Knight and Bishop mate = very importante

Yes that would be fine. Send me a challenge. (Actually I think you can only do setup positions in daily.)

I want to take part in this challenge too! See if I can mate Martin in less moves than other people (that sounded weird lol), you can even set up the positions for each of us.

I think I've done it. Let me know if you don't see it or it's asking you to play Black or similar.

Technic and tactic

I was wrong it is 33 moves with optimal play 33 or less, from certain positions its 17, but in general it is 33 moves or less. I should have known that!

Never seen the use of mating with two minor pieces in my games yet

lol it was a blitz game you cant expect me to be perfect

It’s awesome you was able to do it. Some GMs have failed to do it in a game. I mated MARattigan in under 30 moves , but it wasn’t blitz

Bro let's be real I could probably mate you in 4 from this position (I would use Scholar's mate)

In 23 moves in fact, from a mate in 30 position. But only because I let you.

If I'd played 9...Kh8 here you wouldn't have made it in 30.

My 9...Kh6 was very inaccurate, but nevertheless the best move, I think.

Black would prefer to swindle a draw rather than get accurately mated. After 9...Kh8 you arrive at @EndgameEnthusiast2357 's second position in post #30, from which every man and his dog has learned how to mate by rote.

The 17 move bet was still perfectly safe with 9...Kh6.

In the event you were too accurate to be bamboozled into a draw.

I think you made only two minor inaccuracies in the whole game, so congratulations!

Yea, I owe you $100, what’s your Cashapp?

No you don't.

It was a sucker bet from the start (even if it was your idea).

Lol

Respectfully you don't.

You really teach only how to transfer the king from a corner of the opposite colour from that on which the bishop stands to mate in in a corner of the same colour from that on which the bishop stands using Philidor's method.

You call it the W manoeuvre but I prefer to call it Philidor's method because Philidor was the first to present it and I think should receive the credit. I think the epithet W manoeuvre was invented by a Wikipaedia editor and the influence of Wikipaedia is now so great that poor Philidor is being written out of the history.

There are in fact two other problems with calling it the W manoeuvre.

The first is that Philidor craftily included two inaccuracies (to catch out plagiarists, and he seems to have caught out just about everybody who's expounded the method since, including your good self). When these inaccuracies are corrected the knight no longer describes a W; one of the sides has slipped sideways a bit.

So, if you're not going to refer to it as Philidor's method you should at least call it the wonky W manoeuvre.

The second problem is you can't find any Americans who can spell it correctly (including this spell checker).

In point of established fact the position shown above together with the complete half tree for this line is probably around 800 positions (if you include rotations and reflections) out of a total of 24,536,088. None has a mate depth greater than 20 moves compared with the average mate depth of around 26 moves and the maximum of 33 moves.

In view of that, when you say you actually teach this checkmate, I think you're in grave danger of falling foul of the Trades Description Act.

Mainly, you start off with a position a couple of moves on from the position above, but there's no adequate explanation of how you get there if you happen to be not there. What if Black decides he's not going to the corner? (You don't want him there in any case - it's the wrong corner.) If he plays accurately then it's usually (not invariably) very easy to reach Philidor's position, but what if he doesn't play accurately?

I aver in this post that the lone king's best defense is in general inaccurate.

You don't offer any solid method for doing that. Indeed you recommend not studying Delétang's triangles. This method fills in a lot of the gaps. It covers cases where the lone king is sealed behind a seven square diagonal, which are exactly the positions I would recommend the lone king to bail out into instead of progressing to the corner.

If someone who is unfamiliar with the ending studies Delétang's triangles he will get a much better understanding of the endgame than just looking at Philidor's method of forcing the enemy king along one edge (despite the fact that there are a few inaccuracies in the usual presentations).

Having said that the people making them should also be done under the Trades Description Act, because they normally sell it as a method for the checkmate, whereas the positions in the analysis, while greater in number than Philidor's analysis, are limited to a mate depth of no more than 19 and include no positions where the lone king can reach the main diagonal of opposite colour to the bishop, which constitute the great majority.

It was very apparent from your game in the video that neither you nor your opponent had looked at Delétang's triangles. The theory is about sealing the lone king behind successively closer diagonals to a mating corner. Both you and your opponent (and OP and OP's opponent) were regularly perpetrating gross inaccuracies by allowing the lone king to escape a diagonal or in the lone king's case unnecessarily wandering behind one.

I've annotated the game in your video. Note that your comments at the start of the video about where Black will go are nonsense. He'se already trapped behind the b1-h7 diagonal, so there should be only one place he's going, namely h1.

This is how I think it should be played. Rybka has the Nalimov tables, so is defending perfectly accurately.

One other niggle. You start the video by saying a mate can be forced only with the lone king in a corner of the same colour as the bishop. Practically all the videos I've seen say the same, but it's not true.

Mates can also occur on the squares adjacent to a corner of the same colour as the bishop.