MatPlus.Net

 Website founded by
Milan Velimirović
in 2006

13:07 UTC
 
  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
1-Oct-2019

B P C F





 
 
MatPlus.Net Forum General Threats and duals (spawnoff thread)
 
You can only view this page!
(1) Posted by Hauke Reddmann [Thursday, May 10, 2012 14:22]

Threats and duals (spawnoff thread)


Take a problem with secondary threat correction (or what
the name is, I'm not sure it is what I think it is :-)
or even better a secondary Fleck (here I know definitely :-)

1.A (2.B) c~ 2.D,E,F

Would you see a move c' that just parries D as a worse dual
than the same thing in a free primary Fleck?
My, are you illogical then :-)

1.A (2.B) c~ 2.D

Would you see a move c' that is so idiotic that it introduces
a new mate E in addition to D as a dual? A move x that doesn't
parry B and introduces a new mate F isn't seen as a dual
after all (at least nowadays). My, are you even more illogical :P))

Hauke
 
(Read Only)pid=8522
(2) Posted by Kevin Begley [Thursday, May 17, 2012 03:58]; edited by Kevin Begley [12-05-17]

You bring up a very interesting point.
Threat notation doesn't hold for Fleck Themed problems.
And, therefore, the definition of duals has to be altered.

So, what new notation is required, and what constitutes a dual within this new framework?

Furthermore, shouldn't the proper notation be stipulated, in the problem?
 
 
(Read Only)pid=8571
(3) Posted by Ian Shanahan [Thursday, May 17, 2012 09:48]

@Hauke.

On the subject of Fleck theme, is it OK (or even desirable!) in an otherwise perfectly accurate ideal/total primary or secondary Fleck example to have a single move that actualizes all the threats - i.e. 1....c 2.A,B,C,... #? I think this actually improves thematic clarity, particularly for secondary Flecks. Moreover, in offshoot themes like Combinative Separation, such a 'null move' is demanded!
 
   
(Read Only)pid=8572
(4) Posted by Hauke Reddmann [Thursday, May 17, 2012 13:55]

@Kevin - and since there is no such thing as a pass move in chess,
does it follow that there are no such things as threats? :-)

Hauke

(Note: Today is "Fathers Day" in Germany, meaning that countless
rednecks run around bombed, blitzed, stuffed to the gills etc.
[use Garbage "The boys wanna fight" for more synonyms if needed]
I'm a teetotaler and want to point out this posting was made
with 0.00 promille - in case anyone thought otherwise :-)
 
   
(Read Only)pid=8575
(5) Posted by Kevin Begley [Thursday, May 17, 2012 16:52]

@Hauke,

It really does not logically follow, from a lack of free-move, that threats are not part of problems (or the game).
Imagining the free move is only a method, which is used to determine the threat.

If you're serious about this, could you please provide an alternative notation (which does not use threats)?
 
   
(Read Only)pid=8576
(6) Posted by Hauke Reddmann [Friday, May 18, 2012 11:27]

Naaaah, total unserious :-)
But still, threats are a fictional device to simplify our thoughts,
and as it is with devices, it just takes one inventive
trickster to make them run amuck:

H. Reddmann, Schach-Report #4480
(= 10+8 )

#2 a) Dia b) Sd4->e6

Just ponder whether Black "prefers" to be mated with his knight on d4 or e6.
Of course, it makes no difference for him - only threat and mate after correction
are swapped in a) and b), to the effect they get almost equivalent.

Hauke
 
 
(Read Only)pid=8579

No more posts


MatPlus.Net Forum General Threats and duals (spawnoff thread)