Page 1 of 1
Chess
Posted: December 4th, 2019, 12:03 pm
by cinelli
I think it is high time we had another chess puzzle.
. --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
8 | | | | R | | | | R |
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
7 | | | p | | B | | | |
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
6 | | p | P | | | | p | |
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
5 | | P | | | | | | |
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
4 | | | | | | | p | |
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
3 | | p | k | | | | P | |
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
2 | | p | | | B | | | |
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
1 | | K | | | | | | |
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
a b c d e f g h
In this problem, white, shown here as red, is to move and mate in three moves. The challenge is to find the single forced sequence which solves the puzzle.
Cinelli
Re: Chess
Posted: December 5th, 2019, 11:09 am
by CryptoPlankton
This seems a lot easier than the last one, but I might be missing something obvious like I did with my first attempt last time!
Spoiler:
1. Rd3 Kc4
2. Rhd8 g5
3. R8d4#
Re: Chess
Posted: December 5th, 2019, 11:56 am
by UncleEbenezer
CryptoPlankton wrote:This seems a lot easier than the last one, but I might be missing something obvious like I did with my first attempt last time!
Spoiler:
1. Rd3 Kc4
2. Rhd8 g5 <--- the king can take on b5 instead
3. R8d4# <--- here too.
Re: Chess
Posted: December 5th, 2019, 12:22 pm
by CryptoPlankton
UncleEbenezer wrote:CryptoPlankton wrote:This seems a lot easier than the last one, but I might be missing something obvious like I did with my first attempt last time!
Spoiler:
1. Rd3 Kc4
2. Rhd8 g5 <--- the king can take on b5 instead
3. R8d4# <--- here too.
Excellent, will take another look later (I'm so careless - knew it couldn't be that easy!)
Re: Chess
Posted: December 8th, 2019, 12:56 am
by CryptoPlankton
cinelli wrote:I think it is high time we had another chess puzzle.
. --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
8 | | | | R | | | | R |
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
7 | | | p | | B | | | |
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
6 | | p | P | | | | p | |
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
5 | | P | | | | | | |
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
4 | | | | | | | p | |
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
3 | | p | k | | | | P | |
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
2 | | p | | | B | | | |
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
1 | | K | | | | | | |
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
a b c d e f g h
In this problem, white, shown here as red, is to move and mate in three moves. The challenge is to find the single forced sequence which solves the puzzle.
Cinelli
Hmm, have had a bit more time to look and this seems a bit of a strange challenge as there is a fairly obvious mate in two moves - not giving a lot of incentive to look for one in three! Still, if the position is correct then I guess there must be a solution - no luck so far...
Re: Chess
Posted: December 8th, 2019, 1:54 pm
by GoSeigen
CryptoPlankton wrote:cinelli wrote:I think it is high time we had another chess puzzle.
In this problem, white, shown here as red, is to move and mate in three moves. The challenge is to find the single forced sequence which solves the puzzle.
Cinelli
Hmm, have had a bit more time to look and this seems a bit of a strange challenge as there is a fairly obvious mate in two moves - not giving a lot of incentive to look for one in three! Still, if the position is correct then I guess there must be a solution - no luck so far...
If there is only a single forced sequence in three moves, then isn't the most likely explanation that you made a mistake? Why not post your two move solution?
GS
Re: Chess
Posted: December 9th, 2019, 12:37 am
by CryptoPlankton
GoSeigen wrote:CryptoPlankton wrote:cinelli wrote:I think it is high time we had another chess puzzle.
In this problem, white, shown here as red, is to move and mate in three moves. The challenge is to find the single forced sequence which solves the puzzle.
Cinelli
Hmm, have had a bit more time to look and this seems a bit of a strange challenge as there is a fairly obvious mate in two moves - not giving a lot of incentive to look for one in three! Still, if the position is correct then I guess there must be a solution - no luck so far...
If there is only a single forced sequence in three moves, then isn't the most likely explanation that you made a mistake? Why not post your two move solution?
GS
Not quite sure what you mean - are you saying it's a mistake to say I haven't found the solution?!
Anyway, I am prone to mistakes, but I believe the two move solution is (spoiler):
1. Rh1 g5
2. Rc1#
Re: Chess
Posted: December 9th, 2019, 6:41 am
by UncleEbenezer
CryptoPlankton wrote:
1. Rh1 g5
2. Rc1# <--- b2 x c1
That great column of pawns is one of the things that distinguishes a fiendishly-contrived problem from anything like an actual game.
Re: Chess
Posted: December 9th, 2019, 8:25 am
by CryptoPlankton
UncleEbenezer wrote:CryptoPlankton wrote:
1. Rh1 g5
2. Rc1# <--- b2 x c1
That great column of pawns is one of the things that distinguishes a fiendishly-contrived problem from anything like an actual game.
Oh dear, I'm seriously starting to think I might be showing signs of early onset - both parents had dementia (the old man's first giveaway was starting to struggle with cryptic crosswords).
Time for me to bow out before I embarrass myself further!
Re: Chess
Posted: December 9th, 2019, 8:49 am
by UncleEbenezer
CryptoPlankton wrote:Time for me to bow out before I embarrass myself further!
You'll notice I (and, it seems, other regulars on this board) have already bowed out. You were last-
manorganism-standing.
Are you by any chance accustomed to problems that are made easier to visualise by showing the black and white squares and pieces? I find the two bishops in this one quite confusing in the absence of their respective colours, and of course the pawns confuse through sheer implausibility!
Re: Chess
Posted: December 9th, 2019, 9:15 am
by CryptoPlankton
UncleEbenezer wrote:CryptoPlankton wrote:Time for me to bow out before I embarrass myself further!
You'll notice I (and, it seems, other regulars on this board) have already bowed out. You were last-
manorganism-standing.
Are you by any chance accustomed to problems that are made easier to visualise by showing the black and white squares and pieces? I find the two bishops in this one quite confusing in the absence of their respective colours, and of course the pawns confuse through sheer implausibility!
You are kind to offer me that "out", but I can't hide behind that as an excuse for these repeated mental blind spots. I am genuinely concerned. Anyway, I hope someone comes up with the solution soon as I am in danger of getting a little obsessed with it now (another potential symptom!).
All the best.
Re: Chess
Posted: December 9th, 2019, 11:16 am
by cinelli
CryptoPlankton wrote:Anyway, I hope someone comes up with the solution soon as I am in danger of getting a little obsessed with it now (another potential symptom!).
When CryptoPlankton wrote that he had found a mate in two, I feared that I had set up the board incorrectly. But I hope I haven't made a mistake. I think I had better say that I will give the solution on Wednesday then move on to something else.
Wouldn't it be marvellous if Magnus Carlsen joined the LemonFool?
Cinelli
Re: Chess
Posted: December 9th, 2019, 12:31 pm
by GoSeigen
CryptoPlankton wrote:UncleEbenezer wrote:CryptoPlankton wrote:Time for me to bow out before I embarrass myself further!
You'll notice I (and, it seems, other regulars on this board) have already bowed out. You were last-
manorganism-standing.
Are you by any chance accustomed to problems that are made easier to visualise by showing the black and white squares and pieces? I find the two bishops in this one quite confusing in the absence of their respective colours, and of course the pawns confuse through sheer implausibility!
You are kind to offer me that "out", but I can't hide behind that as an excuse for these repeated mental blind spots. I am genuinely concerned. Anyway, I hope someone comes up with the solution soon as I am in danger of getting a little obsessed with it now (another potential symptom!).
All the best.
Like Uncle, I also have not put my mind properly to the solution. but also could not find any two-move mate, let alone an obvious one!
I think this can be classified as a difficult puzzle given the four white pieces with wide latitude of movement and the fact that the black king pretty much has to move and can go to a number of squares. No shame in missing the answer IMO.
At some point I'll lay out the board and have a proper go. The lack of coloured squares does make the ASCII version harder.
GS
Re: Chess
Posted: December 9th, 2019, 6:10 pm
by CryptoPlankton
Okay, I couldn't let it go - I don't trust my mind any more so if it's wrong please just shoot me and put me out of my misery...
Spoiler:
1. Rhe8 g5
2. Rd2 Kxd2
3. Bb4#
Re: Chess
Posted: December 9th, 2019, 7:00 pm
by cinelli
Reply to spoiler:
Hurray! CP's perseverance has paid off. The first rook move covers the escape square e3. Congratulations.
Cinelli
Re: Chess
Posted: December 9th, 2019, 7:44 pm
by mc2fool
UncleEbenezer wrote:CryptoPlankton wrote:Time for me to bow out before I embarrass myself further!
You'll notice I (and, it seems, other regulars on this board) have already bowed out. You were last-
manorganism-standing.
Are you by any chance accustomed to problems that are made easier to visualise by showing the black and white squares and pieces? I find the two bishops in this one quite confusing in the absence of their respective colours, and of course the pawns confuse through sheer implausibility!
https://lichess.org/editor/3R3R/2p1B3/1pP3p1/1P6/6p1/1pk3P1/1p2B3/1K6_w_-_-_0_1
Re: Chess
Posted: December 13th, 2019, 8:57 pm
by cinelli
I forgot to give due credit to the creator of this problem. It was by Fritz Giegold.
Incidentally there was a short article in the Guardian the other day about Magnus Carlsen, the current world chess champion. Apparently he is one of those people who excel at more than one activity. For the past few years he has done very well in fantasy football.
Cinelli
Re: Chess
Posted: December 13th, 2019, 9:05 pm
by Lootman
cinelli wrote:Incidentally there was a short article in the Guardian the other day about Magnus Carlsen, the current world chess champion. Apparently he is one of those people who excel at more than one activity. For the past few years he has done very well in fantasy football.
Indeed. The leading British amateur player (and Grandmaster), Luke McShane, is also a successful City trader and investor. I think there are definite similarities in the skills involved. In chess, you think "If he does that, I do this". Responding to different scenarios is an important skill in trading as well.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luke_McShaneAs an aside, the ability to solve chess problems is not directly related to being a good chess player. There are obvious similarities but the skill set is also different. For instance some puzzles involve positions that could never happen in a real game. And few good players would waste time looking for a clever mate when they can win by merely swapping off material at a lower risk.
I say that as someone who was a bit of a chess prodigy as a child but could never get the hang of puzzles. I haven't played a serious game since 1982 when I played in the London league for Wood Green.
Re: Chess
Posted: January 27th, 2020, 2:23 pm
by GeoffF100
I think it is time for thousands of chess problems:
https://lichess.org/training/98143I have used ChessTempo in the past, but I have never really been a ChessTempoet. Emerald seems to have shuffled off this mortal coil. Lichess seems to be better to me. I like the board, and I like to be able to pause for breath between problems.