Troitsky line

#10
I value the opinion of the legendary World Champion Capablanca more than that of IM Silman.

It makes sense.

Just because someone is good at something doesn't mean they are any good at teaching it. "should not be allowed to play a game until he can checkmate KNB vs K" is an arrogant hyperbole no matter how you slice it. I believe that Capablanca also called 1...c5 in response to 1.e4 a mistake, do you agree with that evaluation as well? @tpr
I've also never seen KNN vs KP listed as a basic checkmate before. Sure, it's probably a very interesting one and I wanna study it eventually, but there are way more important endings to learn first (KP vs K, KRP vs KR, general pawn endings, even KQ vs KR should be more important).

@Shnippy I see a lot of two knight vs pawn endgame it's impormant and hard

I agree with @Shnippy.

Even if you know it, its not simple at all. Therefore Karsten Müller and other experts simplifyed these Troitsky line and it is still difficult to understand.
I can recommend this instructive video:

www.youtube.com/watch?v=VM9JWGbBQ4s
What is Troitsky's line? An instructive endgame lecture by Chessbase India

#13 Snippy, I've looked all over the internet, just couldn't find where Capablanca said that 1.c5 was a mistake. Capablanca had played 1.c5 sometimes, though not as much as his preferred 1.e5 or 1.c6. www.chessgames.com/perl/chess.pl?pid=47544&playercomp=black&opening=E20-E59&title=Jose%20Raul%20Capablanca%20playing%20the%20Sicilian%20Defence%20as%20Black Some games where he played the Sicilian defence. And back on to KBK vs K, I think what Capablanca said may be a slight hyperbole, but any 1500 player should know it. I've learnt it , though I still need a bit of improving with the technique. A couple of months ago, there was a GM in titled Tuesday who couldn't perform the simple mate, and drew the game, where if he spent merely 15 mins studying this endgame, he would've won it.

Troitsky line but it's so hard to win it's true because three pawn on the board lichess.org/forum/game-analysis/insane-combination-anand-vs-kramnik?page=1

good example black can't sacrfice his pawns

It is now more important than in the old days, when you could adjourn a game and study the position.
I once saw in a tournament a game between an IM and a weaker player. The IM blundered and they adjourned the game with KBN for the weaker player vs. K for the IM. After resuming the game, the weaker player could not checkmate within 50 moves, so it was a draw. What a pity! What an embarassment!

Karpov also blundered at this endgame (Karpov vs Topalov)