11551 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!
52 , the white first-rank-shifting was unneccesary but I had put it in anyway and didnt feel like re-entering the game
Haha brilliant! switching rooks to opposite wings. Now that's creative thinking.
For #163 the last white move must have been a pawn move (or for #1 1.Rh5+ N4xh5# but I doubt the composer left any spare white pieces)
In position 2 Black can play N4h5# with the same position as #1 except for a rook. But I have no idea why f5 would be a legal rook position and c4 not, I suppose I'll only figure out if i do loads of analysis of the position
Could white have moved a pawn on his last move though? This can be easily determined if you try to actually obtain all of those promoted pieces for black.
And if white couldn't have, what could have been his last move? What was the last sequence?
Let me know if you're still working on it, because it seems at the moment like you're the only one :)
I have also tried that one,but it seemed that black could not promote to a dark square bishop if white hadn't played a4 and b3 before that, since if only b3 was played,one more white piece will be required to have it promoted on a1 or c1,while the f and h pawns can't promote to a dark sqaure bishop.Therefore white's last move seems to be a king move,but I cannot find a square for white king to come from which was not already protected by a black knight.But perhaps I was missing something.
There are 5 white pieces that can be captured (Q,R,R,N,black bishop)
The d-pawn made 2 captures, the other pawns 1.
the b-pawn must have moved to allow cxb2
If the a-pawn was on a3 until the previous move then it must have moved before the b-pawn to allow bxa2, but the b-pawn must have moved first to allow axb2.
Contradiction, therefore the a-pawn was on a4 and b-pawn on b3 and the last white move was not a pawn move
White has just moved, his last move was not a pawn or knight move therefore it was a king move.
If this was being played 20 years ago then it would have been easily possible because a king was only considered in check if attacked by 1 or 2 pieces. So it would not have been in check on f8. But under the current rules it is in an impossible triple check on f8.
So there must be trick that I'm missing.
(if it was white to move it would be possible with say B on c4, N on d5, K on g8, 1...Nd5-f6++ 2.Kg7 Bg8)
Here's a fresh one for you all. Double-check your answers... there are several tricky bits here.
Surely that is illegal because there is no way the rook can get to b3 without white already being in check?
So we have to reach this position with whatever white piece on a1.
The pawn in b2 come from g7. He has to take on f6, e5, d4, c3 and b2. So 5 times.
White is missing 2 rooks, 2 bishops, queen and 1 knight. One less to promote. So 5 pieces remaining.
The problem is white can't developp his white bishop.
I think it's not possible.
Very nice deductive work, zuup!
Now tell me if this version changes anything:
Now it is possible
My argument become invalid! 0_o
But I don't have time to look more at it.
Good work, s0030135!
You guys are demolishing my puzzles.
don't forget Shoopi's puzzles and here's one of my own:
you're right piphilologist!
this one looks the same and is as easy as the previous one
Yes, there is!
Well, not really a "trick", but there is a way for white to have a legal last move with his king. You need to look back more than one move, though. You're thinking, if a square is threatened by at least 2 black pieces, there's no way that the white king came from that square. But it is possible - black had a discovered double check, which is the only possible sequence leading to the final position.
I still don't get it. If there wasn't a knight on h7 then N on e7, K on f8, 1...Ne7-g6++ 2.Kg7 but in the diagram f8 would be impossible triple check. The only other possibility is f7, but again it is impossible double check. I really don't see how either position can be legal
What about g8?
The first one is possible, all you need is 6 black minor pieces sacrificed to move the pawns into position like that for white and 1 more to get another white bishop on the black square
I dont understand why biship didnt take Q
by Xirehzin a few minutes ago
2200 vs 2700
by aronchuck a few minutes ago
post your funniest illegal games here!!!!!!!!
by chesssmart82 2 minutes ago
SCID vs PC
by DunnoItAll 2 minutes ago
14 Sicilian games so far, only 1 open Siclian. What about you?
by FriendlySquid 3 minutes ago
12/4/2013 - Immunity
by esazs 4 minutes ago
Best Openings (Humor)(Trolls allowed!)
by AssauIt 4 minutes ago
Easily my favourite GM to watch lecture.
by losingmove 7 minutes ago
Positional response to e4?
by FirebrandX 9 minutes ago
If you could combine two chess pieces powers what would the two pieces be???????
by losingmove 9 minutes ago
Why Join | Chess Topics |
Help & Support |
© 2013 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!