martin0 vs the world: World analysis thread

Nc3 makes the most sense. No need to make a queen on f1.

Nc3

We can make two Queens.  Perhaps you misinterpreted the rule about only one Bishop can stand atop a Rook.  That just means you cannot have two Bishops atop a Rook.

"As a move a bishop can move on top of an allied rook with its normal movement. Only 1 bishop can stand on top of 1 rook."

I took this as you can only form one queen, but I may be wrong. Maybe we should get clarification from Martin.

Agreed.  Definitely need clarification.

Does this sound good?

[Martin, need clarification on…

Event #37 Queenbuilder

As a move a bishop can move on top of an allied rook with its normal movement. Only 1 bishop can stand on top of 1 rook.

Why was this pointed out? (highlighted sentence (by me))  To prevent the possibility of 2 Bishops standing on top of 1 Rook?  To prevent one side from having 2 Queens built at the same time?

Bob]

8 votes for Nc3.

Voting ends.

Nc3 will be our move.

Btw can someone clarify the Pawn Grabber event?

I can try but I don't think it will make it any clearer.

It's saying that if it's your turn to move and there exists a legal move for you that captures a pawn such that after that pawn capture (and it's your opponent's turn to move) your opponent has no legal moves to capture the piece that captured the pawn, then you must capture some piece (not necessarily the pawn; you can capture whichever piece you want) on your current move. Of course if there are no legal moves to capture a pawn such that your opponent has no legal moves to capture the piece that captured the pawn, then you can make whichever move you want (capture or non-capture).

If we oversimplify it a bit then it's roughly saying that if you are attacking an unprotected pawn (before you make a move), then you must capture that pawn or any other piece of your choice on your current move. As Martin points out, there are exceptions to this oversimplification.

For example there are cases when you attack a pawn twice (or more times) and it's only protected by the opponent's king (see Example 3 that Martin posted). In this case the attacked pawn on f7 is protected, but you are still required to make a capturing move. This is is because there exists a move that captures a pawn (for example Nxf7) such that your opponent can't take the piece (let's say the knight) that captured it. In this case it didn't matter that f7 had a defender (the king), because it had no legal moves to recapture on f7 (because that would put the king in check).

Another exception to the oversimplification would be some discovered checks. In Martin's Example 5, white is required to make a capturing move, since the d6 pawn is attacked, even though it's defended. This is because there exists a move that captures a pawn (Nxd6) such that black has no legal moves to recapture on d6 (cxd6 would be illegal since black is in check). In this example the discovered check ignored the defender of the pawn.

But discovered checks will not always ignore defenders. If you make a discovered check that captures a pawn, then sometimes the king can just recapture the piece that captured the pawn, such as in the following position:

In the above position there are no legal moves for white to capture a pawn such that black has no legal moves to recapture the piece that captured the pawn. If white plays the discovered check Rxg7+, then black can just take the rook with his king. Therefore white is not required to make a capturing move (but is of course still allowed to do so).

Ok.

Martin confirmed we can build two queens. My bad everyone. 

He has just played e5

We should look it over for a couple of days… Martin put that much time in.

I've got my sister's birthday party to go to in a few hours, so won't be analyzing until tomorrow.

To help, though, we do not have a Pawn Grabber move imposed on us at the moment, and we could do the one Queen Builder if we wanted to.

The game is still very, very young… the worst part of chess for me — late opening chess moves — out of book. (we've been out of book since the first Event… so, just saying)

8. Bg5 looks interesting here. The point is to pin the knight on f6 and threaten g4. Even if Martin plays 8...h6?? we can still play 9. g4! and he is forced to play 9...Nxg4 because of the pawn grabber event and we win his queen with 10. Bxd8.

After 8. Bg5 I guess he could defend against the g4 threat with 8...Qe8 or even 8...h5 or 8...Nb6 (but the latter 2 moves look awkward and are probably bad).

8. Bg5 exd4 (forcing us to recapture) 9. Nxd4 Ne5 protects the g4 square with the other knight but we can probably just chase it away with with 10. f4, so I don't think that defense works for him.

I haven't looked at the position for very long and I'm not saying I'm voting for 8. Bg5 yet. I will vote for a move later.

Edit: Oops I just realized that after 8. Bg5 h6 9. g4 he doesn't have to take on g4, he can just play 9...hxg5. Forget everything I just said. I guess 8. Bg5 is not as strong as I thought.

Can someone post the diagram?

Let's play Qc2. This threatens dxe5 immediately, and prepares Rd1.

Bg5 is interesting as well. This could force him to play h6, and/or Qe8. Both of which should be advantageous for us.

Bg5