.’
has been replaced by:
‘Preventing the mate but moving away his active bishop. Uncharacteristically Karpov misses his best chance. Possibly he had missed the mate threat and now panicked.’

Page 218, left column, comment after 40…Bf8?!, after the moves 43.Rf7+ Kg5 a new line B) has been given:
‘B) 44.Ne6+!. The simpler way to win, for example: 44…Kxh5 45.Nxc5 Kg6 (45…Rd2 46.Nd3 a2 47.Ra7 Kh4 48.Kd4 and White can start pushing his e-pawn) 46.Rf4 Rc2 47.Kd5 a2 (47…Kh5 48.Nd3 Rd2 49.Kd4) 48.Rxg4+ Kh5 49.Ra4 and White wins.’

And right after this, the following new comment:
‘However, the black king can run away from the danger zone with 40…Ke6!!, when his passed pawn saves the game. Ribli missed this escape in his analysis: 41.Nd8+ (in case of 41.Rh6 Rxf2 42.Rxg6+ Rf6 Black escapes) 41…Kd6 42.Nf7+ (or 42.Nb7+ Kc6 43.Nxc5 Kxc5 44.f4 a3 and the a-pawn is so far advanced, the position is equal) 42…Kc6 43.Ne5+ Kb5 44.Rb7+ Ka6 and White cannot win.’

The line with 44.Rf5+ Kh6 etc. is therefore classified as A) and the rest of the numbering has been changed accordingly.

Page 219, left column, after the moves 41.Ra7 Bd6 the following comment has been added:
‘It looks like Black cannot take the key f-pawn, but tactics are on his side: 41…Rxf2!! (my fellow Hungarian also missed this move in his analysis) 42.Ne5 (after 42.Rxa4 Rh2 there are too few pawns on the board for White to win) 42…Rb2!! (this brilliant move saves Black) 43.Nd7+ (43.Ra6+ Kg7 44.Rxa4 Rb7 and Black holds. He could also exchange rooks on b4) 43…Ke7 44.Nxf8+ Kxf8 45.Rxa4 and White can play on with his extra pan, but objectively this is a draw.’

Page 225, 2nd paragraph under ‘Third Reign (1981-1983):
at the end the following has been added:
‘In the last round, Karpov went on to win a theoretically drawn rook endgame, against IM Jakobsen.’

Page 243, right column: at the end of the Torre-Karpov game, the following comment has been added:
‘A typical Karpov game. Already at a very young age he knew how to go after the enemy king, even in the endgame. This feature of his play has hardly been noticed. He kept his sting in his adult years.’

Page 259, end of game Karpov-Polugaevsky, after 53.Nxa5 Nxa5 the following has been added:
‘? – 53…Nd4+ is still a draw.’

Page 276, game Karpov-Kasparov, right column, above, line D23), after 70.Kd2!
‘I think that this king march brings down Karsten Müller’s defensive plan’
has been replaced by:
‘I thought that this king march would bring down Karsten Müller’s defensive plan thanks to a later finesse, but Müller found a ‘counter-finesse’:’

Page 276, under the analysis diagram, after 79.Ng2!:
‘79.Kg8!? is another try.’ has been added.

Page 276: line D2322 (79…Kd5 etc.) has become D2321 and D2323 (79…Kf5 etc.) has become D2322.
Line D2324 (79…Kd6) has become D2323, and here, after 80…Bf3 the following has been added:
‘?! (according to Dvoretsky, 80…Bg4 is even simpler as it makes it easier to avoid the later zugzwang possibility)’ and after 81…Be4: ‘(again 81…Bg4!?)’.

Page 276: Line D2321 has been changed into D2324, and instead of 80…Kf5 the following has been added:
’80…Kd6! (80…Kf5? 81.d5! Kxf4 82.d6 Bc6 83.Ke7 and White wins) 81.Ke8 Bd1 82.Kd8 Bg4
D2324a) 83.Ng2 Bf5! (83…Be6? 84.Ne3) 84.Ne3 Be6 85.Nd1 Kd5 86.Nc3+ (White cannot win by 86.Ke7 Bg8 87.Nc3+ Kxd4 88.Nxb5+) 86…Kxd4 87.Nxb5+ Kc4 – with the bishop on f5, Nd6 would win, but now it is a draw;
D2324b) 83.d5 Bf5 (83…Ke5? 84.Kc7 Kxf4 85.d6 Ke5 86.d7 Bxd7 87.Kxd7 Kd5 88.Kc7) 84.Ng2 (84.Ke8 Be4 (84…Ke5? 85.Ke7) 85.Kf7 Bh1 (85…Bxd5+ Nxd5) 86.Kf6 Be4 and White cannot make any progress) 84…Bg4 (84…Be4? 85.Ne3 Bf3 86.Kc8) 85.Ne3 Bh3 86.Ke8 Bc8 87.Kf7 Bb7 (87…Bh3 88.Kf6 Bd7) 88.Kf6 Ba8 (88…Bc8; 88…Bxd5? 89.Nxd5 Kxd5 90.Ke7 Kc4 91.Kd6 Kb3 92.Kc5) 89.Kf5 Bxd5. Now the white king is too far away from the b-pawn, so Black is safe.’

Page 277, left column, after D3:
‘Marin found the most stylish win: 6.Ng7+!!’
has been changed into:
‘Marin found the stylish 69.Ng7+!!, which seems to be the only way to win’

Page 287, under ‘Later Years’, the 2nd paragraph has been changed into:
‘In the return match with Kasparov in London and Leningrad, the most uncompromising of all their matches, Karpov played for a win also with black. Again he lost with the narrowest of margins: 11,5-12,5. Their fourth match, in Sevilla the next year, ended in a tie and Kasparov retained his title. In 1990, in New York and Lyon, Kasparov was already the better player. Again the final score was close (11,5-12,5), but Karpov was defending and won a game only when he had already lost the match.’

Page 313, under ‘Fruitful Years (1988-1990)’:
‘next he overcame Artur Yusupov by winning in the last game’
has been replaced by:
‘… but Artur Yusupov made him look like a human. This match was very close – Karpov won by 4,5-3,5.’

Page 351, Epilogue, 5th paragraph: in the list of analysts, Karsten Müller has been added.

Chess Opening Essentials Part 1 (2nd ed.) – Stefan Djuric, Dimitri Komarov, Claudio Pantaleoni

Page 58:
In the diagram, the white Nb1 should be on d2, black Ke8 should be on g8, Rh8 should be on f8.

Page 271, 1st column, line 8 above variation A2):
‘the manoeuvre …h6, …Nh7 and …g5 is also effective’: …g5 should be ‘…Ng5’.

Endgame Tactics – G. van Perlo (3rd ed.)

Page 18, fragment 5:
Karsten Müller has pointed out that it is not clear if Grünfeld actually resigned in this position. It might have been just a variation from later analysis.

Page 51, fragment 75:
Final sentence of final comment: 4…Qd4+ instead of 4…Qd2+.

Page 71, fragment 127:
Comment after 2.Qe5!: the remark ‘2…gxf6 meets with 3.Dxf6+ Ke8 4.g7 Qxc3+ 5.Kh4 winning’ is incorrect and has to be removed. Black draws with 5…Qe1 6.Kxh3 (6.Kh5 Be6 and Black draws at least, and maybe wins) 6…Qe3, as Steve Murdoch has pointed out.

Page 155, fragment 341: comment after 14.g5: ‘Checks no longer help as after 14.Rf8+ Ke4 15.Re8+ the rook can be interposed’ is incorrect, as Echkard Hoffman and David Hotham have pointed out: after 15…Re5?? 16.a8Q+ Kf4 17.Rxe5 Kxe5 18.Qa5+ Kf4 19.Qxb4+ Kf3 20.Qe1, White wins. Black should play 15…Kd3 16.Rd8+ Ke3 17.Re8+ Kd2 18.Rd8+ Ke1 19.a8Q Rxa8 20.Rxa8 b3!, and one of Black’s pawns will queen.

Page 304, fragment 719:
As Victor Trifan from Ontario wrote to us, in the main line after 2...Ra6 White has 3.h4 mate. The correct move is 2...Rh6!, giving the exchange after which the endgame is drawn. This move is given wrongly in all the databases.

Endgame Tactics – G. van Perlo (2nd ed.)

Checking the 2nd edition to make the 3rd edition, we ran all positions with 6 pieces or less through the Nalimov endgame tablebases. This check resulted in many corrections, mostly in sidelines. To give all these corrections here would go too far. We have restricted ourselves to the most important changes.

Page 17, fragment 3: was Söderborg-Drimer instead of Drimer-Söderborg

Page 24, fragment 17: small diagram is wrong

Page 34, fragment 42, comment after 3.Kf5: after the given 3.Kh5 Black does not play 3…Kb5 but immediately 3…d4!, winning, as Gary Blagstad has pointed out.

Page 51, fragment 75:
1. Comment after 1.h6: 1.Qe4 followed by 2.g4 is not ‘easier’, but also a theoretical draw.
2. Comment after 2.Kh4: The position after 2.Qf5 Qd4 3.Qf4 Qa1 is drawn, not ‘unclear’.
3. Final comment: After 3.Qh3, 3…Qd2? is wrong; White wins after 4.Qe6 Kh7 5.Qf7+ Kxh6 6.Qh5+ Kg7 7.Qg5+. After 4…Qd4+ or 4…Qh2+ Black will run out of checks.

Page 124, fragment 267:
In the introductory comment, 1.Kf6! is given as drawing. Later it was discovered that 1…Qg5+! still wins. So the question mark for the game move 1.Nd6 should be removed.
Black also wins after 2.Kd7 (instead of 2.Kf8) 2…Qf6 3.Ke8 Qe6+ 4.Kf8 Kg5!.

Page 135, fragment 287:
1.b6? is not a mistake, but 4.Kb3? was: still winning was 4.Rd4! Ka6 5.Rd5! (threatening to take a walk with the king) 5…Rc1 6.Rd7! Ra1+ (now Black has no lateral checks) 7.Kb4 Rb1+ 8.Kc5 Rb5+ 9.Kc6.
Next:
4…Rh3+?
After 4…Ka6! White cannot make any headway, see 5.Kc4 Rh4+ 6.Kc5 Rh5+ 7.Kd6 Rh6+ 8.Ke7 Rh7+ 9.Kf6 Rb7! 10.Ra4 Rh7! 11.Ra1 Rb7 with a draw.
5.Ka2 Rh2+
Draw agreed, although White could still have played his king to a4 and carried out the winning plan indicated on move 4.

Page 196, fragment 439:
Erik Rausch has pointed out the following:
1. 5.Ra8 is still a draw, not an ‘elementary mistake’
2. Polugaevsky actually did play 6.Ka3 and not 6.Ka1, so 7…Kb3! instead of 7…c4 was not possible
3. Instead of 9.Ka2 (9.Kb1 was not possible after 6.Ka3), 9.Ra6 or 9.Ra5 would have drawn.

Page 251, fragment 583:
Instead of 4…Kb3, Black could have walked out of the checks with 4…Kb4! 5.Qe7+ Kb3 6.Qe6+ Kc3 and then 7.Qa2 Rh4+ 8.Kg3 f4+ 9.Kg2 Rxh2+ and 10…Rxa2.

Page 253, fragment 588:
Comment after 2.Kg4 g5?: instead of 5.Rc7, 5.Rc8! wins (Van Wijgerden).

Page 348, fragment 835:
In the actual game White lost after 1.d7? Rxd7 in view of 2.Kc4 Rc7!.

Page 367, fragment 878:
Instead of 6.Ke1, White could have held off the black king a little longer with 6.Kd2 Kc4 7.Kc2, but then comes 7…Bg3! 8.Be1 Bh4 9.Kd2 Kb3 10.Kc1 Bf6 and Black wins.
But instead of 11.Ke1?, the win for Black would still have been problematic after 11.Bc3! Bd6 (threatening 12…Bxa3) 12.Bd4.

Page 369, fragment 882:
After 3.Bd7: Tougher was 3…dxc4 4.Bxc4 Ka5 5.Bb3 Kb4 6.Bf7! Kxa4 7.Be8 Kb4 (7…Kb5 8.d5) 8.Bxc6 Kc4 and White conquers the centre with tempo play: 9.Bg2 Be6 10.Bb7 Bd7 11.Ba6+ Kd5 12.Kd3 followed by e3-e4+ with promising winning chances.

Page 370, fragment 885:
The right winning plan starts with 2…Bh2! instead of 2…Be1?: 3.Bf2 Bf4 4.Be3 Kg3 5.Bf2+ Kf3 6.Be1 (or 6.Kg1) 6…Bg5 and 7…h4, or 6.Bh4 Be5! 7.Kg1 Bg3 and 8…h4.

Page 382, fragment 913:
1.e6+ is wrong; 1.Bb8 wins.

Page 390, fragment 931:
The game move 4...Nd1+ is wrong; 4...Ng4! wins in 17 moves.

Page 392, fragment 936:
3...Nd3? is not ‘barely winning’ but drawn after 4.Kf5!.

Page 447, fragment 1067:
After 1.h6? Be5 White is already lost. After 2.Kh4 it just takes a little longer. Correct was 1.Kf4= of 1.Kh4=.

Page 448, fragment 1069:
Instead of 2…Ke5, 2…Ke7 still draws, as long as after 3.b5 Black plays not 3…Kd8? but 3…Kd6! 4.Ka6 Kc5 5.b6 Bf3.

Page 449, fragment 1072:
The starting position is already lost for White. The correct analysis after 1.Kh3 goes: 1…h6 2.g4!? Kf2! (2…Kf4? 3.Kg2!) 3.g5 Bxg5! (3…hxg5? 4.Kg4 and Black cannot prevent 5.h4 with a draw) 4.Kg2 Kg2 5.h4 Bd2! and White is in zugzwang – with careful manoeuvres Black can win the h-pawn.
 
Page 454, fragment 1088:
Instead of 1…Kg6, interesting is 1…fxg4!? (Van Wijgerden): 2.Ke3 h5 3.Kxe4 h4 4.Kxd3 g3 5.hxg3 fxg3 6.Ne3 and White retains good winning chances.

Page 458, fragment 1097:
Not 2.Ke1 but 3.Nd5? is the decisive mistake; 3.Ne6 or 3.Nb5 still draws.

Page 459, fragment 1102:
1.Nc3! (Van Wijgerden) is also a draw.

Endgame Tactics – G. van Perlo (1st ed.)

Page 17, fragment 3:
In the line given after 1.Kd7, Black plays 2…Kd8! instead of 2…Kb8 and now 3.Kb7 c6! and neither 4.Kxc6 Kc8 nor 4.Kxa7 Kc7 brings White anything, as Stephen Falk and Fernando Semprun have pointed out.

Page 21, fragment 12:
The fragment Usakov-Davitashvili was incorrect and has been replaced in the 2nd editon by a fragment Swinkels-Erenburg.

Page 138, fragment 294:
Karsten Müller has pointed out that instead of 2.Kd5!, 2.Kd7! would also have won, e.g. 2…Rh6 3.Rc7!.

Page 153, fragment 337:
According to Karsten Müller, instead of 2.bxa5? White could still have won with 2.b5! Rb1 3.Rh7, e.g. 3…a4 4.Rxa7 a3 5.Kb6.

Page 171, fragment 379:
As Karsten Müller has pointed out, 1.Re8 instead of 1.Re7 would not have won: 1…h5! 2.Kf3 (2.f6 h4+ 3.Kf3 Ra6 is a draw as well) 2…h4 3.Ke3 Ra3+ 4.Kf4 Rxh3 5.Rd8+ and now not 5…Kc5? but 5…Kc6! (Peter Scheeren in Schaakbulletin 142) 6.f6 Rh1! 7.Kg/e5 h3! and there is no win, and neither is there after 6.Rd1 Rh2 7.Kf3 Rh3 8.Kg4 Rh2 9.Rd3 h3! – Timman.

Page 294, fragment 695:
Variation after 1…h1Q!: after 1…Ne5+? White does not play 2.Kxd6 as indicated; Gerhard Josten has pointed out in Rochade Europa 5, 2006, that after 2.Kb6! Bc5+ 3.Kxc5 Nxf7 4.Kb6 Nd8 White has various wins.