Two-Result Game
Two-Result Game
Definition
A two-result game is a chess position or entire game in which one side (usually the stronger or better-placed side) has virtually eliminated the possibility of losing. From that point forward, only two final outcomes are realistically on the table:
- A win for the advantaged side, or
- A draw.
In other words, the inferior side cannot conjure up winning chances of their own unless the superior side makes a serious, self-inflicted error. The advantaged player may therefore press “risk-free,” confident that the worst plausible result is a half-point.
How the Term Is Used
Practical players, commentators, and writers use the phrase in several ways:
- Evaluation shorthand. “Carlsen has converted the middlegame into a two-result ending” tells viewers that Magnus can press indefinitely without danger.
- Strategic guideline. Elite players often steer toward two-result structures when they need to win a particular game (e.g., the final round of a tournament) but cannot risk a loss.
- Psychological lever. Knowing your opponent must defend flawlessly for hours, while you have no losing chances, can be a potent psychological weapon.
Strategic Significance
Converting an advantage into a two-result game is a cornerstone of top-level endgame technique. Common ingredients include:
- Material edge with safe king. An extra pawn in a queenless ending, with no mating nets to fear.
- Space advantage and pawn squeezes. A bind (e.g., the Maroczy structure) that cramps counterplay.
- Opposite-colored bishop endings. Paradoxically, the stronger side can press forever because the defender’s bishop cannot challenge certain squares, yet perpetual-check chances are minimal.
- Endgames with one open file. Rook + pawn endings in which the weaker side’s rook is purely passive.
Historical Context & Famous Examples
Two-result games are sprinkled throughout classic tournament play:
-
Carlsen – Karjakin, World Championship 2016, Game 10
After 29. Rd1, Karjakin was tied to passive defense of a backward d-pawn. Commentators noted that Carlsen had “arrived at a two-result position”: Black had no active breaks, while White could probe forever. Karjakin eventually cracked on move 56. -
Fischer – Petrosian, Candidates Final 1971, Game 7
Fischer liquidated to a rook-and-opposite-colored-bishops ending where only he could nurse the passed h-pawn. Petrosian saved the draw, but never came close to winning. -
Karpov’s “boa-constrictor” style
Anatoly Karpov built much of his reputation on steering volatile middlegames into two-result endgames, slowly suffocating opponents while taking essentially zero risk.
Illustrative Mini-Position
Imagine the following simplified ending (White to move):
White: King g3, Rook a7, Pawns a5, f4, h4
Black: King g8, Rook a3, Pawns a6, f7, h7
White is a pawn up, has the active rook behind the passed a-pawn, and the safer king. Black’s rook is stuck guarding the a-file. There is no counter-check mechanism—Black can only sit and wait. White can shuffle kingside pawns, improve the king, and push a6–a7 at leisure. The results realistically available: 1-0 or ½-½—a textbook two-result scenario.
Interesting Facts & Anecdotes
- The expression is borrowed from sports like cricket and baseball, where a team may reach a point in the match where only two final scores remain plausible.
- Magnus Carlsen’s endgame tablebase prep is reputedly aimed at extending the horizon of two-result positions—he knows exactly how far he can press without slipping into danger.
- Engine paradox: Modern engines often show “+0.30” in positions that human grandmasters label a two-result game. The computer sees no forced win, but the human understands that all practical winning chances flow one way.
Key Takeaways
Converting an advantage into a two-result game is a hallmark of elite technique. It marries strategic safety with maximum practical winning chances, forcing the defender into a long, error-prone grind while shielding the attacker from counterplay.