MatPlus.Net

 Website founded by
Milan Velimirović
in 2006

23:24 CET
 
  Forum*
 
 
 
 

Username:

Password:

Remember me

 
Forgot your
password?
Click here!
SIGN IN
to create your account if you don't already have one.
CHESS
SOLVING

Tournaments
Rating lists
01-Oct-2019

B P C F





 
 
MatPlus.Net Forum General The Terrific Triple Threat
 
You can only view this page!
(1) Posted by Rewan Demontay (Real Name: J. Malcom) [Tuesday, Jul 23, 2019 08:27]; edited by Rewan Demontay (Real Name: J. Malcom) [19-07-23]

The Terrific Triple Threat


I recently read #295, entitled "Triple Play," of Tim Krabbe's chess diary. It was an interesting read.

In the following position in the game "Kopiecki - Bonin, New York, Marshall Chess Club, 25 September 2005' was shown, with Black to move.

(= 7+8 )


In here, Black played an astounding move: 0-0-0! Now both White's rook and bishop are being attacked AND Black's rook is threatening Rd8#. White promptly resigned.

A triple play it is indeed.

I wonder, is possible to have a castling that results in four threats? If it's at all possible, I have idea on how to do it.

Just for fun, I made a small and simply easy problem. using this idea. I made Black the castler ( :-) I literally just made that up for fun. Is that actually a term used in chess at all? I do wonder...), as it was in the game.

BTM, n#4

(= 6+8 )


My idea here was to have a two mate threats from the rook instead of just a mate and a capture threat. While their is. There are a few duals here and there, but that's just a small cost to me to make the idea work. Some pawns are there to prevent way too many duals. I'm not too sure if any of the duals in my problem could possibly be wiped out.

Solution: 1... Bxf2 Locking in the White King Rxb7 Taking out a future mating threats 2... 0-0-0 A triple threat-checkmate in two ways, and the capture of the rook Rb8+ or Rxc7+ Futile resistance 3... Kxb8 or Kxc7 c6 Only legal move 4. Rd1# or Rd8#

Variation. 1... Bxf2 c6 Any rook move other than Rxb7 reults in a mate in one or two 2... Rd8->0-0-0? cxb7+! Threating Rd1# Rd4 Preventing Rd1# 3. Rb1+ Rd1 Only legal move Rbxd1# or Rdxd1#

I'm just practicing some annotating here!

Feel free to share any similar studies.
 
(Read Only)pid=17608
(2) Posted by Hauke Reddmann [Tuesday, Jul 23, 2019 12:02]

Wanna try to make it "zweckrein", as the logical school wants?

To elaborate, take one of the threats out of the position.
K->f1: White could linger on with Rh7. (Probably still lost,
but that could be changed.)
B->g7: As before, Rb1 saves the day for the moment.
R->b2: There we have it - OOO still wins a piece.

Just for demo, checked with the Syzygy tables:
(= 3+4 )

1.OOO!
1...Rg2 defends against mate and hanging rook, 2.Rxh1+ is the only win
1...Bd5 defends against mate and hanging bishop, 2.Kxb2 is the only win
- apart from playing Rc8+ and prolonging it - unfortunately a Sb6 doesn't
work as Rg2 would be drawn in that position
1...Rh2 defends both hanging pieces, 1.Rd8# is the only win

And the ultimate rendering would be a study with decoying
the white pieces to b7 and h8 first before castling :-)

Hauke
 
 
(Read Only)pid=17609
(3) Posted by Rewan Demontay (Real Name: J. Malcom) [Tuesday, Jul 23, 2019 17:33]

A miniature of the idea-very nice Hauke!

Also, with this post, I'll have made 110 so far! Five more, and I'll be #40 on the most active members list!
 
   
(Read Only)pid=17610
(4) Posted by Geir Sune Tallaksen Østmoe [Wednesday, Jul 24, 2019 14:29]

Four threats must be possible - the rook can threaten to capture on h8 and d1, and also threaten mate on a vacant square.

Hauke, I will be surprised of nobody has done the idea of luring the pieces to b7 and h8 before castling. I will see if I can find an example.
 
   
(Read Only)pid=17612
(5) Posted by Rewan Demontay (Real Name: J. Malcom) [Wednesday, Jul 24, 2019 16:34]

I'm honestly not sure if this castling brings three four or five threats-what do you think?

(= 11+9 )


If Black castles, then:

1. Ra8# threat

2. KxRb7 threat

3. RxBc5 threat

4. If the bishop moves, then n#2

5. If the knight moves to protect the bishop, then n#2

Then again, those last two are jauf x-ray, non-immediate threats. Should they really count?

And I'm sure that a much nicer position could be made with ny ideas.
 
   
(Read Only)pid=17613
(6) Posted by Geir Sune Tallaksen Østmoe [Thursday, Jul 25, 2019 12:57]

I stand corrected - after searching in hhdbv, there seems to be no example with a triple threat. Lots of example with a double threat, although in most cases one of the "threats" is a check, which is cheating.
 
   
(Read Only)pid=17614
(7) Posted by Bob Baker [Thursday, Aug 29, 2019 12:45]

When I saw the title of this thread, I immediately thought about a position that arises in a well-known endgame procedure. The Philidor position of the endgame KRB vs KR starts, for example, from White: Kd6, Rf1, Bd5; Black: Kd8, Re7. After 22 plies into White's winning procedure, the position below is reached. When teaching the procedure to students, I tell them at this point it is time to find White's terrific triple killer move, which often seems challenging for them to find. Of course the move is Bc4, when the bishop is guarding the checking square d3, blocking the black rook from interposing on c8, and continuing to guard the escape square f7. This is the point at which the student learns why it was necessary to force the black rook to the third rank.

(= 3+2 )

 
   
(Read Only)pid=17810
(8) Posted by Hauke Reddmann [Friday, Aug 30, 2019 09:57]

Challenge to Rewan, I'm sure he will like it:

The "Fleck" theme (most lenient form) is when in a #2, White
has a (non-battery) multiple threat and all threat moves
occur singly in at least one variant. Record is 8 variants.

Let's lift the conditions somewhat for record purposes -
we just want a #2 with n threats and at least one black move
parrying all threats or all except one.
(No black check, that's too easy!)

No cigars unless n around 20, since I once did it myself but
can't find it at the moment :-)
 
   
(Read Only)pid=17819
(9) Posted by Rewan Demontay (Real Name: J. Malcom) [Wednesday, Sep 4, 2019 20:08]; edited by Rewan Demontay (Real Name: J. Malcom) [19-09-04]

BLANK
 
 
(Read Only)pid=17850
(10) Posted by Rewan Demontay (Real Name: J. Malcom) [Wednesday, Sep 4, 2019 20:08]; edited by Rewan Demontay (Real Name: J. Malcom) [19-09-04]

Sorry for the late reply Hauke-I sort of kind of maybe forgot!

Can I ger 90% of a cigar please? :-D

I managed to come up with the followng,

BTM. #2

(= 12+2 )


White has 18 mate in one threats. Black must play Rxg1, and all of the non-battery White threats have been neutralized!

18 is pretty close to 20-it’s 9/10, aka 90%.

What do you think?

And since this thread started with castling, here’s 9 #1’s killed of by a casting.

BTM, #2

(= 7+3 )


Having Black move first in a #2 is probally cheating, but meh!

And finally, I managed a dual-free version of my triple threat castling problem.

BTM, #3

(= 6+4 )

 
   
(Read Only)pid=17851
(11) Posted by Hauke Reddmann [Monday, Sep 9, 2019 10:43]

Smoking is bad for you anyway :P

Here is one with 27 threats I made up yesterday.
DA RULES (for topping the record) are standard Fleck:

- Should be a correct 2#. (Don't bother about quality :-)
- (Under)Promotions are counted only once.
- Random(!) battery checks are counted only once.
- Black has at least one defense which
a) kills all mates except one
b) kills all mates and gives a new

(= 14+6 )

1.Kxg6 (12Q,4R,3S,2B,6P) Bxf7+ 2.Sxf7#
 
 
(Read Only)pid=17868

No more posts


MatPlus.Net Forum General The Terrific Triple Threat