Is this position legal?


  • 3 months ago · Quote · #1481

    chuckvicious

    [COMMENT DELETED]
  • 3 months ago · Quote · #1482

    chessgenius756813

    Remellion wrote:

    #1501: Legal. Composer was T.R. Dawson in 1927.

    In fact, that position comes with a question: "Specify 2 moves that black must have definitely played." By specifying a move, it means that you identify the piece that moves, the starting and ending squares, if a piece was captured, and if so what type of piece was captured.

    Edit: I just read JavierGil's post: he's slightly wrong, there are in fact 2 moves that you can deduce must have been played, not just one.

     Really? I'm pretty sure that it's only one...

  • 3 months ago · Quote · #1483

    BigDoggProblem

    chessgenius756813 wrote:
    Remellion wrote:

    #1501: Legal. Composer was T.R. Dawson in 1927.

    In fact, that position comes with a question: "Specify 2 moves that black must have definitely played." By specifying a move, it means that you identify the piece that moves, the starting and ending squares, if a piece was captured, and if so what type of piece was captured.

    Edit: I just read JavierGil's post: he's slightly wrong, there are in fact 2 moves that you can deduce must have been played, not just one.

     Really? I'm pretty sure that it's only one...

     

    ...Nh3xRg1, and ...Ng1-h3 to get back out again. Simple!

  • 3 months ago · Quote · #1484

    chessgenius756813

    Scottrf wrote:

    Yeah 117 is illegal. There's nothing to capture the last piece after the Knights have mopped up.

     How can you say? You're post 114.

  • 3 months ago · Quote · #1485

    chessgenius756813

    Remellion wrote:

    #1501: Legal. Composer was T.R. Dawson in 1927.

    In fact, that position comes with a question: "Specify 2 moves that black must have definitely played." By specifying a move, it means that you identify the piece that moves, the starting and ending squares, if a piece was captured, and if so what type of piece was captured.

    Edit: I just read JavierGil's post: he's slightly wrong, there are in fact 2 moves that you can deduce must have been played, not just one.

     Wait.. is my computer glitching or is yours? 'Cause for me, the post I am posting now is post 1485...

  • 3 months ago · Quote · #1486

    Firethorn15

    When a post is deleted, the posts after it move one down.

  • 3 months ago · Quote · #1487

    chessgenius756813

    Firethorn15 wrote:

    When a post is deleted, the posts after it moves one down.

     But it only does that on some computers. Correct? Or is it browsers? Because the post I am posting is #1487.

  • 3 months ago · Quote · #1488

    Firethorn15

    Why have you corrected my correct grammar to something incorrect? "...posts..." is plural, so "...move..." is correct, no?

    Yes, you are posting #1487, but if the comments which have now been deleted (or the account has been deleted) were still there, your comment would be much more highly-numbered. So the post which Remellion was referring to was #1501 when he posted it, but is now less highly-numbered.

     

  • 3 months ago · Quote · #1489

    chessgenius756813

    Firethorn15 wrote:

    Why have you corrected my correct grammar to something incorrect? "...posts..." is plural, so "...move..." is correct, no?

    Yes, you are posting #1487, but if the comments which have now been deleted (or the account has been deleted) were still there, your comment would be much more highly-numbered. So the post which Remellion was referring to was #1501 when he posted it, but is now less highly-numbered.

     

     Sorry. I missed something.

  • 3 months ago · Quote · #1490

    chessgenius756813

    Firethorn15 wrote:

    Why have you corrected my correct grammar to something incorrect? "...posts..." is plural, so "...move..." is correct, no?

    Yes, you are posting #1487, but if the comments which have now been deleted (or the account has been deleted) were still there, your comment would be much more highly-numbered. So the post which Remellion was referring to was #1501 when he posted it, but is now less highly-numbered.

     

     Ok... Thanks for that. I was quite confused for a moment.

  • 3 months ago · Quote · #1491

    MindControl116

    *that moment when they try to correct you and fail*

  • 7 weeks ago · Quote · #1492

    finn416

    White to move
    Two questions:
    A)Mate in one.
    B)Is it legal?
    Finn, 2016
  • 7 weeks ago · Quote · #1493

    chaotic_iak

    a. bxc5#

    b. Obviously legal.


Back to Top

Post your reply: