Upgrade to Chess.com Premium!

Impossible to Checkmate!


  • 24 months ago · Quote · #2

    RybkaShredder

    6. Two knights and a king

  • 24 months ago · Quote · #3

    Mac10688

    [COMMENT DELETED]
  • 24 months ago · Quote · #4

    IWTCIRD

    3. Bishop or Knight + King

    i know you can't force mate with two knights, but that doen't meant it's impossible 

  • 24 months ago · Quote · #5

    cjb21

    39 

  • 24 months ago · Quote · #7

    Frootloop2

    8? What do you mean impossible: not-forced mate or no mate even if they want to get mated?

  • 24 months ago · Quote · #8

    Scottrf

    27?

    9 bishops of the same colour.

  • 24 months ago · Quote · #10

    piphilologist

    52

    this is definitely not the maximum as I can see a way to get more

  • 24 months ago · Quote · #11

    PLAVIN79

    Not imposible but higly impobable

  • 24 months ago · Quote · #12

    GeniusKJ

    9 same colored bishops - 27

  • 24 months ago · Quote · #13

    shoopi

    103. Though theoretically speaking, this game has pretty much ended, as there can only be one result, a draw. If this still fails to meet the desired requirements, perhaps op should be more specific about the requirements.

  • 24 months ago · Quote · #14

    shengyi

    Interesting topic. Depends on interpretation of the question.

  • 24 months ago · Quote · #15

    p-wnattack

  • 24 months ago · Quote · #16

    Alext190

    Frootloop2 wrote:

    8? What do you mean impossible: not-forced mate or no mate even if they want to get mated?

     

    That's not valid, as the position you showed isn't impossible to be checkmated. It's a forced mate in 152 or less. Yes, seriously.

  • 24 months ago · Quote · #17

    chessplayer11

    The question implies that you can be checkmated on the next move, therefore it would be impossible to mate, thus the answer would be 103 if the other side allows all of your pawns to queen and both of you move to a position where mate would be impossible on the next move for that side either via stalemate, or the king being checkmated.



  • 24 months ago · Quote · #18

    Frootloop2

    Alext190 wrote: 

    That's not valid, as the position you showed isn't impossible to be checkmated. It's a forced mate in 152 or less. Yes, seriously.

    black just moves between an available square and h8. White can't reach h8 to force black out, and he can't cutoff the available squares without stalemate. right?

  • 24 months ago · Quote · #19

    piphilologist

    shoopi wrote:

    103. Though theoretically speaking, this game has pretty much ended, as there can only be one result, a draw. If this still fails to meet the desired requirements, perhaps op should be more specific about the requirements.

     

    not "pretty much" ended; the game has ended due to FIDE rules 5.2b and 9.6

    5.2 b. The game is drawn when a position has arisen in which neither player can checkmate the opponent’s king with any series of legal moves. The game is said to end in a ‘dead position’. This immediately ends the game, provided that the move producing the position was legal. (See Article 9.6)

    9.6

    The game is drawn when a position is reached from which a checkmate cannot occur by any possible series of legal moves. This immediately ends the game, provided that the move producing this position was legal.

    So therefore a checkmate must still be possible; otherwise the game has already ended. If white cannot possibly checkmate then Black must be able to checkmate white. This means almost all of the positions in this thread up to now have been incorrect.

  • 24 months ago · Quote · #20

    chessplayer11

    piphilologist wrote:

    This means almost all of the positions in this thread up to now have been incorrect.

    Hey. I hope you don't mean mine. I gave a complete move list. Laughing

     

    And no, he said it pretty much has ended, which was true. It was white's turn and any move would have resulted in a stalemate. As white still had one more move, it was "pretty much" over, but not quite yet. So you're last statement is just incorrect.


Back to Top

Post your reply: