Impossible Checkmate?

Sort:
Avatar of KrisRhodes

Is there a such thing as a position which constitutes a checkmate for one side, but which can't be reached by any legal set of moves.

Let's leave out positions with white pawns on the first row or black pawns on the eighth. ;)

Hrm and let's also leave out positions with more than eight promoted pieces on a side. :D

Avatar of KrisRhodes

Another trivial case--the position shouldn't have more than seven pawns on either the a or h files.

Avatar of KrisRhodes

If you have one in mind, I'm not sure why you'd refrain from posting it here.

Avatar of KrisRhodes

I think I have something else in mind--I'll have to think of a reformulation of the question.

Avatar of khpa21

Maybe you mean something like this?

Avatar of pompom

@khpa21:

Avatar of einstein_69101

Avatar of KrisRhodes

@pompom: I guess if you add a white rook to the a file then it will work?

But that's basically the same thing as the four queens from before. (You only need two of the queens, I think, btw.) Maybe this is the best kind of example after all.

@einstein: Is it because of the missing black rook? (How could it have gotten out from behind the black pawn line?)

Avatar of KrisRhodes

What I'm going to ponder now is the question whether there are positions like this where it takes at least two "reverse moves" to be forced into to a manifestly illegal position. Or proof that there can't be any such checkmate position.

What "manifestly illegal" means as opposed to just "illegal" will be something I'll have to figure out. It may turn out there's no useful such distinction...

Avatar of einstein_69101
KrisRhodes wrote:

@pompom: I guess if you add a white rook to the a file then it will work?

But that's basically the same thing as the four queens from before. (You only need two of the queens, I think, btw.) Maybe this is the best kind of example after all.

@einstein: Is it because of the missing black rook? (How could it have gotten out from behind the black pawn line?)


That is part of the reason.  TheMouse has the correct explanation in post #12.  You can say that the rook can't get out.  That is true.  But white can still get in there and capture it with a piece.  The main issue is white's pawn structure.

Avatar of TheGrobe

Any position involving a triple check (or more).

Avatar of einstein_69101
KrisRhodes wrote:

What I'm going to ponder now is the question whether there are positions like this where it takes at least two "reverse moves" to be forced into to a manifestly illegal position. Or proof that there can't be any such checkmate position.

What "manifestly illegal" means as opposed to just "illegal" will be something I'll have to figure out. It may turn out there's no useful such distinction...


You might be interested in a thread like this.  It talks about both legal and illegal positions.  It is mostly positions that are not checkmate though.

Avatar of TheGrobe

This one's actually legal:

Avatar of einstein_69101

Here is one that has checkmate.  There has been some work done in that forum to determine if the position is legal or not.

Avatar of KrisRhodes
TheGrobe wrote:

This one's actually legal:

 


 I'm stumped. Can you give me a hint?

Avatar of TheGrobe

The last move was a capture.

Avatar of paashpoint0

Black's last move was b7-b5. White's pawn on a5 captured en passant. i think that works, but I am not a great chess player by any stretch of the imagination.

Avatar of TheGrobe

That's it:

Avatar of Caliphigia
[COMMENT DELETED]
Avatar of appleplaychess