|
|
| (1) Posted by Sarah Hornecker [Monday, Mar 5, 2012 00:14] |
White Super-AUW with orthodox material
Josef Krejcik created the following brilliancy:
 (= 13+6 )
Selfmate in 16
1.e8K!! Kf5 2.d8S! Kg6 3.h8B! Kf5 4.b8S! Kg6 5.a8R! Kf5 6.f8P!! Kg6 7.Sf7 Kf5 8.c8Q+ Kg6 9.Qg5+ Kh7 10.Qg1 Kg8 11.Qcg4 Kh7 12.Sd7 Kg8 13.Rd8 Kh7 14.Qh1+ Kg8 15.Sxe5 Rxe5+ 16.Qe6+ Rxe6 mate
Can this be shown without duals?
|
|
| (2) Posted by James Malcom [Tuesday, Mar 31, 2020 15:52]; edited by James Malcom [20-03-31] |
The problem is, unfortunately, orthodoxly cooked as noted in P1244385: 1. d8=N+ Kf5 2. Kd7 Kg6 3. h8=B Kf5 4. Kc8 Kg6 5. f8=B Kf5 6. g8=B Kg6 7. Nf7 Kf5 8. Qh7+ Ke6 9. N7xe5+ Kd6 10. B8h6 Rxe5 11. e8=N+ Rxe8#
If the goal is to do a Super-AUW with orthodox material, but not necessarily legal position, I offer the following scheme.
s#10
 (= 13+11 )
Solution (?): 1. gxh8=R+ Kg7 2. f8=B+ Kf6+ 3. e8=N+ Ke6 4. d8=P+ Kd5 5. cxb8=K Kc6 6. a8=Q+ Kb6 7. Ra4 e4 8. Ne5/7 (minor dual) e3 9. Rxa3 Qxa3 10. Qa7+ Qxa7#
This is for sure cooked or dualed in some way, but it is a start nonetheless.
The only other Super-AUW with orthodox material I know of is a Rex Multiplex problem, which is at P1322528.
Gustav Joachim Sontag, Feenschach 12/1982
h=6
 (= 9+14 )
|
|
| (3) Posted by François Labelle [Wednesday, Apr 1, 2020 19:37] |
Your scheme is cooked with promotions RRRQQK:
1.gxh8=R+ Kg7 2.cxb8=K Kf6 3.f8=Q+ Ke6 4.a8=Q Kd6 5.d8=R+ Kc5 6.e8=R+ Kb6 7.Ra4 e4 8.Ne5 e3 9.Rxa3 Qxa3 10.Qa7+ Qxa7#
This is just one of the 63 solutions found with the following Jacobi input:
EnglishN
forsyth 1bB4r/P1PPPPPk/6NN/4p2P/4R3/pp6/qrp1Q3/rbB5
stip u#10
cond SiameseKings PromOnly P S B R Q K
test dia forsyth 1XBXXX1X/q7/1k5N/4N2P/8/1p2p3/1rp1Q3/rbB5
This is a *partial* test, where the stipulation u#10 is testing for a s#10 where black has a unique legal move at each step, and where the last line is enforcing the intended final position (but leaving the choice of promotion free with X). Maybe this test can help you compose a problem that is more likely to be sound?
|
|
| (4) Posted by James Malcom [Wednesday, Apr 1, 2020 20:58]; edited by James Malcom [20-04-01] |
Thanks Francois. That will be very useful to me. There is actually a cook in 8: 1. gxh8=R+ Kg7 2. cxb8=K Kf6 3. f8=Q+ Ke6 4. a8=Q Kd6 5. d8=R+ Kc5 6. e8=Q/B+! Kb6 7. Qfxa3 Qxa3 8. Qa7+ Qxa7+#
|
|
| (5) Posted by James Malcom [Monday, May 18, 2020 23:40]; edited by James Malcom [20-05-20] |
Coming back to this, I’ve managed what is no doubt a correct 5/6 Super-AUW. A s#7 version with a bishop promotion is possible as well: 4nR2/PP1P1PkP/5NBp/1P2PP2/8/7N/6p1/6Bb
s#6
 (= 11+5 )
Sol: 1. h8=Q+ Ke7 2. dxe8=R+ Kd7 3. f8=N+ Kc7 4. a8=K h5 5. b8=P h4 6. Ba7 g1=~#
|
|
| (6) Posted by James Malcom [Tuesday, May 19, 2020 16:02]; edited by James Malcom [20-05-20] |
Does this Super-AUW work? It likely doesn’t.
s#9
 (= 12+10 )
Sol: 1. bxa8=Q+ Kb6 2. cxb8=R+ Kc7 3. d8=B+ Kd6 4. e8=N+ Ke6 5. Bxd5+ Kf5 6. fxg8=P Kg6 7. h8=K Kf5 8. Nd6+ Kg6 9. Rxh3 Rxh3#
|
|
| (7) Posted by Andrew Buchanan [Tuesday, May 19, 2020 16:26] |
I can't see any obvious cooks. If you had wK already on the board, so then the victory condition was checkmate one king to win, well it would be cooked because there of fxg8=K! So best you have it the way it is with no wK on the board at the beginning
|
|
| (8) Posted by Frank Richter [Tuesday, May 19, 2020 16:44] |
What about 1.b:a8R+? Kb6,b7 2.c:b8R+
|
|
| (9) Posted by James Malcom [Tuesday, May 19, 2020 17:12]; edited by James Malcom [20-05-20] |
Frank, if 1. axb8=R+?, then 5. Bxd5+ Kxd5!
|
|
| (10) Posted by Andrew Buchanan [Tuesday, May 19, 2020 19:34] |
Does something like this work?
1. bax8=Q+ Kb6 2. cxb8=R+ Kc7 3. fxg8=R Kd6
4. e8=Q Kc7 5. h8=K Kd6 6. g6 Kc7 7. g7 Kd6
8. Qf8+ Kc7/Ke6 9. Rxh3 Rxh3#
|
|
| (11) Posted by Frank Richter [Tuesday, May 19, 2020 19:50] |
Okay, I see ... I need new glasses or at least playable diagrams here ...
The position after 1.bxa8=Q+ Kb6 2.cxb8=R+ Kc7 3.hxg8K! Kd6 gives an orthodox s#5 with 6 solutions according to Gustav, f.ex. 4.d8=N Kc7 5.Kh8 Kd6 6.e8=N+ Ke7 7.Qa7,b7+ Kf8 8.R:h3 R:h3# or even 4.Kh7 Kc7 5.Bc2 Kd6 6.d8=Q+ Ke6 7.e8=R,f8=N K(x)f7 8.R:h3 R:h3#
|
|
| (12) Posted by James Malcom [Tuesday, May 19, 2020 21:09]; edited by James Malcom [20-05-20] |
Many thanks for the manual/computer testing, Frank and Andrew. The task must be made more “forcingly” then. Since less moves means less possible cooks, I found two 7-mover Super-AUWs. The first one is much more likely to be sound.
s#7
 (= 12+9 )
Sol: 1. bxa8=Q+ (=R+? 5... Kxd5!) Kb6 2. cxb8=R+ Kc7 3. d8=L+ Kd6 4. e8=N+ Ke6 5. d5+ Kf5 6. fxg8=P+ Kg6 7. gxh8=K Bg7#,Bxf8#.
s#7
 (= 12+9 )
1. bxa8=R+ Kb7 2. c8=B+ Kc6 3. d8=N+ Kd6 4. exf8=Q+ Ke5 5. Nc6+ Kf6 6. fxg8=P+ Kg6 7. gxh8=K Bg7#,Bxf8#
This matrix is my most fruitful yet. The limiting dummy pawn is the true difficulty,
|
|
| (13) Posted by James Malcom [Wednesday, May 20, 2020 15:50]; edited by James Malcom [20-05-20] |
UPDATE: I’ve managed a Super-AUW in 6 moves-the minimum number of moves possible. It was very difficult to pull off.
s#6
 (= 13+10 )
Sol: 1. c8=B+ Kc6 2. axb8=N+ Kd6 3. exf8=Q+ Kxe6 4. dxe8=R+ Kf6 5. fxg8=P+ Kg6 6. h8=K Bxf8#,Bg7#
|
|
| (14) Posted by Andrew Buchanan [Wednesday, May 20, 2020 16:28] |
The shorter the representation, the greater the probability of soundness.
Some little typos:
1. c8=B+ Kc6 2. axb8=N+ Kd6 3. exf8=Q+ Kxe6 4. dxe*8*=R+ Kf6 5. fxg8=P+ Kg6 6. gxh8=K Bxf*8*#,Bg7#
How about 5. fxg8=R+ Kg6 6. gxh8=K+ Bg7# though?
Can one shift wPg7 to h7 in the start position, and remove bRh8?
What does Gustav say?
|
|
| (15) Posted by James Malcom [Wednesday, May 20, 2020 16:44]; edited by James Malcom [20-05-20] |
Thanks for finding those types-fixed.
|
|
| (16) Posted by Joost de Heer [Wednesday, May 20, 2020 20:46] |
QUOTE
Can one shift wPg7 to h7 in the start position, and remove bRh8?
No, because after fxg8=P, black can play Bh6xf8.
|
|
| (17) Posted by Frank Richter [Wednesday, May 20, 2020 21:47] |
Well ... even if this is super-sound, it is at least super-ugly and very far from chess composition as an ART FORM.
|
|
| (18) Posted by Andrew Buchanan [Thursday, May 21, 2020 08:00]; edited by Andrew Buchanan [20-05-21] |
John Nunn wrote in his forward to Jeremy Morse's "Chess Problems: Tasks and Records"
"Most chess composition is first and foremost about achieving an artistic effect. [..] By contrast, in task or record problems the artistic element is secondary. The main point is to achieve a particular extreme effect and the means are subordinate to the end."
Morse explores this point in greater detail. Let me pick a soundbite from section 1.21:
"Some problemists are not interested in tasks and records unless they are also 'good chess'. They stress the aesthetic; [T.R.]Dawson stresses the mathematical; and [Alain ] White tries to balance the two."
A task composer is not necessarily "un-artistic", but the challenge they have set themselves can be so hard, that it would be a mistake for them to focus prematurely on the inessential. Once a successful matrix has been identified, then it's possible to explore round from that point, see how big a design space has in fact been stumbled upon, and decide if it's possible to refine what they have achieved to introduce other secondary ideas.
I think this dimension of difference enriches our culture. "We are all independent spirits" and (particularly for relative newcomers) do not merit scorn.
|
|
No more posts |
MatPlus.Net  Forum Promenade White Super-AUW with orthodox material |
ISC 2024
