Upgrade to Chess.com Premium!

5/9/2012 - Mate in 2


  • 2 years ago · Quote · #141

    PapadeNaty

    Clever...

  • 2 years ago · Quote · #142

    tfurba

    A good demostration, that sometimes it is necessary to sacrifice a major piece achieve victory! Nothing easy in convincing the message.

  • 2 years ago · Quote · #143

    hyperal

    Deltaquad wrote:

    Mate in two

     

    Not really valid because the first move isn't forced. Black has too many options to increase the number of moves before he gets mated. The idea of a Mate in 2 puzzle is that it's forced checkmate without any possibility of more than two moves.

  • 2 years ago · Quote · #144

    hyperal

    stephen_33 wrote:
    dufferps wrote:
    Deltaquad wrote:

    "Mate in two 1. Be6?  d3??,  Nd5#"

     dufferps  comments:

    Where do you get this?  Both players make grievous blunders and it ends in a mate,.

    After 1.Be6, black plays 1.... Bxf3+ and even with his huge material advantage it wil take while about 6 moves to get a checkmate.

    White should play the obvious 1.Qxf2 - capturing black's Queen and threatening
    2.Qxh4#  However, 1. ... Bh3 does seem to force it to mate in 3. 

    I have yet to find mate-in-2, but 1.Be6 does not get it

    Sorry dufferps but it's still mate in 2. The purpose of 1.Be6 is twofold - to clear a space for 2.Nd5 but also to cover f5.  I agree that black's response of 1...d3 is bizarre but either 1...Bxf3 or 1...Qxf3 are equally futile.

    Here's my solution:-

     

     



    A good, thoughtful puzzle by Deltaquad. We could do with some like this for the daily puzzle.

    I think it's a bad puzzle if it has more than one solution. It's too messy, defeating the purpose of a puzzle. Puzzles should have one answer. Anyone can come up with a fancy checkmate with a bunch of different variables. It's much more elegant to create a situation with only one way to defend and one way to mate.

  • 2 years ago · Quote · #145

    WaiderMonginzin

    Finished

  • 2 years ago · Quote · #146

    vanhafford

    Thanks for the lesson!

  • 2 years ago · Quote · #147

    _36darshan--

    easy

  • 2 years ago · Quote · #148

    genpet

    In the strict sense of Mate in 2, this cant be solve in 2 moves.

  • 2 years ago · Quote · #149

    genpet

    Deltaquad wrote:

    Mate in two

     

    The solution provided by Deltaquad cant mate in 2 moves. If white remove the bishop, black should eat the pawn with queen making the white under check, then so on and so on.

  • 2 years ago · Quote · #150

    The_Tactic

    sneaky I like

  • 2 years ago · Quote · #151

    Timeyo_R_Nkosi

    Done 

  • 2 years ago · Quote · #152

    BryanCFB

    genpet wrote:
    Deltaquad wrote:

    Mate in two

     

    The solution provided by Deltaquad cant mate in 2 moves. If white remove the bishop, black should eat the pawn with queen making the white under check, then so on and so on.

    It's still mate in two.  Check out post #114 for the solution.

  • 2 years ago · Quote · #153

    Goatllama

    Well gee, don't know if I'd have the guts to make such a sacrifice in an actual game.......

  • 2 years ago · Quote · #154

    RSTAR45

    nice

  • 2 years ago · Quote · #155

    a4hunter25

    easy

  • 2 years ago · Quote · #156

    Ocky

    Easy

  • 2 years ago · Quote · #157

    stephen_33

    hyperal wrote:
    Deltaquad wrote:

    Mate in two

     

    Not really valid because the first move isn't forced. Black has too many options to increase the number of moves before he gets mated. The idea of a Mate in 2 puzzle is that it's forced checkmate without any possibility of more than two moves.

    &

    I think it's a bad puzzle if it has more than one solution. It's too messy, defeating the purpose of a puzzle. Puzzles should have one answer. Anyone can come up with a fancy checkmate with a bunch of different variables. It's much more elegant to create a situation with only one way to defend and one way to mate.

    Having a difference of opinion over a chess puzzle isn't something that troubles me as a rule but 'hyperal' states his obvious disdain for Deltaquad's posted puzzle so emphatically that I feel I have to respond to it.

    First of all I'm not sure whether or not you understood it because you suggest black can drag out the mate beyond two moves but that isn't true - every solution gives mate in two moves. I thought my  diagram on post #114 made that clear.

    One of my criticisms of the daily puzzles on this site is that too many of them involve forced mates in which all moves are checks, with no variation whatsoever. Ok, you get some satisfaction from having solved them but in the end they're not very interesting & usually have the shortest threads. If you search back through this forum, you'll soon notice that the best & liveliest threads are those in which the puzzle offered some defensive alternative moves for (usually) black because not every move is forced. It's only then that you can start to have a real discussion & isn't that the whole point of coming to a website !

    This is why I take issue with you describing Deltaquad's puzzle as 'bad'. It's a good deal more difficult to understand than most but for me that's what makes it so much more elegant. You also state that a puzzle should have only one solution - who invented that rule ?
    The fact is, many of them on this forum have multiple solutions but perhaps you havn't been solving them for long enough to know this.

    Furthermore, claiming anyone can devise such a puzzle - have you tried ? If you can compile a puzzle  equal to Deltaquad's in sophistication & message it to me then I'll certainly look at it.

    In the end it comes down to a matter of taste but that doesn't mean one type is better than the other - they're just different.

     
  • 2 years ago · Quote · #158

    genpet

    [COMMENT DELETED]
  • 2 years ago · Quote · #159

    Jacob30

    stephen_33 wrote:
    hyperal wrote:
    Deltaquad wrote:

    Mate in two

     

    Not really valid because the first move isn't forced. Black has too many options to increase the number of moves before he gets mated. The idea of a Mate in 2 puzzle is that it's forced checkmate without any possibility of more than two moves.

    &

    I think it's a bad puzzle if it has more than one solution. It's too messy, defeating the purpose of a puzzle. Puzzles should have one answer. Anyone can come up with a fancy checkmate with a bunch of different variables. It's much more elegant to create a situation with only one way to defend and one way to mate.

    Having a difference of opinion over a chess puzzle isn't something that troubles me as a rule but 'hyperal' states his obvious disdain for Deltaquad's posted puzzle so emphatically that I feel I have to respond to it.

    First of all I'm not sure whether or not you understood it because you suggest black can drag out the mate beyond two moves but that isn't true - every solution gives mate in two moves. I thought my  diagram on post #114 made that clear.

    One of my criticisms of the daily puzzles on this site is that too many of them involve forced mates in which all moves are checks, with no variation whatsoever. Ok, you get some satisfaction from having solved them but in the end they're not very interesting & usually have the shortest threads. If you search back through this forum, you'll soon notice that the best & liveliest threads are those in which the puzzle offered some defensive alternative moves for (usually) black because not every move is forced. It's only then that you can start to have a real discussion & isn't that the whole point of coming to a website !

    This is why I take issue with you describing Deltaquad's puzzle as 'bad'. It's a good deal more difficult to understand than most but for me that's what makes it so much more elegant. You also state that a puzzle should have only one solution - who invented that rule ?
    The fact is, many of them on this forum have multiple solutions but perhaps you havn't been solving them for long enough to know this.

    Furthermore, claiming anyone can devise such a puzzle - have you tried ? If you can compile a puzzle  equal to Deltaquad's in sophistication & message it to me then I'll certainly look at it.

    In the end it comes down to a matter of taste but that doesn't mean one type is better than the other - they're just different.

     

    What's a real discussion?

  • 24 months ago · Quote · #160

    yinafu

    Jacob30 wrote:

    stephen_33 wrote

    hyperal wrote:

    Deltaquad wrote:

    Mate in two

     

    Not really valid because the first move isn't forced. Black has too many options to increase the number of moves before he gets mated. The idea of a Mate in 2 puzzle is that it's forced checkmate without any possibility of more than two moves.

    &

    I think it's a bad puzzle if it has more than one solution. It's too messy, defeating the purpose of a puzzle. Puzzles should have one answer. Anyone can come up with a fancy checkmate with a bunch of different variables. It's much more elegant to create a situation with only one way to defend and one way to mate.

    Having a difference of opinion over a chess puzzle isn't something that troubles me as a rule but 'hyperal' states his obvious disdain for Deltaquad's posted puzzle so emphatically that I feel I have to respond to it.

    First of all I'm not sure whether or not you understood it because you suggest black can drag out the mate beyond two moves but that isn't true - every solution gives mate in two moves. I thought my  diagram on post #114 made that clear.

    One of my criticisms of the daily puzzles on this site is that too many of them involve forced mates in which all moves are checks, with no variation whatsoever. Ok, you get some satisfaction from having solved them but in the end they're not very interesting & usually have the shortest threads. If you search back through this forum, you'll soon notice that the best & liveliest threads are those in which the puzzle offered some defensive alternative moves for (usually) black because not every move is forced. It's only then that you can start to have a real discussion & isn't that the whole point of coming to a website !

    This is why I take issue with you describing Deltaquad's puzzle as 'bad'. It's a good deal more difficult to understand than most but for me that's what makes it so much more elegant. You also state that a puzzle should have only one solution - who invented that rule ? The fact is, many of them on this forum have multiple solutions but perhaps you havn't been solving them for long enough to know this.

    Furthermore, claiming anyone can devise such a puzzle - have you tried ? If you can compile a puzzle  equal to Deltaquad's in sophistication & message it to me then I'll certainly look at it.

    In the end it comes down to a matter of taste but that doesn't mean one type is better than the other - they're just different.

     

    What's a real discussion?

    Please keep it up


Back to Top

Post your reply: