Chess with Maths

I didn't understand the meaning of "To quibble, a rook takes away 15 squares if you assume the rooks cannot occupy the same square. That would be illegal, of course, but then it's illegal anyway" and to be honest, I didn't try to understand it once I perceived it as gobbledegook. I may be doing RAT a grave disservice but history and experience tells me that it wasn't worth trying to make any sense out of something that 99% wouldn't make sense anyway.

Yes, although the Rattigan is built to deceive, it's because he's very good. I did find him on the internet several years ago and learned what job he's been doing. Something in computer security systems. He must be good or have been very good.

Case 1 :When white plays first in 2×1 after black

Fixing white on first ( a1 )

W□>> we have one ways to fill b1 ( let ) --1

Fixing white on b1

□ W >> we have left black place a1 ---2

Now Case 2:- When black plays first then after white

Fixing black on a1

B□ >> we have one ways to fill for white b1

Fixing black on b2

□B>> We have one ways to fill for white on a1

Note that cases got repeated but here sequence matters which we are playing first

There is no connection between the order the pieces are assumed on the board in a method of counting the diagrams and any side to play. There is no mention of side to play in your current enunciation and in the original White to play was specified, so the assumption of separate cases depending on side to play is invalid on any sensible interpretation. You might as well double your cases by counting them as separate depending on whether it's sunny or raining or multiplying by 150 to account for the ply count (actually make that infinity because the positions aren't legal so no reason why the ply count should be).

The salient point is that the final outcomes (diagrams) in your Case 1 and Case 2 are the same, so if you count both you're double counting. A straightforward mathematical error.

You say here , "If the game has 2 queens you have to count for the both first and second that's the reason answer get doubled ." So which is it to be? Are you doubling because there are two queens, or are you doubling because you've decided to have two separate cases for WTP and BTP? If the latter then you need to add it to the question, because it's either been specifically ruled out or not mentioned so far.

If you wish. 🤷

This means only one queen can go to a square, and not the other. If both queens are able to go to a square, it doesn't count.

Both queens can go to e4. Does that mean it doesn't count?

COrrect.

So then no diagrams count? That should make the answer easy.

Hm?

Can you put two queens anywhere on the board such that there is no square they can't both reach?

I don't think so, sadly.

What did that mean?

@Optimissed https://dictionary.cambridge.org/

Rattigan, it was gobbledegook again. Could have meant anything or everything. It's you that needs a dictionary. You may have been a computerised whizz once upon a time but as for your powers of elf expression ....

That's not mathematical error you should prove it if is so

https://youtu.be/Km024eldY1A?feature=shared

Just you see sequence matters in chess board whether to put black aur white queens first .There is total possible cases not only yours case ( which is assumed to be default case only by your mind ) total cases would definitely counted finally be multiplying 2 just because of sequence.

Yes if originally white as to play first then only Cases without multiplying it but now there is both possibilities of black as well as white .

I deleted because after few more some one will come up with " This is not about playing game " this is about placing queens in that case that might change all prospective.

For a side to move be chosen is default case for all possible ways

Pay no attention. He enjoys trying to tie people in knots and deliberately confusing them. Absolutely lovely person though.

brain training