Example 28.—The following position is an excellent proof of the value of the opposition as a means of defence.
White is a Pawn behind and apparently lost, yet he can manage to draw as follows:
| 1. K - R 1 ! |
The position of the Pawns does not permit White to draw by means of the actual or close opposition, hence he takes the distant opposition: in effect if 1 K - B 1 (actual or close opposition), K - Q 7; 2 K - B 2, K - Q 6 and White cannot continue to keep the lateral opposition essential to his safety, because of his own Pawn at B 3. On the other hand, after the text move, if
| 1. ........ | K - Q 7 | |
| 2. K - R 2 | K - Q 6 | |
| 3. K - R 3 ! | K - K 7 | |
| 4. K - Kt 2 | K - K 6 | |
| 5. K - Kt 3 | K - Q 5 | |
| 6. K - Kt 4 |
attacking the Pawn and forcing Black to play 6... K - K 6 when he can go back to Kt 3 as already shown, and always keep the opposition.
Going back to the original position, if
| 1. K - R 1 | P - Kt 5 |
White does not play P × P, because P - K 5 will win, but plays: