|Page: [Previous] [Next] 1 2 3 |
|(41) Posted by James Malcom [Friday, Dec 13, 2019 22:11]; edited by James Malcom [19-12-14]|
For a legal position, here is an improvement of one over Kostas’s 31 There are 16 forced mates per side. It’s a symmetrical position as well with a mutual pin in the middle.
(= 10+10 )
EDIT: The a5 and h5 pawns have been removed.
|(42) Posted by Kostas Prentos [Saturday, Dec 14, 2019 10:35]|
The mutual pin is an excellent idea. It adds two mates effortlessly. The position works even without the pawns a5 and h4. Good job, James.
|(43) Posted by James Malcom [Saturday, Dec 14, 2019 15:24]|
Many thanks Kostas. I have now removed the a5 and h5 pawns.
|(44) Posted by Arno Tungler [Thursday, Dec 19, 2019 09:01]|
Most of the tasks that were mentioned here were addressed decades ago as Hauke already indicated. You can find tons of possible scenarios if you search for k='einz%gerrekord' on the PDB. For example for
Forced Duplex-mates with James' position in 1950: P1178852
The same with promoted force: P1180136
Forced Duplex-stalemates: P0005615
|(45) Posted by James Malcom [Thursday, Dec 19, 2019 14:22]|
Thanks Arno. Looks like I was completely anticipated 69 years ago!
Also, for an illegal position, see P1180673 with 48 forced duplex mates.
|(46) Posted by Hauke Reddmann [Wednesday, Apr 6, 2022 19:23]|
Spring cleaning Dept.:
EDIT: POSITION 1 DELETED, AMAUROSA PROBLEMISTA :-)
(= 4+9 )
All whites have exactly 1 move which mates (without promoted material)
|(47) Posted by Hauke Reddmann [Friday, Apr 8, 2022 21:31]|
(= 3+10 )
Each move of any side stalemates, and
each side has more than one
|(48) Posted by James Malcom [Sunday, Apr 10, 2022 00:14]|
What is the point of your problems in the spring cleaning post?
|(49) Posted by Hauke Reddmann [Sunday, Apr 10, 2022 09:10]|
Problems must have a point? :-)
For the record type "All White pieces have exactly
one move, and that mates":
#1 just saves a piece for the position I already gave
(since Alfred "demanded" :-),
#2 is a (not yet shown at all!) record for positions
with non-promoted material.
And since all (known to me!) records for duplex stalemating
have only one stalemate for the "weaker" sind, I added
one with 2+2 in el bumpo, just to demonstrate it's possible.
|(50) Posted by Dylan [Sunday, Apr 10, 2022 23:02]|
I've seen in this thread numerous onemovers with the multiple twin stipulations of #1, s#1, s=1, h#1, etc. I wonder if this is possible to do with AUW, either mixed or all for White.
|(51) Posted by Andrew Buchanan [Monday, Apr 11, 2022 04:53]|
If your record quest is not simply “self-entertainment” it’s good to specify your self-imposed conditions so others can admire, compete, learn etc.
In the first problem in 46, doesn’t wK have 5 moves, only one of which is mate?
In the second one, can’t you shift bB to d8, remove the d-file pawns, and stick bSg6 reducing by another unit?
In the third one duplex =1 2 sols, there are many units with no move, doesn’t this violate the idea that all pieces for player on the move have exactly one move?
What am I missing?
|(52) Posted by Hauke Reddmann [Monday, Apr 11, 2022 09:46]|
1. Stupidity on my part. Even more inexcusable as Alfred
already made the same goof. Scrap diagram 1 of post 46.
2. This time YOU goofed :P Hint: g3 is a flight, since
I naturally lack a piece to protect it...
3. Different task: All moves of both sides stalemate,
all sides have >1 move. Should have indexed that clearer,
4. @Dylan: That would be harder to justify than a Babson :-)
EDIT: I have a position where 1.b8S#, 1.b8B! b1X#,
1.b8Q/R+? b1Q/R/B+! which you can easily reconstruct
but that hardly satisfies your task...
|(53) Posted by Andrew Buchanan [Monday, Apr 11, 2022 10:22]|
Good point, Hauke, OK here is the "Letztform"
(= 4+8 )
#1 C+ this time using the full might of Popeye
|(54) Posted by Hauke Reddmann [Monday, Apr 11, 2022 11:26]|
Yup, that shaved off a piece fair and square. THX!
|(55) Posted by Hauke Reddmann [Monday, Apr 11, 2022 11:57]|
Here is another question. This is a brand-new correction of a position by me
posted 2020, probably in another thread I can't find at the moment:
(= 7+6 )
HR, CSE 2022/Apr/11, Any White move ends the game in one move,
all four results (#,s#,=,s=) possible
I remember a problem with a similar stipulation "White ends the game"
(also posted long ago on MPF, in another thread -
but I *don't* mean the Schmidt [which is BTW anticipated? - 407710 YACPDB]
or Djurasevic in *this* thread!), either by Eeltje Visserman or someone
from Finland (I just remember vowel constipation :-). I also dumped my
feenschach 6003 there. Can't find THAT thread either.
Can someone link me to those two relevant threads?
|(56) Posted by Siegfried Hornecker [Monday, Apr 11, 2022 13:57]|
Niels Hoeg, Skakbladet 1907, 1st prize
Here's the problem:
Number 77 in "Chess Problems - Out of the Box":
I don't find the MPF thread, however, where this problem is.
|(57) Posted by Joost de Heer [Monday, Apr 11, 2022 15:08]|
Posted today: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dnpd4vgm2qQ
|(58) Posted by Hauke Reddmann [Monday, Apr 11, 2022 15:49]|
@Siegfried: Nevermind the thread :-)
Thus (I *did* have some vague memory that it contained an AUW
and the author a double vowel :-)
also the question of Dylan is answered in the positive.
(@Joost: one second. I've seen harder :-)
|(59) Posted by Andrew Buchanan [Tuesday, Apr 12, 2022 02:49]|
For the Type C promo case, reducing two queens to bishops seems wise in these tough economic times, and also saves one promotion overall:
(= 9+4 )
(9 solutions as before)
No more posts
|Page: [Previous] [Next] 1 2 3 |
MatPlus.Net Forum General Onemovers?