This is a Chess Composition that I composed myself. At first (without exaggerating) even engines can't find the solution!!! Can you find the win for White? For more details visit my YouTube channel: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qduqvZbCZh4&t=7s I hope you enjoyed it!
That is really very nice.
It's a good chess combination! I wouldn't call it a composition yet. Chess compositions are governed by pretty strict rules, notably that the moves of the solution should be dualfree. On move 5, white has 2 winning alternatives amongst them the obvious 5. Nf4. That wouldn't bother a chess player but as a composer you are supposed to sacrifice at least 3 nights of sleep 
to find a way to get rid of the duals. Or you could terminate the solution after move 4 by stating "and white wins" which is probably not to your liking.
It's a good chess combination! I wouldn't call it a composition yet. Chess compositions are governed by pretty strict rules, notably that the moves of the solution should be dualfree. On move 5, white has 2 winning alternatives amongst them the obvious 5. Nf4. That wouldn't bother a chess player but as a composer you are supposed to sacrifice at least 3 nights of sleep to find a way to get rid of the duals. Or you could terminate the solution after move 4 by stating "and white wins" which is probably not to your liking.
Yes, it is true that the Knight has two squares to win the Queen. But it was really difficult. Maybe you are right to end the combination after Kc8.
According to SF (and me) Re7 wins as effectively as Nf4 and Ng5 because of the mate threat. Again, in the game domain the difference is negligible since white will follow it up with Nf4/Ng5 anyway but chess composers are real hair-splitters. Sorry for that
Ok then, corrected.
Yes, that is one of the ways we commonly wrap it up. Another example, with concrete moves:
"and white wins e.g. after 6. ... Nc4 7. Pa7 Nb6 8. Pa8=Q+ Nxa8 9. Rxa8#"
One of the practical reasons for separating formal solution moves from illustrative continuations is that it permits compositions to be offered as puzzles. Primitive interfaces like the one on chess.com are incapable to support multiple correct choices in a solution. Chess.coms puzzle interface is on the borderline of being embarrassing.
Шахматные композиции развивают тактические навыки но в практике одинаковых позиций не встречается из-за этого на одних шахматных задачках гроссмейстером не станешь.
Шахматные композиции развивают тактические навыки но в практике одинаковых позиций не встречается из-за этого на одних шахматных задачках гроссмейстером не станешь.
Согласен. Надо делать трейнеровку на все темы да ещё и играть часто в классику! Но реально же красиво?
Шахматные композиции развивают тактические навыки но в практике одинаковых позиций не встречается из-за этого на одних шахматных задачках гроссмейстером не станешь.
That is true. What compositions and games have in common is that you can do either one to train your visualization and reading skills - which is also useful for the other one. But don't expect too much of cross-value. These two activities are so different that they are organized in two different federations, the WFCC and the FIDE.
This is a Chess Composition that I composed myself. At first (without exaggerating) even engines can't find the solution!!! Can you find the win for White? For more details visit my YouTube channel: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qduqvZbCZh4&t=7s I hope you enjoyed it!