Timeline for Never kill your king ... without first seeking proper legal advice!
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
27 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 21, 2021 at 21:58 | vote | accept | Albert.Lang | ||
| Mar 20, 2021 at 14:32 | comment | added | justhalf | Ah, right. The Nd4 can't go there anyway due to the king at Ke5. | |
| Mar 20, 2021 at 12:37 | comment | added | loopy walt | @justhalf I think Pf3 would lose its purpose. | |
| Mar 20, 2021 at 11:47 | comment | added | justhalf | @loopywalt, also, it seems that this solution still works if you swap black dark-squared bishop with the black queen? | |
| Mar 18, 2021 at 1:55 | comment | added | Albert.Lang | @justhalf Ah, I didn't even notice. You are right, of course. | |
| Mar 17, 2021 at 17:39 | comment | added | justhalf | Oops, yea, haha that seems obvious in hindsight. Also, Nf4 seems to be a witness? And h3 is also a witness? | |
| Mar 17, 2021 at 15:11 | comment | added | Albert.Lang | @justhalf Actually, I don't see that. But Pe2 is involved in two felonies. | |
| Mar 17, 2021 at 12:33 | comment | added | justhalf | Looks neat! Is it because removing black queen still results in mate in 1? | |
| Mar 17, 2021 at 11:12 | comment | added | Albert.Lang | Ha, I don't do those, @justhalf, my trade are 30s that don't quite work. Like 2Q1BN1b/pppbk1Br/rRqNp1pR/PPPpPpKp/5n1n/3P3P/4P1P1/8 No prize for spotting the flaws. | |
| Mar 17, 2021 at 10:43 | comment | added | justhalf | Anyway, just curious, @Albert.Lang, what is your high 20s solution? | |
| Mar 17, 2021 at 10:42 | comment | added | justhalf | Oops, that's right, haha, sorry. It's tough to design all these indeed! It's nice to see the plan all coming into places nicely. | |
| Mar 17, 2021 at 10:32 | comment | added | loopy walt | @justhalf What do you mean "fortunately"? All part of my grand design =D | |
| Mar 17, 2021 at 10:22 | comment | added | justhalf | Also, e4 is a close call there. Removing it doesn't allow black queen to move, but fortunately Ne4-f2 is valid. | |
| Mar 17, 2021 at 10:19 | comment | added | justhalf | Yep! I made a puzzle based on that property here. | |
| Mar 17, 2021 at 10:18 | comment | added | loopy walt | @justhalf Ah, let me see c8 and d7 in mine, b8 and e8 in yours? I set up the player btw. | |
| Mar 17, 2021 at 10:13 | history | edited | loopy walt | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 67 characters in body
|
| Mar 17, 2021 at 10:12 | comment | added | justhalf | Also, interestingly, this has the same property as my position, in that there is exactly one combination of two pieces that when removed again results in mate in 1. | |
| Mar 17, 2021 at 10:08 | comment | added | justhalf | Yes, that's what I usually encountered, putting too many white pieces around the black king will give alternate checkmate. Also, I like this position in that white is not overwhelmingly winning (other than the mate in 1). Putting this in chess.com analysis reveals that there is only one other good move other than the mate in one, the rest is draw or losing. | |
| Mar 17, 2021 at 10:05 | comment | added | loopy walt | @justhalf thanks for propping up what little Albert left of my ego ;-) Obviously I learned quite a bit from studying your solutions. Re a5: It also removes the need to cover the rooks giving them more freedom to hunt down those pesky little pawns. Re h8: Yeah, without that trick I found myself inadvertently setting up alternative checkmates all the time while double covering all the squares the black king could have come from. | |
| Mar 17, 2021 at 10:01 | comment | added | justhalf | My observation has revealed no error so far. So I think this is correct too! My only suggestion is to put the FEN on the chess SE replayer so it can be played. | |
| Mar 17, 2021 at 9:49 | comment | added | justhalf | "black king couldn't have moved because white king would have been in check by bishop h8" this is also clever! Removing the need to cover the squares around the king! This is what enables you to freely put other pieces around the board =D | |
| Mar 17, 2021 at 9:47 | comment | added | justhalf | "a5 couldn't have moved because there are two black rooks out and no promotions used for black" this is clever! Pawns are the hardest to cover, and alternative ways to cover pawns will be very useful, like in this case! | |
| Mar 17, 2021 at 8:58 | comment | added | loopy walt | Is that me looking silly by trying to be clever too hard? @Albert.Lang | |
| Mar 17, 2021 at 8:57 | history | edited | loopy walt | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 82 characters in body
|
| Mar 17, 2021 at 8:51 | comment | added | Albert.Lang | Looks good to me. I even like that not all removals disable the mate in one by removing e.p. but that there is one which does it differently. My only gripe: Rc4 simply blocks the square where Pc3 could have come from, so no need for all that parrying-discovered-check-while-giving-ones-own-discovered-check cleverness. But that does not invalidate the solution. | |
| Mar 16, 2021 at 21:40 | history | edited | loopy walt | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
Added proof game
|
| Mar 16, 2021 at 20:42 | history | answered | loopy walt | CC BY-SA 4.0 |