MatPlus.Net

 Website founded by
Milan Velimirović
in 2006

13:34 UTC
ISC 2020
 
  Forum*
 
 
 

Username:

Password:

Remember me

 
Forgot your
password?
Click here!
SIGN IN
to create your account if you don't already have one.
CHESS
SOLVING

Tournaments
Rating lists
1-Jul-2020

B P C F





 
 
MatPlus.Net Forum Competitions Quick Series-Movers Online Tournament (25.12.2009 - 05.01.2010)
 
You can only view this page!
(1) Posted by Cornel Pacurar [Friday, Dec 25, 2009 20:43]

Quick Series-Movers Online Tournament (25.12.2009 - 05.01.2010)


For the series-movers enthusiasts: a quick series-movers online thematic tournament has started earlier today! Introduction, news and standings are available at http://tt1.chessproblems.ca
 
(Read Only)pid=4474
(2) Posted by Geoff Foster [Friday, Dec 25, 2009 23:22]

The tourney is for series auto-mates (ser-!#), using an 8x8 board with orthodox pieces and no fairy conditions. The definition of series auto-mate is:
Black does not play at all, White plays a series of "n" moves, and at the end of the series puts itself into a mate position.

I assume that White is not allowed to move into check during the series, except on the final move, so the final move would have to be by a pawn. However, the organisers claim to have composed a 4-piece series-!#11 (including both kings). I can think of an obvious 4-piece series-!#8 (I won't post it here, because of the tourney), but I can't see how there could be a longer one.

Is White allowed to move into check during the series, or to give check to Black?
 
 
(Read Only)pid=4475
(3) Posted by Gilles Regniers [Friday, Dec 25, 2009 23:45]

No, White is not allowed to move into check during the series.

I think I can imagine the ser-!#8 you are thinking of; it was the first scheme I came up with too. You can extend this mating picture to at least 10 moves, which is a good excercise I think.

I don't want to give away too much, so I will give no further hints for you to find a ser-!#11. But try it anyway. You'll love the Eureka-moment!

Good luck.
 
 
(Read Only)pid=4476
(4) Posted by Joost de Heer [Saturday, Dec 26, 2009 09:54]

 QUOTE 

I assume that White is not allowed to move into check during the series, except on the final move, so the final move would have to be by a pawn.

Or a capture with selfpin.
 
   
(Read Only)pid=4477
(5) Posted by Geoff Foster [Saturday, Dec 26, 2009 10:48]

I found the #10 quickly, but the #11 is beyond me. On the final move can the white king move next to the black king? If not, why not?

By the way, when using "redaction mode" in WinChloe, White's final auto-mating move is not accepted. Also, WinChloe found no solution to the following problem.

original by Geoff Foster
(= 3+4 )
ser.auto#3 (b)Rg8->c8

(a) 1.Ra2 2.Rah2 3.0-0
(b) 1.Rh2 2.Rb2 3.0-0-0
 
   
(Read Only)pid=4478
(6) Posted by Joost de Heer [Saturday, Dec 26, 2009 11:28]

 QUOTE 

On the final move can the white king move next to the black king? If not, why not?

Because it'd be an illegal move. Agreed, one could discuss 'legality' if the goal is to put yourself in check, but still...

Does the final position have to be legal in the orthodox sense? I.e., in Geoff's (a)-variation of the last example, the mate is legal (last move was Bg5-e3), but if Rg8 was on g4, would this still be an accepted ser-!# ?
 
   
(Read Only)pid=4479
(7) Posted by Cornel Pacurar [Saturday, Dec 26, 2009 19:50]; edited by Cornel Pacurar [09-12-26]

Within the framework of the tournament, a composition like the scheme below is acceptable.

(= 2+4 )

ser-!#9
1.Ka2-a1 2.d2-d4 3.d4-d5 4.d5-d6 5.d6-d7 6.d7-d8=B 7.Bd8-e7 8.Be7-a3 9.Ka1×b2 !#

The initial position is legal (the last move was a capture on b2), there are no checks (or self-checks, for that matter!), and after the last move of the series White is in a checkmate position. The final position would have been illegal if the last move was made by Black, which is not the case. This may be in contradiction with what one might deduce from the German definition of Eigenmatt found at http://www.chessworld.org/E.htm (the Google translation is far from being perfect!), but it complies with the WinChloe’s implementation of the stipulation, which is the norm for this tourney.
 
 
(Read Only)pid=4484
(8) Posted by Juraj Lörinc [Tuesday, Dec 29, 2009 19:29]

I think there is deeper reason for not allowing kings standing side by side in mating position beyond move legality. The issue is that in the mating position the checkmate is checkmate because White cannot parry check(s) to his king. If kings would be places side by side, he could answer check by capture of black king. This technique is used in some types of fairy condition for checking moe legality or whether there is checkmate on the board.
 
   
(Read Only)pid=4498
(9) Posted by Cornel Pacurar [Wednesday, Jan 6, 2010 04:10]

The tournament has ended! The final standings, the table of records and, of course, the compositions, have been posted at http://tt1.chessproblems.ca/results.htm
 
 
(Read Only)pid=4519
(10) Posted by Siegfried Hornecker [Wednesday, Jan 6, 2010 08:36]; edited by Siegfried Hornecker [10-01-06]

Geoff, you castle onto a field that is attacked twice. That's simply an illegal move, even with this condition.

We must differentiate:
a) The rule of this stipulation that allows moving into one's own checkmate.
b) The general rules of castling.

Under a) your solution is legal, but not under b) and FIDE laws of piece movement still apply for the tourney.


@Cornel
It was a nice tourney, many thanks!
 
   
(Read Only)pid=4520
(11) Posted by Geoff Foster [Thursday, Jan 7, 2010 04:06]

The FIDE laws state that Castling is not allowed if the king's original square, or the square which the king must pass over, or that which it is to occupy, is attacked by an opponent's piece. However, this law only exists because in a game of chess it is not permissible to move a king into check. The FIDE laws are not intended to cover all the possibilities of fairy chess problems.
 
 
(Read Only)pid=4521

No more posts


MatPlus.Net Forum Competitions Quick Series-Movers Online Tournament (25.12.2009 - 05.01.2010)