FREE - In Google Play
FREE - in Win Phone Store
Rook g8 works as well.
pretty easy but a nice practice
nice and easy
love ur title
good one indeed.
har har har
Quite good puzzle made better by an interesting thread. I had trouble finding the first move for a little while & considered Qxc6 but then saw the threat from d4 & realised it was no good: So why some people propose it as a valid alternative is beyond me - the given solution is a forced mate in 4. I don't see how you can improve on that unless you can find one in 3 !
'slowhare', I think you found yourself having the wrong argument & with the wrong opponent on this one - 'ndskykng' always defends his corner well & that's no bad thing.
And by the way, I think that in your longer solution (post #151) you may have missed a quicker mate at move 16: Try Rxa7#.
easy. but i never thought about back rank like that before!
Appreciate that Stephen. That's all I was trying to get across to slow... that his alternative wasn't a move that works also, not like a mate-in-4. It never should have escalated like that.
Good eye on move 16. I never calculated that far cause I saw the pressure building on that back rank by queen+rook, I knew I was losing a rook anyway and felt I shouldn't waste an escape move and should take a pawn down with me. But yeah, if it got there, then 16. Rxa7# (or 16. Qxa7#) would have worked. Nice catch.
Another queen sac for da chess daddy mac. :)
it was okay
Lose to Win . A prefect game!!!!
I have no problem with skyking defending his corner, although he misread my intention and comes off condescending as usual. I solved the puzzle right off, but saw another interesting possibility when analyizing it and pointed it out on page one. Never did I say it was a better solution and even showed the queens only way out. Why not make a play like that in a game when your winning chance is assured and the possibility that your opponent will not see their only way of survival or resign. Skyking likes the banter and I just keep playing his tune for my own fun.
Why not make a play like that (1. Qe6+) in a game when your winning chance (mate-in-4) is assured and the possibility that your opponent will not see their only way of survival (cause it doesn't exist) or resign (because mate is coming in four).
So much better when you make my point for me.
not as bad as yesterday