|
|
| (1) Posted by Hauke Reddmann [Monday, Sep 21, 2009 10:36] |
Shredders todays (21/09/09) quiz
Todays quiz was: Ke5 Be2 Bb4 - Ke8 Sg7, White wins
Obviously Kf6 wins. Obviously *everything* wins (except Bh5 etc.),
at least from the table bases view. :-)
Now I checked more deeply and found that only Bc4 is the other move
winning in less than 50 moves. Again obviously, if one would like
to compose a "Study under OTB rules", one would need distance-to-
conversion metric, not distance-to-mate to correctly apply the
50 move rule, so the standard Nalimov base is useless.
Has someone ever composed a "study under OTB rules"? (I dimly
remember yes.) A good one (not only demonstration-of-working)?
Hauke
|
|
| (2) Posted by Joost de Heer [Monday, Sep 21, 2009 12:02] |
Define 'Study'. Nikita Plaksin a.o. has composed several compositions in which a draw can be claimed due to the 50-move rule.
E.g.
Plaksin, Special prize, Shakhmatny v SSSR 1980
 (= 13+15 )
Draw
Solution: 1.OOO!! and draw due to the 50-move rule.
Technically, this probably is a wrong solution, because white can't claim the draw if he doesn't have the move, and mate immediately ends the game (so black wins by playing 1...Qa1#). The correct solution should probably be 'White writes down 1.OOO and declares his intention to play this move, and then claims this is the 100th move without capture or pawn move'.
The 50-move rule in chess composition is slightly different than the OTB rule by the way. In chess composition, castling is also a 'move counter reset'.
|
|
| (3) Posted by Kevin Begley [Monday, Sep 21, 2009 14:01]; edited by Kevin Begley [09-09-21] |
Technically, I think a player need only claim draw (by 50 move rule) to the arbitrator, prior to making his move, then upon making the move, the arbitrator has some latitude in this decision.
I'm not an active player for many years, so I might be wrong...
@Joost,
Since when is castling a "move-count reset" in chess composition?
Can you site some example problems using this?
If this is really the case, can anybody give some justification?
|
|
| (4) Posted by Joost de Heer [Monday, Sep 21, 2009 15:07]; edited by Joost de Heer [09-09-21] |
Castling is an irreversible change. See http://www.janko.at/Retros/Glossary/FiftyMoves.htm
A recent example: 13941-le Gleuher (Die Schwalbe Heft 233), for the solution see http://www.pairlist.net/pipermail/retros/2009-June/002863.html)
An example in the FIDE album: S. and Y. Volobiev (apres M. Wittlich), Shakhmatnaia Kompozicija 1992 2nd prize (FIDE album 1992-1994 H19)
The FIDE rule (9.3) clearly states that only the player having the move can make the claim.
|
|
| (5) Posted by Kostas Prentos [Monday, Sep 21, 2009 19:12] |
In their book "Secrets of Spectacular Chess" Jonathan Levitt and David Friedgood give the following study in the chapter dealing with depth:
Noam Elkies, Internet 1994
 (= 8+6 )
Draw
Solution: 1.f6! Qb3 2.f7! Qd1+ 3.Kh6 which draws just in time for the 50-moves rule: 3...Qf3 4.Kg7 Qg4+ 5.Kh8 Qf5 6.Kg7 Qg5+ 7.Kh7 Qf6 8.Kg8 Qg6+ 9.Kf8 (9.Kh8? Qxf7 10.Sc2 is not stalemate) 9...Ka4 10.Ke7 Qg7 11.Ke8 Qe5+ 12.Kd7 Qf6 13.Ke8 Qe6+ 14.Kf8 Kb3 etc.
Note that 2.Kh6? fails to do the trick and comes 1 move short.
|
|
| (6) Posted by Kostas Prentos [Monday, Sep 21, 2009 19:36] |
I remember a discussion in Reb Orrell's forum a few years ago, on whether the move count is reset by castling. I remember that I was quite confused as I could not find this rule anywhere in the codex. I think Michel Caillaud gave a good explanation of the historic facts. There was a time when castling was considered as a move count reset, but this became obsolete and now the chess composition rules follow the FIDE rules in what concerns the 50-move rule.
Plaksin's example seems OK to me. Maybe it was around 1980 when the abovementioned change occured and this problem intended to underline this controversy.
|
|
| (7) Posted by Hauke Reddmann [Tuesday, Sep 22, 2009 10:28] |
@Kostas: Yup, the Elkies position I probably remembered.
@everybody: I hadn't exactly retro in mind - does anyone know a
position (maybe in KLL/KS, but there are now enough endgames
needing 50+) where only one move will win (DTC, not DTM metric,
see above!) in the 50 move limit (and is no boring BxS move
or the like)?
Hauke
|
|
| (8) Posted by Joost de Heer [Tuesday, Sep 22, 2009 13:27] |
Noam Elkies
Internet 1991
 (= 8+6 )
Draw
1. f6 Qb3 2. f7!! (2. Kh6? Qd1 3. f7 Qf3 4. Kg7 Qg4+ 5. Kh8 Qf5 6. Kg7 Qg5+ 7. Kh7 Qf6 8. Kg8 Qg6+ 9. Kf8 Ka4 10. Ke7 Qg7 11. Ke8 Qe5+ 12. Kd7 Qf6 13. Ke8 Qe6+ 14. Kf8 Kb3 15. Kg7 Qe7 16. Kg8 Qg5+ 17. Kh8 Qf6+ 18. Kg8 Qg6+ 19. Kf8 Kb2 20. Ke7 Qg7 21. Ke8 Qe5+ 22. Kd8 Qf6+ 23. Ke8 Qe6+ 24. Kf8 Kc1 25. Kg7 Qe7 26. Kg8 Qg5+ 27. Kh8 Qf6+ 28. Kg8 Qg6+ 29. Kf8 Kd1 30. Ke7 Qg7 31. Ke8 Qe5+ 32. Kd7 Qf6 33. Ke8 Qe6+ 34. Kf8 Ke2 35. Kg7 Qe7 36. Kg8 Qg5+ 37. Kh8 Qf6+ 38. Kg8 Qg6+ 39. Kf8 Kf3 40. Ke7 Qg7 41. Ke8 Qe5+ 42. Kd7 Qf6 43. Ke8 Qe6+ 44. Kf8 Kf4 45. Kg7 Qe7 46. Kg8 Qg5+ 47. Kh7 Qf6 48. Kg8 Qg6+ 49. Kf8 Ke5 50. Ke7 Qg7 51. Ke8 Ke6 52. Kd8 Qxf7) 2... Qd1+ 3. Kh6 Qf3 4. Kg7 Qg4+ 5. Kh8 Qf5 6. Kg7 Qg5+ 7. Kh7 Qf6 8. Kg8 Qg6+ 9. Kf8 (9. Kh8? Qxf7 10. Nc2 dxc2) 9... Ka4 10. Ke7! Qg7 11. Ke8 Qe5+ 12. Kd7 Qf6 13. Ke8 Qe6+ 14. Kf8 Kb3 15. Kg7 Qe7 16. Kg8 Qg5+ 17. Kh8 Qf6+ 18. Kg8 Qg6+ 19. Kf8 Kb2 20. Ke7 Qg7 21. Ke8 Qe5+ 22. Kd8 Qf6+ 23. Ke8 Qe6+ 24. Kf8 Kc1 25. Kg7 Qe7 26. Kg8 Qg5+ 27. Kh8 Qh6+ 28. Kg8 Qg6+ 29. Kf8 Kd1 30. Ke7 Qg7 31. Ke8 Qe5+ 32. Kd7 Qf6 33. Ke8 Qe6+ 34. Kf8 Ke2 35. Kg7 Qe7 36. Kg8 Qg5+ 37. Kh8 Qf6+ 38. Kg8 Qg6+ 39. Kf8 Kf3 40. Ke7 Qg7 41. Ke8 Qe5+ 42. Kd7 Qf6 43. Ke8 Qe6+ 44. Kf8 Kf4 45. Kg7 Qe7 (45... Qd7 46. Kf6) 46. Kg8 Qg5+ 47. Kh7 Qf6 48. Kg8 Qg6+ 49. Kf8 Ke5 50. Ke7 Qg7 (50... Qe6+ 51. Kf8 Kf6 52. Kg8) 51. Ke8 Ke6 52. Kd8! 1/2-1/2
The try results in the same position after 52 moves, but the 50-move rule doesn't apply there.
|
|
No more posts |
MatPlus.Net  Forum Endgame studies Shredders todays (21/09/09) quiz |
ISC 2024
