Answers.Body: <p>After fiddling around for a while with the <a href="https://syzygy-tables.info/?fen=3Q4/8/8/2p4K/8/8/2kp4/8_w_-_-_0_1" rel="noreferrer">Syzygy endgame tablebase</a>, I found this position:</p>
  <pre><code>[Title &quot;KQ vs. KPP, white is not in check&quot;]
  [FEN &quot;3Q4/8/8/2p4K/8/8/2kp4/8 w - - 0 1&quot;]
  </code></pre>
  <p>According to the tablebase, it's mate in 105 against best play by White, which starts with either Qa8 or Kg6.  White can't stop promotion without sacrificing the Queen, and because Black is threatening to promote with check, the resulting KQP vs. KQ endgame is winning for Black.</p>
  
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2021-12-13T08:22:21.453Z
Answers.Text: Ah, so even with "no check" it's *not* unique, I already feared that. My position was Ka4 Qa2/Ke1 Pd2 Pe5 with a central pawn remaining. Didn't expect a bishop pawn would work too. (And maxima mea culpa to wimi!)
Answers.UserDisplayName: Hauke Reddmann
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2021-12-13T17:05:44.990Z
Answers.Text: Hauke: I have heard that bishop pawns are the most likely to win the QvQ endgame.
Answers.UserDisplayName: Ferazhu
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2021-12-13T05:37:25.750Z
Answers.LastActivityDate: 2021-12-13T05:37:25.750Z
Answers.UserDisplayName: isaacg
Answers.Body: <p>Of course, letting the White king be in check at the beginning seems to be a reasonable approach. Here is a <a href="https://syzygy-tables.info/?fen=Q7/8/8/5p2/8/8/4pk2/3K4_w_-_-_0_1" rel="nofollow noreferrer">position</a> with a Black pawn on the fifth rank (its fourth rank):</p>
  <pre><code>[Title &quot;KQ vs KPP: White to move loses&quot;]
  [FEN &quot;Q7/8/8/5p2/8/8/4pk2/3K4 w - - 0 1&quot;]
  </code></pre>
  <p>It is not unique: here is <a href="https://syzygy-tables.info/?fen=Q7/8/8/4p3/8/8/4pk2/3K4_w_-_-_0_1" rel="nofollow noreferrer">another one</a>:</p>
  <pre><code>[Title &quot;KQ vs KPP: White to move loses&quot;]
  [FEN &quot;Q7/8/8/4p3/8/8/4pk2/3K4 w - - 0 1&quot;]
  </code></pre>
  <p>and there is even one <a href="https://syzygy-tables.info/?fen=Q7/8/5p2/8/8/8/4pk2/3K4_w_-_-_0_1" rel="nofollow noreferrer">with a Black pawn on the sixth rank</a> (its third rank)!:</p>
  <pre><code>[Title &quot;KQ vs KPP: White to move loses&quot;]
  [FEN &quot;Q7/8/5p2/8/8/8/4pk2/3K4 w - - 0 1&quot;]
  </code></pre>
  
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2021-12-12T19:08:38.487Z
Answers.Text: I upvoted but wK in check is a bit of cheating :-) I edited my question to avoid this. (If noone else bites I accept the answer but please please try harder :-)
Answers.UserDisplayName: Hauke Reddmann
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2021-12-12T19:11:05.470Z
Answers.Text: @HaukeReddmann with no wK in check, I have only achieved third rank until now...
Answers.UserDisplayName: wimi
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2021-12-12T19:01:56.377Z
Answers.LastActivityDate: 2021-12-12T19:01:56.377Z
Answers.UserDisplayName: wimi
Body: <p><a href="https://chess.stackexchange.com/questions/33149/how-many-pawns-make-up-for-a-missing-queen-in-the-endgame">Inspiration</a></p>
  <p>BCLC guessed (see link) that even only 2P can win against Q, even if the Q side has the move, if they are advanced far enough. I quickly checked a few promising position candidates in a tablebase. He is correct, but even more, it is not even true that both pawns have to be on the 7th rank for that! Thus, a little challenge: Find the (at 1st look) unbelievable position where</p>
  <ul>
  <li>White has K+Q</li>
  <li>Black has K+P+P</li>
  <li>White has the move but is lost</li>
  <li>White is not in check</li>
  <li>One black pawn is only on the 5th row (from White).</li>
  </ul>
  <p>Sidenote A: The position might be unique (I guess but I'm not 100% sure). Sidenote B: Due to 50 move rule, the win is longer than the simple shortest mate, but won it is.</p>
  
Comments.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Comments.CreationDate: 2021-12-15T18:22:44.783Z
Comments.Text: Sidenote C: Just for fun, 3P can win even if none is on the 2nd rank and no imminent checks exist: Pa3 b3 c3 Kb2 wins against almost any.
Comments.UserDisplayName: Hauke Reddmann
Tags: <endgame><puzzles><queen-endgame>
Title: 2P winning against Q
ThreadText: # 2P winning against Q
  
  (Asked by: username_0 on 2021-12-11)
  
  [Inspiration](https://chess.stackexchange.com/questions/33149/how-many-pawns-make-up-for-a-missing-queen-in-the-endgame)
  
  BCLC guessed (see link) that even only 2P can win against Q, even if the Q side has the move, if they are advanced far enough. I quickly checked a few promising position candidates in a tablebase. He is correct, but even more, it is not even true that both pawns have to be on the 7th rank for that! Thus, a little challenge: Find the (at 1st look) unbelievable position where
  
  * White has K+Q
  * Black has K+P+P
  * White has the move but is lost
  * White is not in check
  * One black pawn is only on the 5th row (from White).
  
  Sidenote A: The position might be unique (I guess but I'm not 100% sure). Sidenote B: Due to 50 move rule, the win is longer than the simple shortest mate, but won it is.
  
  **Tags:** endgame, puzzles, queen-endgame
  
  > **Comments:**
  > **username_0**: Sidenote C: Just for fun, 3P can win even if none is on the 2nd rank and no imminent checks exist: Pa3 b3 c3 Kb2 wins against almost any.  
  
  ---
  
  ## 2 answers
  
  ### Answer by username_1 on 2021-12-13. Score: 6 | Accepted answer
  
  After fiddling around for a while with the Syzygy endgame tablebase, I found this position:
  [Title "KQ vs. KPP, white is not in check"]
  [FEN "3Q4/8/8/2p4K/8/8/2kp4/8 w - - 0 1"]
  
  According to the tablebase, it's mate in 105 against best play by White, which starts with either Qa8 or Kg6.  White can't stop promotion without sacrificing the Queen, and because Black is threatening to promote with check, the resulting KQP vs. KQ endgame is winning for Black.
  
  > **Comments:**
  > **username_0**: Ah, so even with "no check" it's *not* unique, I already feared that. My position was Ka4 Qa2/Ke1 Pd2 Pe5 with a central pawn remaining. Didn't expect a bishop pawn would work too. (And maxima mea culpa to username_3!)  
  > **username_2**: Hauke: I have heard that bishop pawns are the most likely to win the QvQ endgame.  
  
  ---
  
  ### Answer by username_3 on 2021-12-12. Score: 4
  
  Of course, letting the White king be in check at the beginning seems to be a reasonable approach. Here is a position with a Black pawn on the fifth rank (its fourth rank):
  [Title "KQ vs KPP: White to move loses"]
  [FEN "Q7/8/8/5p2/8/8/4pk2/3K4 w - - 0 1"]
  
  It is not unique: here is another one:
  [Title "KQ vs KPP: White to move loses"]
  [FEN "Q7/8/8/4p3/8/8/4pk2/3K4 w - - 0 1"]
  
  and there is even one with a Black pawn on the sixth rank (its third rank)!:
  [Title "KQ vs KPP: White to move loses"]
  [FEN "Q7/8/5p2/8/8/8/4pk2/3K4 w - - 0 1"]
  
  > **Comments:**
  > **username_0**: I upvoted but wK in check is a bit of cheating :-) I edited my question to avoid this. (If noone else bites I accept the answer but please please try harder :-)  
  > **username_3**: @HaukeReddmann with no wK in check, I have only achieved third rank until now...  
  
  ---
  
  