10968 Players currently online!
Man vs. Machine - good luck!
Turn-based games at any time!
Vote for the best move to win!
Do you have what it takes?
Sharpen your tactical vision!
Get advice and game insights!
Learn from top players & pros!
View millions of master games!
Your virtual chess coach!
Perfect your opening moves!
Test your skills vs. computer!
Find the right private coach!
Can you solve it each day?
Bring it all together!
Beginners, start here!
Make friends & play team games!
News from the world of chess!
Search all Chess.com members!
Find local clubs & events!
Who's the best of your friends?
Read what members are saying!
Again in the course "essential checkmate patterns", there are two lessons with the same name: "Queen and rook vs. an exposed king (2)". They are two variations on the same main line, so that's not too bad (though confusing, and I would still recommend changing one name). However, it's clear the lessons are presented in the revererse order to what was intended. The one currently first, should be second; the one currently second, should be first.
One I'm less sure of: This lesson ignores the possibility of 1... Rf6, which as far as I can tell refutes the logic of white's main line (effectively protects against the mate, and leaves white in a tough setting). In other words: the main line only works because the computer blunders in a way that can't be anticipated.
While it is certainly not mate, it is still losing, but is a better try. Kh7 is another good try but still losing. I am not sure it ignores the possibility, it just is more concerned with the proper tactics of why it is a winning move. You see a lot of this in Tactics Trainer. Two identical puzzles but one displays the tactic, while the other one puts up the best fight.
eddysallin: The two lessons are part of one course. Each of them is fine by itself, but the point they make together would be better understood if their order would be reversed. From the text in them, it's also clear this is the way the author originally meant it to be, and the current situation is just a technical mistake.
Just another correction that helps retrievals:
Correct date is 1949
Here may be seen perfectly:
I know this thread is old, but I did not want to open a new one:
In lesson PEB043 Connected Pawns (http://www.chess.com/chessmentor/view_lesson?id=365), after 1. e3 Kd6 2. Kf5 Kd5 3. d3 Kd6 4. e4 Kd7, it regards 5. e5 as a wrong move. It is clear that after 5. e5 Black can no longer keep off White king of the e6 square, and after that the e7 pawn is doomed.
This lesson needs work. Think more about that knight's fork on rook and king. One does not need to move the king, because the queen can easily capture the knight. Simultaneously, the queen moves out of check. I may find a different website, if no mentor likes having a queen.
nigel short says women brain not suited for chess. Give 1 word for how you feel?
by lisa_zhang_tok a few minutes ago
My System Examples
by Mikado777 a few minutes ago
Youtube - recommendations
by isayoldboy a few minutes ago
Nigel Short: Women's brains not chess brains
by Elubas 7 minutes ago
How many moves do you think ahead?
by The_Vision 8 minutes ago
Vote Chess Help
by DEATHW1SH 18 minutes ago
Rating Inflation: 100 Elo points starting in 1985
by kleelof 22 minutes ago
New chess circuit to be announced in Saint Louis
by highhowareyou 26 minutes ago
Good chess books with no chess in them?
by wiscmike 27 minutes ago
4/24/2015 - Setting Them Up For Failure
by ian_w_yip 28 minutes ago
Why Join | Chess Topics |
Help & Support |
© 2015 Chess.com
• Chess - English
We are working hard to make Chess.com available in over 70 languages. Check back over the year as we develop the technology to add more, and we will try our best to notify you when your language is ready for translating!