|
|
| (1) Posted by Hauke Reddmann [Monday, Mar 18, 2024 23:04] |
Black King in check
Do you know a #2 (actually a #1, so to say) with black king in check?
Obviously, White could have given that check in his first move,
so retroillegality or desastrous cook danger are the only reasons
I offhand can come up with for such measures...
|
|
| (2) Posted by Jakob Leck [Monday, Mar 18, 2024 23:41] |
I don't understand your "actually a #1, so to say". If the black king is in check and the stipulation is #2, wouldn't it be 4 half-moves? Cf. P0004182 and others...
|
|
| (3) Posted by Andrew Buchanan [Tuesday, Mar 19, 2024 04:12] |
Yes I agree with Jakob if Codex Article 15 is applied, then Black gets an extra defensive move. In Popeye this can be solved as “#3 postkeyplay”.
Another possibility I think you are familiar with Hauke is Lese Majeste. Here we say we have an illegal (indeed ill-formed) position in which WTM is already delivering check. However actually capturing the king is illegal in FIDE Laws (and would permanently prevent White from
checkmating!) So one can still play forwards and treat the problem as a regular #2. Here are two examples: https://pdb.dieschwalbe.de/search.jsp?expression=PROBID%20IN%20%27P1305338;%20P1305342%27 This is also supported by Popeye.
|
|
| (4) Posted by Hauke Reddmann [Tuesday, Mar 19, 2024 09:09] |
@Jakob&Andrew: I never read the Codex :-), but note that the problem
Jakob mentions has the solution written as "1. ... c6 2. b4 Ka3 3. Ta1#".
This numbering is also standard for set play, so I find it natural
to call this a "#3". Since evidently the community sees this otherwise,
I am pouting :-)...no, I note that this interpretation allows even
more interesting #2. Who is the first to show a starflight starflight? :-)
|
|
| (5) Posted by Olaf Jenkner [Tuesday, Mar 19, 2024 21:08] |
A problem with four plies (halfmoves) is a problem with two moves.
|
|
| (6) Posted by Juraj Lörinc [Wednesday, Mar 20, 2024 21:02] |
This topic reminds me of another way how to force the Black move first. (Actually not so different as check to bK implies white moved last.)
What about the following twomover with really false tries 1.Sb4?, 1.Sxg4?, 1.Qh7? and surprising solution. (Well, not so suprising with all the explanations.)
Ladislav Packa
Particular First Prize Pravda 1992-1993
 (= 15+6 )
#2
Published (click there 2682 for solution, if needed): https://rubriky.soks.sk/wp-content/plugins/rubriky/www/pravda/r1993/pr_2682.php
In the award (at the bottom): https://rubriky.soks.sk/wp-content/plugins/rubriky/www/pravda/r1994/pr_92_93.php#d
|
|
| (7) Posted by Neal Turner [Saturday, Mar 23, 2024 13:49] |
Why couldn't Black's last move have been h5xg4?
(asking for a friend)
|
|
| (8) Posted by Frank Richter [Saturday, Mar 23, 2024 14:34] |
In position with bPh5 and a white piece on g4 - how do you explain the black pawns e4 and e5?
|
|
| (9) Posted by Neal Turner [Saturday, Mar 23, 2024 14:49] |
I'm going to have to find some less stupid friends.
|
|
| (10) Posted by seetharaman kalyan [Saturday, Mar 23, 2024 19:06] |
@ Neal
😅😀😂
|
|
No more posts |
MatPlus.Net  Forum General Black King in check |
ISC 2024
