Website founded by
Milan Velimirović
in 2006
22:47 UTC
| |
MatPlus.Net  Forum General Continuously checking, leaving only one legal move, without repeating the position, and ending in checkmate |
| |
|
|
|
|
You can only view this page!
| | | (1) Posted by James Malcom [Wednesday, Mar 8, 2023 03:15] | Continuously checking, leaving only one legal move, without repeating the position, and ending in checkmate
The title says it all, and was brought up on CSE as a challenge: https://chess.stackexchange.com/questions/41731/longest-sequence-of-unique-legal-moves-for-one-player-always-in-check-and-endin
Over the past 24 hours, with some help from Noam Elkies, I've come up with a behemoth solution. It can be played out on the other site, and it's easy to spot the idea.
627 moves
EDIT: Startig with 459. Ng1+, as Noam suggested, more moves have been string out.
 (= 6+12 )
While I could add in a technical move or two, I feel we shouldn't yet.
I release it unto the MatPlus hoard to improve upon.
| | | (2) Posted by Joost de Heer [Wednesday, Mar 8, 2023 09:23] |
So white should postpone the checkmate as long as possible?
| | | (3) Posted by Hauke Reddmann [Wednesday, Mar 8, 2023 09:41] |
@Joost: Checkmate is neither AIM nor GOAL (hi Kevin :-), in fact
it only gets in the way.
AIM of White: make a move such that Black has exactly 1 legal move,
GOAL of White: repeat AIM consecutively as often as possible,
without repetition of move. (50 move rule is void.)
| | | (4) Posted by Kevin Begley [Wednesday, Mar 8, 2023 09:56] |
Hi Hauke. :-)
On this we can agree: checkmate is not the only AIM (or GOAL).
Often times, it's the least interesting, due to its terminal nature.
| | | (5) Posted by Joost de Heer [Wednesday, Mar 8, 2023 21:15] |
a) Where in my reply did I mention goal or stipulation?
b) Apparently reading titles of posts is harder than reading Kevin's texts. The title mentions 'ending in checkmate', hence my question 'should the mate be postponed as long as possible?'
| | | (6) Posted by James Malcom [Wednesday, Mar 8, 2023 22:46] |
a) Let's not threadjack, shall we all? :p
b) Postponement of is correct, Joost.
| | | (7) Posted by James Malcom [Wednesday, Mar 8, 2023 22:46] |
And I'll be increasing the length past 500 once I get home, with more of Noam's ideas.
| | | (8) Posted by Anders Thulin [Friday, Mar 10, 2023 08:45] |
Well, no, the title does not say it all. It says the wrong things. (Method of proof: Announce a tourney based on that single statement, and count the number of requests for clarifications. We already have seen some such requests.)
The most obvious piece of information that is lacking is if the title expresses a description or a prescription. It also doesn't make clear why 'ending in checkmate' needs to be expressed, nor why black moves needs to be specified to be legal. (In the original setting, written by a non-problemist, and apparently having two differently phrased requirements for 'without repeating the position', it was considerably more clear that additional cleaning-up was necessary.)
More to the point would have been something on the lines of "Create the longest orthodox direct mate in which all white moves except the last are checks, in response to which black does not have more than one possible move." Even so, something needs to be added about number of possible white checking moves per turn (I believe they were unlimited in the original: white could make any checking move), as well as the question of black promotions.
(Actually, it is interesting to note that just as the OP requirement is for the *longest* game/problem that fits the conditions, a second sub-task could be expressed as
"Rewrite the above requirement in the *shortest* number of words without any missing details or other loss of clarity.")
| | | (9) Posted by Hauke Reddmann [Saturday, Mar 11, 2023 10:04] |
Well, the first thing I think when reading the title would be
"OK, and how would the record skyrocket if 'White must check'
is dropped?" :-)
| | | (10) Posted by Neal Turner [Monday, Mar 13, 2023 07:37] |
One way to avoid all this controversial stuff is just to make chess problems - you know, #2, s#3, h#4 - that sort of thing.
You're welcome.
| | | (11) Posted by Joost de Heer [Monday, Mar 13, 2023 07:50] |
QUOTE
One way to avoid all this controversial stuff is just to make chess problems - you know, #2, s#3, h#4 - that sort of thing.
I agree. Stay away from silly things like grasshoppers and SAT, just create chess problems.
| |
No more posts |
MatPlus.Net Forum General Continuously checking, leaving only one legal move, without repeating the position, and ending in checkmate |
|
|
|
ISC 2024
