Go back
White to Move© (The Turk's Tactics Thread)

White to Move© (The Turk's Tactics Thread)

Only Chess

M

Joined
12 Mar 03
Moves
44411
Clock
16 Apr 08
1 edit
Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by heinzkat
Is there already 50 move rule danger? That would explain the problem perhaps. Then it'd be 1. Rxg6 (?) with Qf1#.
Makes sense as an idea. Now who's going to do the 99% fieldwork, lol.

edit. it doesn't explain the mate in 3 (and not 2) part, I think

j
Ganbei!

Not in lecture

Joined
14 Mar 07
Moves
5133
Clock
16 Apr 08
Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by Mephisto2
Makes sense as an idea. Now who's going to do the 99% fieldwork, lol.

edit. it doesn't explain the mate in 3 (and not 2) part, I think
Does it not solve it if we have:
1. Rxg6 Rg8+
2. Rxg8 ...
3. Qf1#
?

h

Joined
25 Apr 06
Moves
5939
Clock
16 Apr 08
Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by jockmcgee
Does it not solve it if we have:
1. Rxg6 Rg8+
2. Rxg8 ...
3. Qf1#
?
Maybe, but Black can play 2. ... Kg1! For the rest, SwissGambit will probably insist we give the full retrogradic proof, instead this link will do;

http://www.mrmip.net/mipsofacto/plaksin.htm

h

Joined
25 Apr 06
Moves
5939
Clock
16 Apr 08
Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by Mephisto2
Makes sense as an idea. Now who's going to do the 99% fieldwork, lol.

edit. it doesn't explain the mate in 3 (and not 2) part, I think
Oh yes, because else after 1. Qf1+ Black can claim the draw. With 1. Rxg6 Black has nothing left.

j
Ganbei!

Not in lecture

Joined
14 Mar 07
Moves
5133
Clock
16 Apr 08
Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by heinzkat
Maybe, but Black can play 2. ... Kg1! For the rest, SwissGambit will probably insist we give the full retrogradic proof, instead this link will do;

http://www.mrmip.net/mipsofacto/plaksin.htm
Retrogradic proofs being beyond me, I'll just correct myself on what I meant before 🙂

If black plays 2. ... Kg1! doesn't 3. Qe1# work?

M

Joined
12 Mar 03
Moves
44411
Clock
16 Apr 08
Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by heinzkat
Oh yes, because else after 1. Qf1+ Black can claim the draw. With 1. Rxg6 Black has nothing left.
correct. Thanks for saving us the hard work with the link 😉

h

Joined
25 Apr 06
Moves
5939
Clock
16 Apr 08
Vote Up
Vote Down



White to move. Mate in a few moves [six at most]; should be possible to figure out.

S
Caninus Interruptus

2014.05.01

Joined
11 Apr 07
Moves
92274
Clock
16 Apr 08
3 edits
Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by heinzkat
[fen]2r1kb1r/p2n1p2/8/3R1N1p/Pp1p4/5Q1P/1q4P1/5RK1 w - -[/fen]

White to move. Mate in a few moves [six at most]; should be possible to figure out.
Thank god I have my chess engine to spare me the hard work of actually solving this.

1.Sf5-g7 + !
1...Ke8-d8 2.Rd5*d7 + 2...Kd8*d7 3.Qf3-d5 + [quote] 3...Kd7-e7 4.Rf1*f7 #
3...Kd7-c7 4.Rf1*f7 + [quote] 4...Kc7-b8 5.Qd5-b7 #
4...Kc7-b6 5.Qd5-b5 #
4...Bf8-e7 5.Rf7*e7 +[quote] 5...Kc7-b8 6.Qd5-b7 #
5...Kc7-b6 6.Qd5-b5 # [/quote] 3...Bf8-d6 4.Rf1*f7 + 4...Kd7-d8 5.Qd5*d6 # [/quote] 1...Ke8-e7 2.Qf3*f7 + 2...Ke7-d8 3.Sg7-e6 # [duals 3.Qf7*d7 # and 3.Rd5*d7 #]
1...Bf8*g7 2.Qf3*f7 + 2...Ke8-d8 3.Qf7*d7 # [dual 3.Rd5*d7 #][/quote]

M

Joined
12 Mar 03
Moves
44411
Clock
16 Apr 08
Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by SwissGambit
Thank god I have my chess engine to spare me the hard work of actually solving this.

1.Sf5-g7 + !
1...Ke8-d8 2.Rd5*d7 + 2...Kd8*d7 3.Qf3-d5 + [quote] 3...Kd7-e7 4.Rf1*f7 #
3...Kd7-c7 4.Rf1*f7 + [quote] 4...Kc7-b8 5.Qd5-b7 #
4...Kc7-b6 5.Qd5-b5 #
4...Bf8-e7 5.Rf7*e7 +[quote] 5...Kc7-b8 6.Qd5-b7 #
5...Kc7-b6 6.Qd5-b5 # [/quote ...[text shortened]... f7*d7 # and 3.Rd5*d7 #]
1...Bf8*g7 2.Qf3*f7 + 2...Ke8-d8 3.Qf7*d7 # [dual 3.Rd5*d7 #][/quote]
Was this really necessary?

S
Caninus Interruptus

2014.05.01

Joined
11 Apr 07
Moves
92274
Clock
16 Apr 08
Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by Mephisto2
Was this really necessary?
Permitted, yes. It has clearly been established in this thread that if we feel a problem is too hard for us to solve [or we're just too lazy to bother] we simply look it up and copy and paste the solution, or give a link [thus spoiling it for everyone else]. What I did is just as valid.

M

Joined
12 Mar 03
Moves
44411
Clock
16 Apr 08
Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by SwissGambit
Permitted, yes. It has clearly been established in this thread that if we feel a problem is too hard for us to solve [or we're just too lazy to bother] we simply look it up and copy and paste the solution, or give a link [thus spoiling it for everyone else]. What I did is just as valid.
Your point is taken (at least by me). However, you off all regular posters in the chess and puzzle forums should be able to understand the difference between the last two puzzles. The link you were referring to may have spoiled it for a very small number of members, but only if they decided to click on the solution link. The last puzzle, however, was within many members' reach, and the solution was posted plainly and almost impossible to ignore.

S
Caninus Interruptus

2014.05.01

Joined
11 Apr 07
Moves
92274
Clock
17 Apr 08
2 edits
Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by Mephisto2
Your point is taken (at least by me). However, you off all regular posters in the chess and puzzle forums should be able to understand the difference between the last two puzzles. The link you were referring to may have spoiled it for a very small number of members, but only if they decided to click on the solution link. The last puzzle, however, was within many members' reach, and the solution was posted plainly and almost impossible to ignore.
And what would have happened with the last puzzle, had I left it alone? The 'many members' would still have been beaten to the punch by the faster solvers in the crowd. The problem isn't that the solution is posted; it's that someone decides for everyone else that the problem isn't even worth solving. That's what's getting spoiled: the potential thrill of being the first to find a difficult solution to a problem that stumps everyone for awhile.

Cookies help us deliver our Services. By using our Services or clicking I agree, you agree to our use of cookies. Learn More.