Upgrade to Chess.com Premium!

3/10/2012 - White to Draw


  • 3 years ago · Quote · #121

    FredBatchelor

    Easy Breezie. I would like to clarify this problem to everyone. ............

  • 3 years ago · Quote · #122

    stephen_33

    Baffling !
    You've only got to read the posts on this from beginning to end (and some of us do) to realise how utterly bemused & confused most people are.  I managed to get about 3 moves right by playing tactically but I didn't understand the objective.

      So white has to force a draw.  First principles then (copied from the Learn/Basic Rules section of this site):-
    1. The position reaches a stalemate where it is one player’s turn to move, but his king is NOT in check and yet he does not have another legal move
    2. The players may simply agree to a draw and stop playing
    3. There are not enough pieces on the board to force a checkmate (example: a king and a bishop vs. a king)
    4. A player declares a draw if the same exact position is repeated three times (though not necessarily three times in a row)
    5. Fifty consecutive moves have been played where neither player has moved a pawn or captured a piece.

        So which of these applies when you get to the solution ? I just don't get it even after reading 'gutartas's analysis.
        Is this Chess.com's revenge for all the whining that goes on in this forum ?
  • 3 years ago · Quote · #123

    ndskykng

    stephen_33 wrote:
    Baffling !
    You've only got to read the posts on this from beginning to end (and some of us do) to realise how utterly bemused & confused most people are.  I managed to get about 3 moves right by playing tactically but I didn't understand the objective.

      So white has to force a draw.  First principles then (copied from the Learn/Basic Rules section of this site):-
    The position reaches a stalemate where it is one player’s turn to move, but his king is NOT in check and yet he does not have another legal move The players may simply agree to a draw and stop playing There are not enough pieces on the board to force a checkmate (example: a king and a bishop vs. a king) A player declares a draw if the same exact position is repeated three times (though not necessarily three times in a row) Fifty consecutive moves have been played where neither player has moved a pawn or captured a piece.

      So which of these applies when you get to the solution ? I just don't get it even after reading 'gutartas's analysis.
      Is this Chess.com's revenge for all the whining that goes on in this forum ?

    4.

     

    I thought you said you read all the posts from beginning to end.

  • 3 years ago · Quote · #124

    StrategicPlay

    I think in this case, 'draw' means escaping a checkmate. Well, a pretty hard and unexpected puzzle it is!
  • 3 years ago · Quote · #125

    ne0218

    ???

  • 3 years ago · Quote · #126

    valientone

    I think I like solving for Mate better.. Im Not a draw type player

  • 3 years ago · Quote · #127

    vanhafford

    Thanks for the lesson!  A draw is worth 1/2 point!  Better than no point at all.

  • 3 years ago · Quote · #128

    MDOC777

    I didn't get it right, but I can see the draw.

  • 3 years ago · Quote · #129

    MDOC777

    Wilderboard wrote:

    didnt read the title...was trying to find a way to mate...damn...


     LOL... I did.  It pays.

  • 3 years ago · Quote · #130

    onlyswaraj

  • 3 years ago · Quote · #131

    RedAdom

    White should win this position easily.

  • 3 years ago · Quote · #132

    domalius

    Good puzzle, relatively difficult

  • 3 years ago · Quote · #133

    cfrench49

    Tough one.

  • 3 years ago · Quote · #134

    The_Chess_Ninja

    HARD

  • 3 years ago · Quote · #135

    donce83

    A very difficult puzzle, i´m missed in second moveSmile

  • 3 years ago · Quote · #136

    wayne100

    difficult

  • 3 years ago · Quote · #137

    Mathematics

    wow:)

  • 3 years ago · Quote · #138

    melvinbluestone

    The solution given is not very convincing. The problem is, after 1.Bh3 white doesn't threaten anything. So 1...Bxh3 (or 1...Qxh3) is not forced for black. For example, why not 1...Bxe2 followed maybe by a check Bf3+ or BxN? Here's a nice continuation:

  • 3 years ago · Quote · #139

    DynamicMoose

    Ah, now I see why B-h3 was necessary. Qxh2 would have been a mate. Here I was trying to look for something for the white queen to do. 

    Oops...

  • 3 years ago · Quote · #140

    ndskykng

    melvinbluestone wrote:

    The solution given is not very convincing. The problem is, after 1.Bh3 white doesn't threaten anything. So 1...Bxh3 (or 1...Qxh3) is not forced for black. For example, why not 1...Bxe2 followed maybe by a check Bf3+ or BxN? Here's a nice continuation:


    White isn't threatening anything? First off, take a glance at his queenside pawns, that can be turned in a hurry.

    And take your own advice buddy.

    3. Rxd1 isn't forced at all, and it leads to hanging of the rook.

    For that matter, 4. Rxd6 isn't forced either, he would be an idiot to leave the bank rank available for that Queen check on e1.  You have to play the best move for both sides, are you kidding me?

    White would never hang his rook with 3. Rxd1.  Start your continuation instead with 3. Qxf7, threatening the b7 pawn to finish off his passed pawns on the queenside and protecting his hung rook.


Back to Top

Post your reply: