Nice
IMO best way to phrase that is "keep your opponents king at a Knights jump distance"
Yeah, why mate in 6 moves when you can do it in 14 moves instead by this ridiculous method.
The guy who discovered this and started to teach it should be shot.
Yeah, why mate in 6 moves when you can do it in 14 moves instead by this ridiculous method.
The guy who discovered this and started to teach it should be shot.
wdym
Yeah, why mate in 6 moves when you can do it in 14 moves instead by this ridiculous method.
The guy who discovered this and started to teach it should be shot.
That is just harsh
Yeah, why mate in 6 moves when you can do it in 14 moves instead by this ridiculous method.
The guy who discovered this and started to teach it should be shot.
That is just harsh
The method given is inefficient, inelegant and still effective. Even very weak beginners can remember it.
A strong player using the given method might be seen as trolling, but a weak player is seen as merely playing the simplest winning moves without worrying about how inefficient they may be.
Yeah, why mate in 6 moves when you can do it in 14 moves instead by this ridiculous method.
The guy who discovered this and started to teach it should be shot.
Or… when it becomes obvious that the “weak” opponent is in a winning position and uses this method, resignation is in order. It doesn’t need to take 14 moves. But, we all start somewhere and this an easily remembered route. if all one plays is speed chess, it would be more valuable to learn something else i suppose.
Anyone who learns this awful method is doing himself (or herself) a great disservice. One of the main problems is that this is only useful in this particular situation and nowhere else. When you want to mate with a rook, this method does not work. It does not help at all. This method teaches you nothing that is worth remembering.
Conversely, consider the normal method: bring your king closer to the enemy king if you can - if you can't, push the king back with the queen. This IS useful when you are learning how to mate with a rook. Or even with 2 bishops. Or or even bishop + kmight. It even teaches you a very, very valuable lesson : "bring your king up in the endgame".
If someone knows of a better way to mate using only a queen and king, why not teach it to us?
If someone knows of a better way to mate using only a queen and king, why not teach it to us?
Cut the king off and keep it close to your own king.
I was looking casually at 1 Qc6 Kg5 2 Qe6 Kh5 3 Kg5 Kg3 4 Kh5 Kf4 5 Kh4 Qh6#
Black can play better moves to hang on longer but it illustrates getting the king into action quicker and being more efficient on driving the opposing king to the edge of the board for a mate.
It's kind of like the difference between easy and efficient for the K+R vs K ending with White on the move having Kf3, Rd2 and Black having Ke1. The easy method is 1 Rh2 Kc1 2 Kd3 Kb1 3 Kc3 Ka1 4 Kb3 Kb1 5 Rh1#. The efficient method is to keep the black king from running to the queen-side by 1 Rd3 Kf1 (only legal move) 2 Rd1#. The first one is easy to teach to a raw beginner and can be used row by row until driving the opposing king to the edge. The second is faster and emphasizes the more difficult concept of the value of your own king in restricting the opposing king.
Yeah, why mate in 6 moves when you can do it in 14 moves instead by this ridiculous method.
The guy who discovered this and started to teach it should be shot.
That is just harsh
The method given is inefficient, inelegant and still effective. Even very weak beginners can remember it.
A strong player using the given method might be seen as trolling, but a weak player is seen as merely playing the simplest winning moves without worrying about how inefficient they may be.
Starting at what rating would count as a strong player?
900?
I'd figure a 1500 would be trolling, a 1200 might not have studied endgames that much and instead is playing an easy-to-remember method, a 900 might have learned to be efficient or might not have, a 600 would be moderately surprising if playing with efficiency and a 300 would be shocking if playing with efficiency.
I would say this is not useful information for anyone, regardless of rating.
This is supposedly advice for beginners, yet beginners are exactly they type of players that should be avoiding bad habits. Chess as a game is supposed to be a fun interaction. But as a puzzle or problem it's supposed to be efficiently solved.
