Two Bishop Mate

I am very bad at chess lol so I am trying to learn about some tricks to win.

One of them is having two bishops in a endgame.

I have been practicing the two bishop mate but I need some help!

Any tips?

https://www.chess.com/forum/view/endgames/two-bishops-mate-1

1st post is annotated which should be helpful to you. I suggest focusing not as much on the moves, but how the moves reduce space/confines the kings space. Also note when and understand why waiting moves are played.

Edited to add - to my understanding, this does not occur very often, which means after you learn it, you will need to review often enough to make sure you are capable of doing it. Also if I am correct that it is relatively rare that it occurs, your time studying may be better spent on studying reviewing things which occur more frequently.

I also do not no how to do this

Two bishop mate is hard

You should practice the 5 basic checkmates: KQ vs. K, KR vs. K, KBB vs. K, KBN vs. K, KNN vs. KP.
In his beginner book A Primer Of Chess Capablanca treats them.

It actually occurs but rarely, you can just learn it on YouTube or chess.com videos, but its not necessary.

I have to ask if it's actually useful to learn, (as a 'trick to win' as per the OP). I've told myself I will learn the 2 bishops checkmate when I draw or lose a game because I don't know it. I have never drawn or lost a game because I don't know it, so I haven't bothered learning it.

I know it's listed as a basic endgame I have to learn but I feel like I got more out of Anna Rudolf's pawn endgames course than I would ever get out of a Bishops checkmate.

Of the tens of thousands of chess games I've played in my life, I've yet to have one that came down to a two-bishop checkmate (or, for that matter, a bishop-and-knight checkmate). That's how rare they are.

This should be about 186th on your list of things to study.

If you want to study endgames, how much work ahve you put into understanding king-and-pawn endings? That's the place to start (and they can get very complicated, so there's no such thing as studying them too much). Two reasons for this: 1) for games were you find yourself in a king-and-pawn ending. 2) for games where you're in something larger -- Rook-and-pawn, knight-and-pawn, etc -- and you frequently need to be able to evaluate (and often rahter quickly) what the consequences would be of trading into a pawn ending.

Study rook and pawn endgames

In order to get good at checkmates you need to understand the ideas
ladder mate for example, walking the king up the board, cutting him off and then ensuring the rooks do not let the king get close.
For 2 bishop mate, understand the ideas, and practice against the engine
Go to chess.com/analysis
set up position
8/3k4/8/8/8/2B5/2BK4/8 w - - 0 1
is a good FEN to paste in
then click practice against computer
The ideas are to get their king to the side of the board, then into a corner
Theres ways to push the king back
the first is two bishops next to each other, they cover 4 squares

You have to also consider waiting moves
Check this example where I made a mistake, no problem can just go back and wait 1 move

Its important to practice end games to really have it sink in.. So load different types of positions and practice against the endgame, and when you feel comfortable... If you find an opponent who refuses to resign, step out of your comfort zone and give away/trade off all pieces so that you only have 2 bishops and a king. You will find humans play differently to the computer in this scenario and will play moves that will throw you off.
Good luck
Also those above stating you should focus on the other, more common endgames, are right.. But I support your ambition to tackle these less common ones

Also... I keep replying to myself but oh well..
Just like a N+B+K mate, is it important to know... well yes... Does it come up much... Absolutely not. Have I ever seen it in a tournament game? No... However, there is potential to see it in games however a lot of players sway the game in a different direction to avoid getting put in that pressure situation.
Its a weird flex to back but still nice to pull off, every piece of chess knowledge you have will make you stronger

@10

"I've yet to have one that came down to a two-bishop checkmate (or, for that matter, a bishop-and-knight checkmate)." ++ Yes, KBB is rare. KBN occurs more often.

In blitz it often happens: to get out of a losing endgame sacrifice pieces for pawns to leave KBN vs. K, most opponents fail to checkmate.

I once saw an amateur reach it against an IM in a classical time control Swiss open tournament. The master had blundered and the endgame resulted. The amateur could not win it. I guess he regrets to this day that he was to lazy to learn it, so he could have boasted about defeating an IM.

Apart from that, learning KBB vs. K, KBN vs. K, KNN vs. KP also shows B > N, which most beginners otherwise fail to understand.

"This should be about 186th on your list of things to study." ++ Capablanca included the 5 basic checkmates in both A Primer of Chess and Chess Fundamentals, so he thought differently.

"how much work ahve you put into understanding king-and-pawn endings?"
++ That is fundamental too, but does not occur as often as rook endings.

I haven't needed KBN vs K either yet.

And situations where your opponent could go for a draw by trading to a K vs KBN endgame don't matter if they don't actually do so.

And you can do so yourself without actually knowing how to win K vs KBN (or even knowing it is theoretically a win).

@16

"And you can do so yourself without actually knowing how to win K vs KBN (or even knowing it is theoretically a win)." ++ It is hard to do if you do not know, even in classical time control, even more in blitz.

To clarify, I mean you can trade down to a K vs KBN endgame to go for a draw; without knowing how to win one yourself.

I'm not saying you can win one without knowing how to.

Yes, that one requires study (though, like I said, I’ve yet to find myself on either side of one, so I’m not sure it’s worth it relative to studying other things). KBB, on the other hand, could probably be figured out over the board, especially in a slow game.

And yes, rook endings are important too, but to play them well, you also have to be good in pawn endings. If you’re able to judge pawn endings accurately and quickly, that gives you some extra leverage on being able to correctly judge when it’s ok offer or accept a rook trade.

@18

"trade down to a K vs KBN endgame to go for a draw; without knowing how to win one yourself" ++ Not really, you have to know where to go with your king to make it harder.
Checkmate is only possible in a corner of the same color as the bishop,
so the king must avoid those corners as long as possible.

@19

"I’m not sure it’s worth it relative to studying other things"
'The student will do well to exercise himself methodically in this ending,
as it gives a very good idea of the actual power of the pieces,
and it requires foresight in order to accomplish the mate within the fifty moves which are granted by the rules. ' - Capablanca

"KBB, on the other hand, could probably be figured out over the board" ++ Yes.

"rook endings are important too, but to play them well, you also have to be good in pawn endings." ++ You argue above that KBB vs. K (and also KBN vs. K or KNN vs. KP) do not occur that often and thus are worth less study. Pawn endings occur less often than rook endings.

"If you’re able to judge pawn endings accurately and quickly, that gives you some extra leverage on being able to correctly judge when it’s ok offer or accept a rook trade."
++ Most pawn endings with an extra pawn are won. Most rook endings are drawn,
even with an extra pawn. That is one reason why rook endings occur more often.

'Endings of one rook and pawns are about the most common sort of endings arising on the chess board. Yet though they do occur so often, few have mastered them thoroughly.
They are often of a very difficult nature,
and sometimes while apparently very simple they are in reality extremely intricate.' - Capablanca

In a classical time control game I played a rook ending a pawn down,
and managed to win by trading to a pawn ending a pawn down, but with a breakthrough.

Pawn endings occur *all the time* at the beginner and intermediate levels. In master games, they're less common, but only because (1) masters are better at judging when to avoid them and (2) most master games are drawn or resigned before they reach the pawn ending stage. Nevertheless, even in master-level rook endings (or knight endings or queen endings, etc), the *possibility* of pawn endings is contemplated repeatedly. They really are the foundation of all endgames. And they're extremely complicated, extremely unforgiving, and often counterintuitive, so they particularly repay careful study.