Arisktotle wrote:
By the way, I think the proof game for #2299 could be shortened to 45 moves. Or 46 at most!
Interestingly your post is #2299.
Is this position legal?
Sort:
plz prove legal
note: five queens each
im_bbc wrote:
oops
someties they go twice in a row
It’s legal. Go on from this on your own,
It’s legal with either side to move.
RewanDemontay wrote:
@Arisktotle You just may be right. Here’s one in 48 moves. It becomes inceasingly difficult to find moves for Black.
It's always the mining of the last reserves which requires the greatest investments! I'll take a look myself at the shorter proof game I envisioned and hope it won't be frustrated by an unexpected blockade.
MARattigan wrote:
Arisktotle wrote:
By the way, I think the proof game for #2299 could be shortened to 45 moves. Or 46 at most!
Interestingly your post is #2299.
Right! In that case, it shouldn't be hard to shorten it! 
FYI: A large number of posts appears to have been deleted, changing all the post numbers.
Arisktotle wrote:
FYI: A large number of posts appears to have been deleted, changing all the post numbers.
With the number of members chess.com boasts one would think they should be able to afford professional programmers.
check out the victor beach experience dot com
RewanDemontay wrote:
It’s legal with either side to move.
the king and queen are switched
Legal?
im_bbc wrote:
RewanDemontay wrote:
It’s legal with either side to move.
the king and queen are switched
Meh. Doesn’t matter. Legal either which way.
Legal or not?
I'm a composer not a solver so...
Would I have one of the three main puzzle solvers see if this is legal?
RewanDemontay wrote:
im_bbc wrote:
RewanDemontay wrote:
It’s legal with either side to move.
the king and queen are switched
Meh. Doesn’t matter. Legal either which way.
still though
@MARattigan
@RewanDemontay
@Arisktotle
I challenge you all with post 2,134!
Solve it or else...
Prove that this is legal, please.