Website founded by
Milan Velimirović
in 2006

13:25 CET



Remember me

Forgot your
Click here!
to create your account if you don't already have one.

Rating lists


MatPlus.Net Forum Selfmates A Forced Selfmate In 16 Ply
You can only view this page!
Page: [Previous] [Next] 1 2
(21) Posted by Hauke Reddmann [Wednesday, May 29, 2019 10:32]

I'm no s# expert, but it should be very easy to check the
problem with a solving program at least *after* Whites
1st move.
(Read Only)pid=17426
(22) Posted by Rewan Demontay [Wednesday, May 29, 2019 13:16]

(Read Only)pid=17430
(23) Posted by Geir Sune Tallaksen Østmoe [Thursday, May 30, 2019 08:56]

Some years ago, Valery Liskovets suggested the stipulation «CU-mate», or «completely unavoidable mate», with the notation ###. That’s not exactly the same as the «forced» selfmates presented in this thread, since ### is a stipulation and not a theme, but the idea is similar: neither player can avoid the mate. In a ###, other lines which reach mate equally fast, but which are not CU-mates, will not be valid solutions. Also, in a ###, the distance to mate does not matter, as long as it is a CU-mate.

Geir Sune Tallaksen Østmoe and Valery Liskovets
Feenschach 2014

(= 6+5 )

1.Bd5 a5 2.e3 a4 3.e4 a3 4.b4 a2 5.Be6 d5 6.e5 d4 7.b5 d3 8.b6 cxb6 9.Bd7 b5 10.e6 b4###
(Read Only)pid=17434
(24) Posted by Geir Sune Tallaksen Østmoe [Thursday, May 30, 2019 09:05]

BTW, Rewan, if I understand you right, you mean that White is trying to achieve a selfmate in *exactly* 8 moves, so that the solutions in 7 moves are not considered cooks. That has to be specified as a fairy stipulation, because in a normal selfmate, s#8 means selfmate in «8 or less» moves. When White has an unintended solution which forces mate in 7 moves, then that’s a cook.
(Read Only)pid=17435
(25) Posted by Frank Richter [Thursday, May 30, 2019 10:31]

More precisely, White has to play such a first move, that it follows to a forced sequence of moves for BOTH sides, that leads to a selfmate after the 16th ply.
And not earlier.
(Read Only)pid=17436
(26) Posted by Rewan Demontay [Thursday, May 30, 2019 20:34]; edited by Rewan Demontay [19-05-30]

Precisely. And I don't mind it being called a fairy stipulation-it makes sense.

Also, it's a selfmate ON the 16th ply, not after.
(Read Only)pid=17437
(27) Posted by Joost de Heer [Friday, May 31, 2019 08:20]

Perhaps a better stipulation would be 'Loss in 1'.
(Read Only)pid=17438

No more posts
Page: [Previous] [Next] 1 2

MatPlus.Net Forum Selfmates A Forced Selfmate In 16 Ply