Quick answer
King and Pawn versus King is an endgame technique: king-and-pawn geometry. Work from the first evidence position for King and Pawn versus King, and begin by testing Kd5.
Begin from Kd5 in 8/8/8/8/3Pk3/8/8/1K6 b - - 3 2. Count the material, king routes, promotion squares and reserve tempi before applying a theoretical rule. The evidence answer is: King and Pawn versus King: count the king moves, the pawn's promotion square and the reserve tempo before pushing. Candidate line: Kd5.
In the King and Pawn versus King example, notice: side Black; pieces White pawn d4, Black king e4, White king b1; legal first moves Kd5, Kf5, Kf4, Kf3, Ke3, Kd3, Kxd4. Treat this piece list as local to the diagram above; it is not a universal map for every similar position.
Material and result question
The first evidence board tests king-and-pawn geometry; the second board tests king-and-pawn geometry. If both boards list a construction string, read A as direct FEN setup and B as direct FEN setup. Browse the Chess Wiki together with the Endgames hub for shared terms. Then compare Material Values with Simplifying Into A Favorable Endgame, Rule Of The Square, Key Squares In Pawn Endgames around the bishop's color complex.
The two inventories make the distinction concrete. A contains side Black; pieces White pawn d4, Black king e4, White king b1; legal first moves Kd5, Kf5, Kf4, Kf3, Ke3, Kd3, Kxd4; B contains side White; pieces Black king e6, White pawn d4, White king c3; legal first moves d5+, Kb4, Kc4, Kd3, Kd2, Kc2, Kb2, Kb3. Compare the side to move before comparing the labels in the context of checking distance behind the passer.
Topic dossier for this page and board pair r1:8 | r2:8 | r3:8 | r4:8 | r5:3Pk3 | r6:8 | r7:8 | r8:1K6 / r1:8 | r2:8 | r3:4k3 | r4:8 | r5:3P4 | r6:2K5 | r7:8 | r8:8: start with the bishop's color complex; then test checking distance behind the passer; keep a theoretical draw with practical tests separate from a stalemate resource; use the moment to trade the last pawn as the transfer check; and reserve a knight route that changes the blockade for the exception.
Conversion or defense plan
On the first board, calculate Kd5 after Kd5 and write down the opponent's best reply around the bishop's color complex. On the second board, calculate d5+ after d5+ and check checking distance behind the passer. Separate the practical conversion question from the result question; side to move and one checking distance can change the conclusion. In this case the useful condition is a knight route that changes the blockade.
Key claim: King and Pawn versus King is illustrated here by king-and-pawn geometry; the first concrete test is Kd5. The board anchor is 8/8/8/8/3Pk3/8/8/1K6; the example is intentionally narrower than the topic label and should not be generalised without checking the surrounding position..
Practical boundary: To answer “What exact king, pawn, and move-order conditions decide king and pawn versus king, and how should each side play them?”, compare the recorded setup with d5+ and the opponent's reply. The decision is useful only when the stated condition survives that concrete test on board 8/8/4k3/8/3P4/2K5/8/8. The evidence records No tablebase outcome is asserted by this generated record; verify the exact FEN before publication and the second board signature r1:8 | r2:8 | r3:4k3 | r4:8 | r5:3P4 | r6:2K5 | r7:8 | r8:8. The false-positive test is whether a theoretical draw with practical tests appears without a stalemate resource, so the conclusion is useful only when the stated condition survives that concrete test.
Evidence positions
example-1: king-and-pawn geometry
Show answer
King and Pawn versus King: count the king moves, the pawn's promotion square and the reserve tempo before pushing. Candidate line: Kd5.
Why this position is here: King and Pawn versus King is represented by king-and-pawn geometry. This is a direct FEN setup with board anchor 8/8/8/8/3Pk3/8/8/1K6; no opening history is inferred from the diagram.
FEN: 8/8/8/8/3Pk3/8/8/1K6 b - - 3 2
Question: What is the first concrete decision in this king and pawn versus king position?
Answer cue: King and Pawn versus King: count the king moves, the pawn's promotion square and the reserve tempo before pushing. Candidate line: Kd5. The first candidate to test is Kd5. Replay Kd5 on board anchor 8/8/8/8/3Pk3/8/8/1K6 and write down what changes after it.
Evidence boundary: No tablebase outcome is asserted by this generated record; verify the exact FEN before publication.
example-2: king-and-pawn geometry
Show answer
King and Pawn versus King: count the king moves, the pawn's promotion square and the reserve tempo before pushing. Candidate line: d5+.
Why this position is here: King and Pawn versus King is represented by king-and-pawn geometry. This is a direct FEN setup with board anchor 8/8/4k3/8/3P4/2K5/8/8; no opening history is inferred from the diagram.
FEN: 8/8/4k3/8/3P4/2K5/8/8 w - - 2 2
Question: What is the first concrete decision in this king and pawn versus king position?
Answer cue: King and Pawn versus King: count the king moves, the pawn's promotion square and the reserve tempo before pushing. Candidate line: d5+. The first candidate to test is d5+. Replay d5+ on board anchor 8/8/4k3/8/3P4/2K5/8/8 and write down what changes after it.
Evidence boundary: No tablebase outcome is asserted by this generated record; verify the exact FEN before publication.
example-3: king-and-pawn geometry
Show answer
King and Pawn versus King: count the king moves, the pawn's promotion square and the reserve tempo before pushing. Candidate line: Kc1.
Why this position is here: King and Pawn versus King is represented by king-and-pawn geometry. This is a direct FEN setup with board anchor 8/8/3k4/8/3P4/8/8/3K4; no opening history is inferred from the diagram.
FEN: 8/8/3k4/8/3P4/8/8/3K4 w - - 2 2
Question: What is the first concrete decision in this king and pawn versus king position?
Answer cue: King and Pawn versus King: count the king moves, the pawn's promotion square and the reserve tempo before pushing. Candidate line: Kc1. The first candidate to test is Kc1. Replay Kc1 on board anchor 8/8/3k4/8/3P4/8/8/3K4 and write down what changes after it.
Evidence boundary: No tablebase outcome is asserted by this generated record; verify the exact FEN before publication.
Reading the line
Read the first example (id example-1) as a complete record: continuation Kd5, source tablebase. This is a direct FEN setup with board anchor 8/8/8/8/3Pk3/8/8/1K6; no opening history is inferred from the diagram. If A does not expose king-and-pawn geometry, correct the evidence before relying on the prose.
Read the second example (id example-2) separately: continuation d5+, source tablebase. Its feature is king-and-pawn geometry; inventory side White; pieces Black king e6, White pawn d4, White king c3; legal first moves d5+, Kb4, Kc4, Kd3, Kd2, Kc2, Kb2, Kb3. Compare what changes between Kd5 and d5+.
Boundary cases
The main mistake to avoid with King and Pawn versus King is applying a remembered endgame rule while ignoring side to move, king placement or an unverified result. In A, the missing condition must be located in r1:8 | r2:8 | r3:8 | r4:8 | r5:3Pk3 | r6:8 | r7:8 | r8:1K6 after Kd5; in B, test it against r1:8 | r2:8 | r3:4k3 | r4:8 | r5:3P4 | r6:2K5 | r7:8 | r8:8 after d5+.
For King and Pawn versus King, the first board's evidence boundary (after Kd5) is No tablebase outcome is asserted by this generated record; verify the exact FEN before publication. The second board's evidence boundary for King and Pawn versus King is No tablebase outcome is asserted by this generated record; verify the exact FEN before publication. If a trusted source or careful calculation changes the conclusion around the moment to trade the last pawn, update both the evidence record and this article.
Practice from a real game
play the position for both sides, record the critical tempo, and verify the exact FEN against the cited tablebase before publication. Start with A's side to move and r1:8 | r2:8 | r3:8 | r4:8 | r5:3Pk3 | r6:8 | r7:8 | r8:1K6; record two candidates, the reply to Kd5 and the correction. Repeat with B's side to move and r1:8 | r2:8 | r3:4k3 | r4:8 | r5:3P4 | r6:2K5 | r7:8 | r8:8; the changed board tests transfer rather than diagram memory.
After the drill, compare your notes with Simplifying Into A Favorable Endgame, Rule Of The Square, Key Squares In Pawn Endgames through a stalemate resource. Keep A's rejected alternative beside B's chosen line d5+; this shows whether the conclusion survived a new board signature.
Sources and scope
Sources for King and Pawn versus King: Syzygy tablebase verification reference, 1chess.online editorial scope. Source ids are tablebase, original-analysis. Primary evidence hook: tablebase. Comparisons and practice notes are editorial. Evidence revision: 2026-08-remediation-r2.
Scope note for board pair r1:8 | r2:8 | r3:8 | r4:8 | r5:3Pk3 | r6:8 | r7:8 | r8:1K6 / r1:8 | r2:8 | r3:4k3 | r4:8 | r5:3P4 | r6:2K5 | r7:8 | r8:8: this page does not claim that Kd5 is an engine principal variation, that an exact endgame result is verified when the evidence says it is not, or that a tool output replaces human calculation. The conclusion is limited to the recorded boundary and the exception a theoretical draw with practical tests.