x
Chess - Play & Learn

Chess.com

FREE - in Win Phone Store

# Chess on an Infinite Plane (aidanB1 - HorribleTomato)

• #221
HorribleTomato wrote:

@vickalin can you add the rule "inevitable checkmate?" Since there is no 50 move rule, a player can cycle R and Q down to infinity, but it won't checkmate. Therefore the game would go forever, but when a mating pattern has been proven, should the player with the mating pattern win automatically?

To be honest I haven't studied minimum material required for a checkmate very much yet - but it's a really interesting topic, and I'm sure there are scenarios that don't exist in normal chess.

For your example do you mean KRQ vs K? I haven't checked - does this allow one side to push the opponent king one square every move, so the king walks eternally to infinity?

It's an interesting scenario. If a king can "walk forever" then I would call that a draw. But I don't know how to deal with players that never give up and continue moving a piece without repeating a position. Need ideas, I might bring that up in the infinite chess thread soon. Thanks for bringing it up.

• #222

for example black has a ton of pieces and white only has Q and R, but has a mating pattern. Would it be considered a win, since there is no 50 move nor does white have to agree to a draw. Theoretically, you should either bring 50+ move, making this position drawn, OR add the inevitable checkmate, making it a win for white.

• #223

the mating pattern: but there is no edge, so this would go on forever

• #224
HorribleTomato wrote:

for example black has a ton of pieces and white only has Q and R, but has a mating pattern...

If White has a mating pattern why doesn't he just play it out? Or is it infinitely-many moves away?

If it requires a lot of moves (like 10,000) then I would like the game to proceed (although this could be a problem if it's in a tournament, and other players are waiting for the game to be finished).

But if your question is about "checkmates at infinity" then I don't know what to do about that yet. I'll put you on the committee to help answer that question.

• #225

THERE'S A COMMITTEE!??!!

• #226

What forum?

• #227

Oh, now I see your example. That's funny and interesting at the same time. I think that should be a draw. It's more like a stalemate in normal chess. Black is screwed, but hasn't been put into a formal checkmate. But that adds the dilemma that some players will never give up, and there is no repetition. It could be really annoying if the game decision is needed in a tournament, but someone just keeps playing for ever and ever.

There is a type of "mathematical repetition" going on. But it's not formalized yet into a defined rule yet. I guess I have some work to do.

• #228

How about a 100 move rule?

• #229

A link to the general "infinite chess" thread is above, and again (here).

There's no committee yet, but if I make one you can be on it.

• #230
HorribleTomato wrote:

How about a 100 move rule?

Maybe but that is arbitrary. Even some people who study normal chess don't like the 50-move rule because there are some legitimate checkmates that require more than 100 moves.

Check (this thread) for a checkmate that requires 546 moves.

• #231

It's kinda old, not visited much nowadays. I thought that was the thread for simply developing the game. Well I posted the issue on there now!

• #232
HorribleTomato wrote:

the mating pattern: but there is no edge, so this would go on forever

Then it's not a mating pattern. The queen and rook can do the job with the king's help, so try 2. Qg2 and force the enemy king towards the friendly king.

The attacker can't claim a win simply because "it's a mating net on a classical board", and the point about repetition is a good one, in that an escaping king is never repeating the position because he always occupies a square he hasn't occupied previously.

So long as there is mating material on the board, the king cannot escape unless the attacker is incompetent.

• #233
Yes, the King needs be used in KQRvK. Although now that I think about it, this means that KRRvK is a draw with best play.
• #234
I think if there is a proven checkmate an infinite number of moves away, or an inconvenient large number of moves away, it should be considered a win as long as the attacker shows that they know what they’re doing.
• #235
hitthepin wrote:
Yes, the King needs be used in KQRvK. Although now that I think about it, this means that KRRvK is a draw with best play.

I don't think so. The "easy" checkmate with two rooks won't be possible, but between the two rooks they can crete two "edges", driving the enemy king into the "corner"... surely ther's a zugwang trick to mate the king.

• #236
This is hardly optimal, obviously I don't have an infinite chessboard to analyse on, but this kind of strategy is what I have in mind...

• #237
Well, we will have to wait and seen
• #238

hitthepin, *see and in my diagram the QR and K are far from action, where there black is clearly winning.

• #239
Which post?
Top
or

Online Now