|(1) Posted by Hauke Reddmann [Saturday, Dec 26, 2009 13:46]|
(Pseudo and true) Djurasevic cycle
a) Could someone repost the true Djurasevic cycle #2
(with the e.p. trick)?
b) Possible with a mathematically sound proof that e.p. is the only
way to get it done?
c) One can cheat and let the thematic moves be made by different
like pieces or with different departure fields, which is much
easier. Nevertheless, I only saw two of those and both were
with K flights. Do you know one without? (I boasted against
Wieland I could do a fake one in half an hour - *if* I'd ever
get the hang of letter problems. But I think it's allowed to
study a few matrices first, if only to not get anticipated :-)
|(2) Posted by Joost de Heer [Saturday, Dec 26, 2009 14:19]|
Jacques Rotenberg, Jean-Marc Loustau, Michel Caillaud
Special prize, Phénix 10.1988 (version 12.1994)
(= 7+4 )
1. hg6ep? [2. Rh3#] Bg6 2. Sg4# but there's no proof that black's last move was g7-g5
1. Rh3! [2. Sg4#] Bg6 2. hg6#
|(3) Posted by Hauke Reddmann [Sunday, Dec 27, 2009 19:22]|
THX for recalling that but...
Oho! This is *still* cheating :P
(1.hxg6 and 2.hxg6 are not the same move.)
|(4) Posted by Jacques Rotenberg [Sunday, Dec 27, 2009 22:29]|
interesting! why ?
|(5) Posted by Hauke Reddmann [Monday, Dec 28, 2009 19:45]|
Well, 1.hxg6 is an en passant capture, and
2.hxg6 a capture of a bishop. Moreover 1...Bg6/1...Bxg6
is also different with respect to a pawn biting
Which obviously begs the question if a super-stringent
Djurasevic (moves identical in long notation)
is chess-mathematically possible at all.
|(6) Posted by Joost de Heer [Tuesday, Dec 29, 2009 11:44]|
It's the same move. A pawn moves from h5 to g6 and captures a piece. It's irrelevant that in one variation this piece is a pawn on g5, and in the other it's a bishop on g6. That's why it's called a 'trick'. The same ep-capture on both the first and second move is of course impossible.
No more posts
MatPlus.Net Forum General (Pseudo and true) Djurasevic cycle