You really struggle to remain rational don't you Gavin? I'm amazed we're trying to have discussion with some kid that calls himself the gavinator obsessed with a Gadaffi look alike who reckons vectors have a use in chess. Enlighten us how does black force mate below?
Defences to the Parham Attack
Sort:
No I showed what he said, jetfighter is just stupid.
They can't, how dumb are you.
The_Gavinator wrote:
They can't, how dumb are you.
If they can't wtf is wrong with jetfighers statement.
jetfighter13 wrote:
maybe they are in looneyville Gavinator. the problem with this logic is that in Matrix chess Rooks are also worth two and this is completely false. the reason is it takes two bishop's assisted to mate where as it takes only one rook assisted to mate.
No it doesn't.
I know, but 1 bishop can give mate too.
You fail to understand the game of chess is not a cooperative affair. The mate you showed earlier cannot be forced. Therefore, jetfighters statement that two bishops in cooperation with a king are needed to force mate is completely valid.
He never said force now did he?
Jun 13, 2012
0
#590
The_Gavinator wrote:
jetfighter13 wrote:
maybe they are in looneyville Gavinator. the problem with this logic is that in Matrix chess Rooks are also worth two and this is completely false. the reason is it takes two bishop's assisted to mate where as it takes only one rook assisted to mate.
It does?
no the situation that I refered to was below
You never mentioned the word force, and there is no mate there period. Stop trolling.
Jun 13, 2012
0
#592
Ok you are the one trolling because you don't know general chess termonology. when I say a Bishop and King cannot mate without extra help I mean against a lone king where as a rook can do that with a king. its simple endgame termonology that you don't know because you never get there. either because you loose. win because of your elaborate trap. or just plain don't care to play one.
I wish I had admin control. I'd retitle this thread, "Gavinator is a troll" making sure that is by Gavinator, giving his apology along with a lengthy, why the Parham is inept. Then I'd lock it.
Jun 13, 2012
0
#594
I don't think the value of pieces has much to do with how easy it is to mate the king with them.
Jun 13, 2012
0
#595
well calling a rook equal to a bishop is looney. therefore Gavinator Parham and anyone who agree's with them are loons. Dive back underwater why doncha
It's a different thought process jetfighter, be more open minded. Mr. Parham has gotten a lot farther playing matrix chess then you have playing regular chess. At least he probably knows that it is possible to mate with just 1 bishop and a king lol...
Jun 14, 2012
0
#597
no no Two knights and a king can force a mate if the other side has a pawn behind a certain point. eventually it is captured and two knights and the king mate. Bishop and knight can mate with assistence from a king.
a single rook can mate with help from the king without anyother material on the board.
Queen can do the same but since it moves like a rook and bishop it is worth about the same as them combined.
and a lone Bishop and King cannot mate against a lone King.
jetfighter13 wrote:
I mean against a lone king
Two knights can't force mate.
Jun 14, 2012
0
#599
there is a position in which it is possible but the other side has to have a pawn. its wierd but just use any endgame tablebase and give a position with a pawn on its starting square for the loosing side and then check the result. now remove the pawn. what you get is the only time the enemy having more material is better than the enemy having less.
Yes I know that, what does that have to do with anything? Stop trolling me bro