Quick answer
Opposite-Color Bishop Endings is an endgame technique: opposite-color bishop drawing resources. Work from the first evidence position for Opposite-Color Bishop Endings, and begin by testing Bf4.
Begin from Bf4 in 6k1/5p2/7B/5b2/3K4/8/8/8 w - - 4 3. Count the material, king routes, promotion squares and reserve tempi before applying a theoretical rule. The evidence answer is: Opposite-Color Bishop Endings: create a blockade and attack the pawns from the color the opposing bishop cannot cover. Candidate line: Bf4 Bd3.
In the Opposite-Color Bishop Endings example, notice: side White; pieces Black king g8, Black pawn f7, White bishop h6, Black bishop f5, White king d4; legal first moves Bg7, Bf8, Bg5, Bf4, Be3, Bd2, Bc1, Kc5. Anchor your reading to the FEN above; the inventory is illustrative, not a portable law of chess.
Material and result question
The first evidence board tests opposite-color bishop drawing resources; the second board tests opposite-color bishop drawing resources. Use direct FEN setup to reconstruct A and direct FEN setup to reconstruct B when the evidence includes move text. Shared language is catalogued on the Chess Wiki and the Endgames hub. Then compare Material Values with Same Color Bishop Endings, Bishop Versus Knight Endings, Knight Versus Pawns around the king's route around a pawn chain.
The two inventories make the distinction concrete. A contains side White; pieces Black king g8, Black pawn f7, White bishop h6, Black bishop f5, White king d4; legal first moves Bg7, Bf8, Bg5, Bf4, Be3, Bd2, Bc1, Kc5; B contains side White; pieces Black king h8, Black pawn f7, White king d4, Black bishop g4, White bishop d2; legal first moves Kc5, Kd5, Ke5, Ke4, Ke3, Kd3, Kc3, Kc4. Compare the side to move before comparing the labels in the context of king opposition on the critical file.
Topic dossier for this page and board pair r1:6k1 | r2:5p2 | r3:7B | r4:5b2 | r5:3K4 | r6:8 | r7:8 | r8:8 / r1:7k | r2:5p2 | r3:8 | r4:8 | r5:3K2b1 | r6:8 | r7:3B4 | r8:8: start with the king's route around a pawn chain; then test king opposition on the critical file; keep a knight route that changes the blockade separate from the moment to trade the last pawn; use a stalemate resource as the transfer check; and reserve a theoretical draw with practical tests for the exception.
Conversion or defense plan
On the first board, calculate Bf4 Bd3 after Bf4 and write down the opponent's best reply around the king's route around a pawn chain. On the second board, calculate Bf4 after Bf4 and check king opposition on the critical file. 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 theoretical draw with practical tests.
Key claim: Opposite-Color Bishop Endings is illustrated here by opposite-color bishop drawing resources; the first concrete test is Bf4. The board anchor is 6k1/5p2/7B/5b2/3K4/8/8/8; 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 opposite-color bishop endings, and how should each side play them?”, compare the recorded setup with Bf4 and the opponent's reply. The decision is useful only when the stated condition survives that concrete test on board 7k/5p2/8/8/3K2b1/8/3B4/8. The evidence records No tablebase outcome is asserted by this generated record; verify the exact FEN before publication and the second board signature r1:7k | r2:5p2 | r3:8 | r4:8 | r5:3K2b1 | r6:8 | r7:3B4 | r8:8. The false-positive test is whether a knight route that changes the blockade appears without the moment to trade the last pawn, so the conclusion is useful only when the stated condition survives that concrete test.
Evidence positions
example-1: opposite-color bishop drawing resources
Show answer
Opposite-Color Bishop Endings: create a blockade and attack the pawns from the color the opposing bishop cannot cover. Candidate line: Bf4 Bd3.
Why this position is here: Opposite-Color Bishop Endings is represented by opposite-color bishop drawing resources. This is a direct FEN setup with board anchor 6k1/5p2/7B/5b2/3K4/8/8/8; no opening history is inferred from the diagram.
FEN: 6k1/5p2/7B/5b2/3K4/8/8/8 w - - 4 3
Question: What is the first concrete decision in this opposite-color bishop endings position?
Answer cue: Opposite-Color Bishop Endings: create a blockade and attack the pawns from the color the opposing bishop cannot cover. Candidate line: Bf4 Bd3. The first candidate to test is Bf4. Replay Bf4 Bd3 on board anchor 6k1/5p2/7B/5b2/3K4/8/8/8 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-2: opposite-color bishop drawing resources
Show answer
Opposite-Color Bishop Endings: create a blockade and attack the pawns from the color the opposing bishop cannot cover. Candidate line: Bf4.
Why this position is here: Opposite-Color Bishop Endings is represented by opposite-color bishop drawing resources. This is a direct FEN setup with board anchor 7k/5p2/8/8/3K2b1/8/3B4/8; no opening history is inferred from the diagram.
FEN: 7k/5p2/8/8/3K2b1/8/3B4/8 w - - 2 2
Question: What is the first concrete decision in this opposite-color bishop endings position?
Answer cue: Opposite-Color Bishop Endings: create a blockade and attack the pawns from the color the opposing bishop cannot cover. Candidate line: Bf4. The first candidate to test is Bf4. Replay Bf4 on board anchor 7k/5p2/8/8/3K2b1/8/3B4/8 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: opposite-color bishop drawing resources
Show answer
Opposite-Color Bishop Endings: create a blockade and attack the pawns from the color the opposing bishop cannot cover. Candidate line: Kd3.
Why this position is here: Opposite-Color Bishop Endings is represented by opposite-color bishop drawing resources. This is a direct FEN setup with board anchor 2b3k1/5p2/5B2/8/4K3/8/8/8; no opening history is inferred from the diagram.
FEN: 2b3k1/5p2/5B2/8/4K3/8/8/8 w - - 4 3
Question: What is the first concrete decision in this opposite-color bishop endings position?
Answer cue: Opposite-Color Bishop Endings: create a blockade and attack the pawns from the color the opposing bishop cannot cover. Candidate line: Kd3. The first candidate to test is Kd3. Replay Kd3 on board anchor 2b3k1/5p2/5B2/8/4K3/8/8/8 and write down what changes after it.
Evidence boundary: No tablebase outcome is asserted by this generated record; verify the exact FEN before publication.
Reading the line
Read the first example (id example-1) as a complete record: continuation Bf4 Bd3, source tablebase. This is a direct FEN setup with board anchor 6k1/5p2/7B/5b2/3K4/8/8/8; no opening history is inferred from the diagram. If A does not expose opposite-color bishop drawing resources, correct the evidence before relying on the prose.
Read the second example (id example-2) separately: continuation Bf4, source tablebase. Its feature is opposite-color bishop drawing resources; inventory side White; pieces Black king h8, Black pawn f7, White king d4, Black bishop g4, White bishop d2; legal first moves Kc5, Kd5, Ke5, Ke4, Ke3, Kd3, Kc3, Kc4. Compare what changes between Bf4 and Bf4.
Boundary cases
The main mistake to avoid with Opposite-Color Bishop Endings 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 r1:6k1 | r2:5p2 | r3:7B | r4:5b2 | r5:3K4 | r6:8 | r7:8 | r8:8 after Bf4; in B, test it against r1:7k | r2:5p2 | r3:8 | r4:8 | r5:3K2b1 | r6:8 | r7:3B4 | r8:8 after Bf4.
For Opposite-Color Bishop Endings, the first board's evidence boundary (after Bf4) is No tablebase outcome is asserted by this generated record; verify the exact FEN before publication. The second board's evidence boundary for Opposite-Color Bishop Endings 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 a stalemate resource, 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 r1:6k1 | r2:5p2 | r3:7B | r4:5b2 | r5:3K4 | r6:8 | r7:8 | r8:8; record two candidates, the reply to Bf4 Bd3 and the correction. Repeat with B's side to move and r1:7k | r2:5p2 | r3:8 | r4:8 | r5:3K2b1 | r6:8 | r7:3B4 | r8:8; the changed board tests transfer rather than diagram memory.
After the drill, compare your notes with Same Color Bishop Endings, Bishop Versus Knight Endings, Knight Versus Pawns through the moment to trade the last pawn. Keep A's rejected alternative beside B's chosen line Bf4; this shows whether the conclusion survived a new board signature.
Sources and scope
Sources for Opposite-Color Bishop Endings: 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 r1:6k1 | r2:5p2 | r3:7B | r4:5b2 | r5:3K4 | r6:8 | r7:8 | r8:8 / r1:7k | r2:5p2 | r3:8 | r4:8 | r5:3K2b1 | r6:8 | r7:3B4 | r8:8: this page does not claim that Bf4 Bd3 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 knight route that changes the blockade.