Is endgame study important?

I think it would be good to study king and pawn endings.  I find that there are a number of games where I need to decide whether to trade in to a king and pawn endgame.

Rook and pawn endings are also important.  When I played in tournaments regularly, I understood these endings well, and so I often went into a Rook and Pawn ending down a pawn, and still won the game.

Bishop vs. Knight endings might be next.  The Bishop is usually better, if you know how to play this type of ending.

I would start studying these shortly after you know enough opening strategy to sty out of trouble for the first 5 or 6 moves, and enough about the middlegame so that it is rare that you give away a free pawn or piece.

Beginners often spend too much time memorizing opening moves without an understanding of opening fundamentals. The beginner will become easily confused when his or her opponent varies from memorized lines. Therefore, beginners are well advised to initially avoid memorizing opening moves. "Openings teach you openings. Endgames teach you chess!" (Gerzadowicz)

Endgame theory is well established. Whereas, opening theory changes with each new innovation. Therefore, you can be confident that time spent learning endgame theory will not be wasted. Besides, it is easier for the beginner to comprehend the movements of few pieces then of 32 pieces.

One thing is clear, a student of the endgame will usually reach a happy ending!

"Opening will learn you opening but end game will learn you chess"

Jose Raul Capablanca 

Of course it's important.  What kind of question is that?  Every part of the game is important to study.

The weaker you are, the less important the endgame is.  Normally, you don't make the ending.  But if you want to progress as a player, or if you want to succeed in tournaments, endings are essential.  What's the point of playing like a monster in the opening and/or middlegame only to toss your game away because you don't know about "the opposition" or "the Lucena position"?

Endgame is only part of chess which is science so can be mastered with proper study. Rest of game is more of art . So there no standard way to master middle game like there is no way any one can make you a good poet ! Endgame study  will surely help you to win a lot of games .

I can play a mean opening game, which usually gives me a strong position in the midgame. The problem boils down to the endgame. I have the picture of a game I was playing agains Little ChessPartner. I had just finished a rather extensive trade off which left me a bishop up and a passed pawn (Black had only pawns and they were locked in). I had managed to get 2 of them promoted, though through my lack of endgame skills, I had managed to throw this one for a draw, but ChessPartner called Checkmate (I'm positive it was a draw).

http://i361.photobucket.com/albums/oo57/DamastaOfAll/chesspartner.jpg?t=1227839069

endgames are Very important. [yawn? may be.. - but they are still very important.]

K+B+P+P v K+R is drawn if the two pawns are an edge-pawn and a neighbouring pawn [ie h&g or a&b - in descriptive: RP and NP]  even if the pawn are advanced beyond the fourth rank - but if you dont know why [the stalemate position] then you will lose with K+R in this case, because you wont even know that there is a draw by stalemate!

etc etc.

It is important.Alekhine has stated that to excell  in chess we need to play well in the three phases of the game: opening middle game and endgame.Picture this... your opponent's play in the opening is strong but you were able to hold your own by equalizing... then he starts the middle game attack, sets-up traps, pins and forks which almost put you to the wall.But you deflected each threat one after the other. Then to lessen his attacks in piece play, you force an exchange to simplify the position sac sac... then you are now in the end game...the culmination of all the hard work you've done in the whole game which decides your fate in the game. What do you do?

Capablanca has praised both Janowski and Nimzovicth as excellent middle game players but he does not quallify them as good endgame players.Actually "weak" was the word Capa used in his book "Capablancas last lectures". Alekhine too had  to understand Capa's approach to the endgame in order to fully understand Capa's style. The endgame may be a bit boring to some but its worth really studying even Karpov recommends studying it.

"In studying, one should study the endgame before the opening or middlegame because, while the endgame can be studued by itself, the opening and middlegame must be studied in relation to the endgame."

Another Capablanca quote (or something similar to a Capablanca quote).

Asking if endgame study is important in chess is like asking if it is important for american football teams to practice their 2-minute drill.  You may not need it for every single game, but you'll sure notice when you're running out of time and don't have a well-organized plan for executing the win.

Basic endgame study is very helpful. You'll have a hard time closing out games if you don't know basic endgame patterns. You'll find yourself losing games where you're up a pawn (or even more) because you blew the position.

I think the endgame is the most important thing to study in chess, besides tactics. Unfortunatly it is also the most boring, well for me anyway... I think my weakest part of my game is my endgame.

 Believe me too.