2nd one has two bishops, and 1. Qxf5+ Ke7 2. Qxf7+ Kd6 3 Bxc8 looks way better.
A pair of puzzles
Sort:
Yes, but remember, the goal is to prepare in 2 turns. I'm starting off with easier puzzles until I get more proficient in the art of puzzle making.
nice and easy
I think there is forced mate in the second puzzle
Qxf5+ is best move in puzzle 2
Mar 23, 2009
0
#8
lol i put the alternative moves in the list... i forgot to erase the old moves. sorry
-Art- wrote:
Yes, but remember, the goal is to prepare in 2 turns.
Sure, that is the stipulation that you gave, but the stipulation given for a chess problem should always be the best possible continuation. If you stipulate 'white to play and win' and we find 'white to play and mate,' then the puzzle is flawed.
I haven't spent the time to figure out exactly how it happens but I am positive that after 1.Qxf5+ Ke7 2.Bxc8 or 1.Qxf5+ Ke7 2.Qxf7+ Kd6 3.Bxc8, mate will follow shortly.
@Mscloyes: The purpose is to make your opponent lose his queen, and he can't get it back anytiome soon.
Tonight only: this is my puzzle, and havent there been other promotion puzzles you know of? How about you stop critisizing my puzzles and enjoy them, maybe I feel like changing the goal, and maybe I'll make a variation of the puzzle where it's asked to mate. Ever heard of material gain puzzles?
-Art- wrote:
Tonight only: this is my puzzle, and havent there been other promotion puzzles you know of? How about you stop critisizing my puzzles and enjoy them, maybe I feel like changing the goal, and maybe I'll make a variation of the puzzle where it's asked to mate. Ever heard of material gain puzzles?
Why does everyone on this site take criticism so personally?
If you had submitted this to your city newspaper, you would expect readers to write in if they found a better solution. Why do you not expect this sort of thing here on chess.com? If you did not expect this sort of response to puzzles you post, you had better get used to it.
When you give us chess buffs a position, our brains fire up for analysis and try to find the best continuation for white. If we comment that we found something better than the given solution, this is not some attack on your character or something. It just means we found something you didn't, and now you have something to take with you and make better puzzles in the future.
I'm not sure you read or understood my post #10, so I will repeat myself: The stipulation given for a chess problem should always be the best possible continuation. If you stipulate 'white to play and win' and we find 'white to play and mate,' then the puzzle is flawed. You cannot just post any instructions you want and expect people to only solve for that instruction. Instructions are only guide posts as to what is the best that white has.
Remember that you, as the puzzle creator, are expected to have done most of the work. You should have gone through all the possible variations and found the best possible move for both sides on every move. You are then expected to give the correct stipulation (yes, a chess problem has an objectively 'correct' stipulation). If you don't, you should expect people to post the correct solution.
What you call 'material gain' problems as well as 'promotion' problems are known as 'white to play and win' problems. They are problems where white is supposed to find a way to win the position. In other words, they fall in between 'white to play and mate in x' puzzles and 'white to play and draw' puzzles. Checkmating your opponent is clearly better than promoting a pawn or winning a piece. So, if there is a forced mate in a 'white to play and win' puzzle, then that puzzle is flawed. Likewise, if there is a win in a 'white to play and draw' puzzle, then that puzzle is flawed.
TonightOnly wrote:
I'm not sure you read or understood my post #10, so I will repeat myself: The stipulation given for a chess problem should always be the best possible continuation. If you stipulate 'white to play and win' and we find 'white to play and mate,' then the puzzle is flawed. You cannot just post any instructions you want and expect people to only solve for that instruction. Instructions are only guide posts as to what is the best that white has.
Remember that you, as the puzzle creator, are expected to have done most of the work. You should have gone through all the possible variations and found the best possible move for both sides on every move. You are then expected to give the correct stipulation (yes, a chess problem has an objectively 'correct' stipulation). If you don't, you should expect people to post the correct solution.
What you call 'material gain' problems as well as 'promotion' problems are known as 'white to play and win' problems. They are problems where white is supposed to find a way to win the position. In other words, they fall in between 'white to play and mate in x' puzzles and 'white to play and draw' puzzles. Checkmating your opponent is clearly better than promoting a pawn or winning a piece. So, if there is a forced mate in a 'white to play and win' puzzle, then that puzzle is flawed. Likewise, if there is a win in a 'white to play and draw' puzzle, then that puzzle is flawed.
I'm sorry, but I'm allowed to allow practice for things other than checkmating. Ever heard of: "Find the wrong move" puzzles? Are you saying those are flawed? I see some material gain puzzles too, so are they flawed as well? I expect critisizm, but yours is illogical, and you're complaining too much.
You think I didn't see the checkmate? I'm not blind, I just wanted a different goal for my puzzle thank you very much. I believe there could be some checkmates in a good amount of moves for puzzle like "material gain," but they are not flawed are they? If the puzzle works, it's a good puzzle. If you don't think they're good, don't play them!
As seeing my posts above, I'm new at making puzzles, so they aren't gonna' be perfect right away. At least these are reasonable and actually work unlike some other messed up ones I've seen.
-Art- wrote:
I'm sorry, but I'm allowed to allow practice for things other than checkmating.
Of course you are allowed to include any instructions you like. However, if these instructions are not the best for white you will confuse people. People are used to finding the best continuation. This is the whole point of chess problems. You should expect to get responses from people that show the best for white. You can't get mad at me and the four or five other people when we comment that 1.Qxf5+ was the best for white. This is what we are used to doing.
-Art- wrote:
Ever heard of: "Find the wrong move" puzzles? Are you saying those are flawed? I see some material gain puzzles too, so are they flawed as well?
You think I didn't see the checkmate? I'm not blind, I just wanted a different goal for my puzzle thank you very much. I believe there could be some checkmates in a good amount of moves for puzzle like "material gain," but they are not flawed are they?
You did not read (or at least did not understand) the post you quoted. What you call 'material gain' puzzles are known in the chess world as 'white to play and win' puzzles. If the best for white in these puzzles (against best defense) is a won position, then the puzzle is not flawed.
You said that you think it's possible that there are forced mates in many 'material gain' puzzles. You are wrong. If a 'material gain' puzzle includes a forced mate, then it is flawed.
You are clearly having a tough time believing me on this point. That's fine. I'm a nameless, faceless internet entity. So, go research chess problems at the library or on the internet, or ask a stronger player that you trust. If you want to get better at making chess problems, this is something you will have to understand.
Have fun!
First one is mate in 1.
Second is promotion prep in 2.