pawn-only checkmate?

Originally posted by Wulebgr
White's move. Mate in two, with one bad move by black.

[fen]2K5/k2NN3/8/8/8/8/8/8 w - - 0 1[/fen]

ok so wulebgr beat me to it but thats pretty much what i was going to say, not possible to force but certainly possible to get if black makes one (very stupid) mistake.

Originally posted by MCA
ok so wulebgr beat me to it but thats pretty much what i was going to say, not possible to force but certainly possible to get if black makes one (very stupid) mistake.

In the example I gave, black is NOT making a stupid mistake. One could argue that black could play g7-g5 instead of g7-g6 (and not losing the pawn), but this has no effect on the next move or on the total number of moves, hence is not a mistake. And the mate is forced.

Originally posted by Mephisto2
In the example I gave, black is NOT making a stupid mistake. One could argue that black could play g7-g5 instead of g7-g6 (and not losing the pawn), but this has no effect on the next move or on the total number of moves, hence is not a mistake. And the mate is forced.

In the example you give, there was a pawn on the board, so it's a moot point.
However, the other examples are correct, if black is a moron, he can walk into the mate.

Originally posted by General Putzer
In the example you give, there was a pawn on the board, so it's a moot point.
However, the other examples are correct, if black is a moron, he can walk into the mate.

That is nonsense. The game ended with two knights and no pawns. Of course there were pawns and other pieces earlier in the game (as in EVERY game it started with 32 pieces on the board). I went back to the position with a pawn to prove that the end position could be obtained legally, and without help of black. So think again, who is the moron here?

edit: I think we all know what your point is (the general endgame K+2N vs. K is draw), but if you want to make that point, then formulate it correctly.