6/23/2018 - An Amazing Way To Draw

fightingbob
Rocky64 wrote:
Arisktotle wrote:

Why omit the final move? Because it didn't happen in the game? Not a good reason since the game details are omitted anyway. Never pass on an opportunity to show a beautiful mate or stalemate position!

 It's just another limitation of these Daily Puzzles that they must end with a white move. And this has to be a study rather than a game, because the pin-stalemate is too attractive and neat to not have been contrived. I couldn't find the source though.

I was wondering, Peter, if you purchased Harold van der Heijden's Endgame Study Database, which I understand is the the most complete of all the ones available online?  I'm seriously thinking of spending 50 Euros (approximately 58.50 USD) for it.

fightingbob
CitizenOfTheWorld91 wrote:
fightingbob wrote:
CitizenOfTheWorld91 wrote:
Rocky64 wrote:
CitizenOfTheWorld91 wrote:

@Rocky64

Wouldn't you say that the word "limitation" in the context of your original post implies some sort of "technical limitation"?

I just think that labeling a certain choice as self-imposed limitation is a bit of an oxymoron, really.

Not really. I was referring to a feature limitation of the Daily Puzzles, which isn't an oxymoron. Maybe you should've asked what I meant (surely you have seen some of my analysis diagrams with side variations and comments) before jumping in with "That's not true"?

You have been backtracking and changing your tune since your first post. It's good to know when to give it up. It's okay to know when to admit being wrong.

I had nothing but respect for you. Alas, you have caused me to reconsider my thinking high of your person.

Interestingly, I've never had that problem with you.  I never had to reconsider what I think of you or your posts.

Peter's (Rocky64) comments are always clear and instruction whereas yours are unreasonably contentious at best and superficial and snarky at worst.  No doubt they reflect your winning personality.

 

Aww, shucks! Thank you for appreciating my winning personality.

And yes, Rocky's comments are always instruction [sic]. Your comment was very instruction too.

Oops, I guess I played right into your hand of being superficial and snarky? Oh well, anything to preserve my winning personality.

 

Oh, you caught me, I'm simply devastated.  Apparently I don't know my ions from my ives ... or my auto spell-checker doesn't.  On the other hand, your awkward "Alas, you have caused me to reconsider my thinking high of your person" was a genuine pleasure to read.  Perchance, were you high when you wrote it or just naturally impaired?

BryanCFB
BryanCFB wrote:
 

I now see that in addition to 2...Qd8 and 2...Bxe4!! that 2...Qxe5! also draws because after 2...Qxe5 3. dxe5 black draws with 3...Kg8!, and black can now stop the e5 pawn from queening.  If 3...a3?? instead then white wins with 4. e6 because black's king cannot stop the e6 pawn from queening.  Thanks to SuperPatzer77 for pointing that out.

CitizenOfTheWorld91
fightingbob wrote:
CitizenOfTheWorld91 wrote:
fightingbob wrote:
CitizenOfTheWorld91 wrote:
Rocky64 wrote:
CitizenOfTheWorld91 wrote:

@Rocky64

Wouldn't you say that the word "limitation" in the context of your original post implies some sort of "technical limitation"?

I just think that labeling a certain choice as self-imposed limitation is a bit of an oxymoron, really.

Not really. I was referring to a feature limitation of the Daily Puzzles, which isn't an oxymoron. Maybe you should've asked what I meant (surely you have seen some of my analysis diagrams with side variations and comments) before jumping in with "That's not true"?

You have been backtracking and changing your tune since your first post. It's good to know when to give it up. It's okay to know when to admit being wrong.

I had nothing but respect for you. Alas, you have caused me to reconsider my thinking high of your person.

Interestingly, I've never had that problem with you.  I never had to reconsider what I think of you or your posts.

Peter's (Rocky64) comments are always clear and instruction whereas yours are unreasonably contentious at best and superficial and snarky at worst.  No doubt they reflect your winning personality.

 

Aww, shucks! Thank you for appreciating my winning personality.

And yes, Rocky's comments are always instruction [sic]. Your comment was very instruction too.

Oops, I guess I played right into your hand of being superficial and snarky? Oh well, anything to preserve my winning personality.

 

Oh, you caught me, I'm simply devastated.  Apparently I don't know my ions from my ives ... or my auto spell-checker doesn't.  On the other hand, your awkward "Alas, you have caused me to reconsider my thinking high of your person" was a genuine pleasure to read.  Perchance, were you high when you wrote it or just naturally impaired?

Hmm... Someone is not well versed in Middle English. Have you never read a piece of Tudorian literature? Just because you are unfamiliar with that form of expression does not make it wrong, it just makes you... Let me see, how did you put it? Ah, yes, it makes you "naturally impaired" (whatever that means)!

DamTiVidle
[COMMENT DELETED]
Rocky64
fightingbob wrote:
Rocky64 wrote:
Arisktotle wrote:

Why omit the final move? Because it didn't happen in the game? Not a good reason since the game details are omitted anyway. Never pass on an opportunity to show a beautiful mate or stalemate position!

 It's just another limitation of these Daily Puzzles that they must end with a white move. And this has to be a study rather than a game, because the pin-stalemate is too attractive and neat to not have been contrived. I couldn't find the source though.

I was wondering, Peter, if you purchased Harold van der Heijden's Endgame Study Database, which I understand is the the most complete of all the ones available online?  I'm seriously thinking of spending 50 Euros (approximately 58.50 USD) for it.

Hey, Bob, I haven't bought that as I'm pretty happy with the free ones available. If it were less pricey I would consider it, especially after reading the description you linked which sounds good!

CheeSZ513

dfhg

 

sean_roy
discountPundit wrote:

What about this line:

2 ... QxRe5

3. d4xQe5   a3

4. Bd5  Bd3xe4+

5. BxBe4 a2

6. e6 a1/Q

7. e7 Qa6+

8. Kh5 Qe6

Then the queen can take the Pawn at e7 or e8 and it's Queen and Pawn against a lone Bishop.

Because instead of playing 4. Bd5 to guard the a2 square, White can make a run for the queening square. His pawn will get to e8 after Black's a-pawn queens, but White queens with checkmate: 4. e6 a2 5. e7 a1=Q 6. e8=Q#. If Black tries to interfere with his bishop, he's still lost because he'll have to give the bishop up, and White will still be able to queen his pawn: 4. e6 Bc4 5. e7 Bf7+ 6. Kxf7 Kh7 7. e8=Q, with mate to follow in a few moves.

SuperPatzer77

@sean_roy and @DiscountPundit,

 

I’m telling you that 3...a3?? is a blunder. Correct move is 3...Kg8!! - only move for a draw.

 

2...Qxe5!, 3. dxe5 Kg8!!, 4. Bxa4 Bxe4+, 5. Kg5 Kf7 (Black can stop the dangerous White e-pawn so it’s a draw). 

 

SuperPatzer77
[COMMENT DELETED]
SuperPatzer77

1. Bc6!! Bd3+!, 2. e4 Qd8!, 3. Re8+?? (Blunder) Qxe8+, 4. Bxe8 Bxe4+,  5. Kg5 a3! (winning move for Black), 6. Bf7 Bb1!, 7. Kf4 a2, 8. Bxa2 Bxa2, 9. Ke5 Kh7!, 10. d5 Bxd5!, 11. Kxd5 Kg6, 12. Ke4 Kg5!, 13. Kf3 Kh4, 14. Kg2 Kg4, 15. Kf2 Kh3!, 16. Kf3 g5, 17. Kf2 g4, 18. Kg1 Kg3, 19. Kf1 Kh2 and Black wins. 

 

Thats why 3. Re8+?? is a big blunder 

CitizenOfTheWorld91

It took you 8 days? Wow!

SuperPatzer77

Yup, sir! I’ve been busy running errands. I read some guy’s suggestion of 3. Re8+. I’m telling that 3. Re8 is not a good move, so 3. Rh5+! is the only move for a draw. 

 

Some of the guys are patzers. I’ve been tired of their absurd suggestions. They should be able to analyze this game when they use chess set and chessboard 

CitizenOfTheWorld91

Hear, hear!

1400136896

People who don't know:

1. Bc6 Bd3+ 2. e4 Qd8 3. Rh5+ Kg8 4. Bd5+ Qxd5 5. Rh8+