Chessmaster mistakes

pompom

I found 3 mistakes in Josh Waitzkin's tutorials.  The first one is this position.

 

This one is in part 1 in the Mastery Quiz, page 10.  Josh Waitzkin showed it as mate in 4, but it could be done in 2 moves.
The next one is on that same lesson on page 14.
He showed mate in 5, but it is actually mate in 4.
The third one is page 5 in the "Removing the Defender" lesson.
The correct answer wins a queen for a rook, but you could have won a whole queen.
Chapter_Eleven

I don't understand the third pic.  You win a whole queen, but you would not have mate in 4 at that rate.  What am I missing?

pompom
Romans920 wrote:

I don't understand the third pic.  You win a whole queen, but you would not have mate in 4 at that rate.  What am I missing?


You win a whole queen.  You don't mate in four.

Sigmoid_Flexure

Regarding the first 2: is he just trying to teach the simple staircase? He doesn't mention possible quicker ways to #? (Silman presents both the simple #'s and the quicker variations in his end game book)

pompom
Sigmoid_Flexure wrote:

Regarding the first 2: is he just trying to teach the simple staircase? He doesn't mention possible quicker ways to #? (Silman presents both the simple #'s and the quicker variations in his end game book)


Yes, I think he is just trying to teach the staircase.

clinttherakam

I thought it was called the electric fence.....am i mistaken

pompom

There's a lot of ways they call it, I actually call it the "rook roller".

clinttherakam

Fair call...

chessmaster12344

... wow...

clinttherakam

Yeah the last pic isn't wrong, if you play what the guy does, you will either have a mate or be a rook and queen up...

clinttherakam

In fact I don't get how any of them are mistaken, they all get the mate in the quickest possible way.

Am I missing something?

pompom
clinttherakam wrote:

In fact I don't get how any of them are mistaken, they all get the mate in the quickest possible way.

Am I missing something?


The moves in chessmaster are in the variations.

clinttherakam

So like the second quickest way to mate?

nicbentulan

Relevant?

 

https://chess.stackexchange.com/questions/34038/josh-waitzkin-on-trading-pieces-the-art-of-the-trade

 

https://chess.stackexchange.com/questions/34055/josh-waitzkin-chessmaster-mastery-quiz-spatial-advantage-trading-bishops

 

https://chess.stackexchange.com/questions/34048/josh-waitzkin-chessmaster-mastery-quiz-order-of-check-vs-trade

 

 

jjupiter6

As much as an 11 year old thread for obsolete software can be, I guess.

nicbentulan
jjupiter6 wrote:

As much as an 11 year old thread for obsolete software can be, I guess.

i mean 11 years old or not: josh is an IM, and josh had access to computers when making h parts of the chessmaster course....sooo...what, the computer josh was using was wrong?

TheBaconEater

I doubt it was a mistake, they all demonstrate ladder mates. Betting dollars to donuts they weren’t trying to show fastest mate, but how to walk the rooms down together.

RorschachTest1
jjupiter6 wrote:

As much as an 11 year old thread for obsolete software can be, I guess.

how do you explain this then? grin.png

nicbentulan
TheBaconEater wrote:

I doubt it was a mistake, they all demonstrate ladder mates. Betting dollars to donuts they weren’t trying to show fastest mate, but how to walk the rooms down together.

what about these?

 

https://chess.stackexchange.com/questions/34038/josh-waitzkin-on-trading-pieces-the-art-of-the-trade

 

https://chess.stackexchange.com/questions/34055/josh-waitzkin-chessmaster-mastery-quiz-spatial-advantage-trading-bishops

 

https://chess.stackexchange.com/questions/34048/josh-waitzkin-chessmaster-mastery-quiz-order-of-check-vs-trade