user21899: Why does there seem to be some idea that trading queens is the start of the endgame? What does trading queens have to do with the endgame? Why are queenless positions often considered to be endgame positions?
I have also heard repeatedly people saying "trading queens doesn't mean it's the endgame guys" so it seems like an "urban myth" kind of thing. How everyone loves debunking common knowledge. That actually shouldn't count as common knowledge anymore because everyone debunks it.
There is definitely some association between having no queens, and the endgame. How did this association begin and why does it exist?

user446: To assume that the game has reached the endgame just because the Queens have been exchanged is a bad conceptual mistake that can lead to disaster.
A classic example is a game Verlinski-Alekhine where Queens are traded very early in the game and white plays the early middlegame "as if" it was an endgame already with the result of getting run over by the young future world champion.
The game is #2 in the collected Alekhine's games written by himself.

(Added) In the classic book of Romanovski, a cornerstone of the soviet school of chess, the endgame is defined as the phase of the game when the Kings take an active role.

user-1: Some positions are clearly not end games and some others clearly are. Unfortunately there are some positions in between that seem to defy classification. Why is that?
Wikipedia The start of the endgame does an excellent job on surveying opinions of highly knowledgable players.
Note the quote from the fourth World Chess Champion

Alexander Alekhine:
"We cannot define when the middle game ends and the end-game starts."

Hence sometimes we should take the borderline cases out of the defintion of the general concept, to make it more abstract, simpler and more elastic.
For the offending cases, fundamental strategic questions like king safety, importance of material, have to be decided on a case by case basis.

user13674: Some say the endgame begins when the kings can come out and join the fight. Usually it's not safe for them to do so until queens are off the board.

21899: <p>Why does there seem to be some idea that trading queens is the start of the endgame? What does trading queens have to do with the endgame? Why are queenless positions often considered to be endgame positions?</p>
<p>I have also heard repeatedly people saying &quot;trading queens doesn't mean it's the endgame guys&quot; so it seems like an &quot;urban myth&quot; kind of thing. How everyone loves debunking common knowledge. That actually shouldn't count as common knowledge anymore because everyone debunks it.</p>
<p>There is definitely some association between having no queens, and the endgame. How did this association begin and why does it exist?</p>
 446: <p>To assume that the game has reached the endgame just because the Queens have been exchanged is a bad conceptual mistake that can lead to disaster.</p>
<p>A classic example is a game <a href="https://www.chessgames.com/perl/chessgame?gid=1011736" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Verlinski-Alekhine</a> where Queens are traded very early in the game and white plays the early middlegame &quot;as if&quot; it was an endgame already with the result of getting run over by the young future world champion.</p>
<p>The game is #2 in the collected Alekhine's games written by himself.</p>
<hr />
<p>(Added) In the classic book of Romanovski, a cornerstone of the soviet school of chess, the endgame is defined as the phase of the game when the Kings take an active role.</p>
 -1: <p>Some positions are clearly not end games and some others clearly are. Unfortunately there are some positions in between that seem to defy classification. Why is that?
<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chess_endgame" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Wikipedia The start of the endgame</a> does an excellent job on surveying opinions of highly knowledgable players.
Note the quote from the fourth World Chess Champion</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Alexander Alekhine:
&quot;We cannot define when the middle game ends and the end-game starts.&quot;</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Hence sometimes we should take the borderline cases out of the defintion of the general concept, to make it more abstract, simpler and more elastic.
For the offending cases, fundamental strategic questions like king safety, importance of material, have to be decided on a case by case basis.</p>
 13674: <p>Some say the endgame begins when the kings can come out and join the fight. Usually it's not safe for them to do so until queens are off the board.</p>
