Please do not use engines
Best study I've ever seen
Sort:
Nice! I solved it but I had some wrong moves.
that's in one of my books
like that aagaard book maybe
practical chess defense?
Are you sure white is on move? :D
There are many 'perfect studies' which may contend for the title 'best study' but this is not one of them. Placing a king in check is an act of sheer desperation and there is a lot of heavy saccing going on. I assume the endgame was produced under time stress for a composition tournament involving 'sacrifices'. The group of 3 composers also points in that direction.
Still a commendable product, though.
black just played Rc6-c1+ followed by Rd5-d1+ to clear the long diagonal for the queen to checkmate on g2. This was not done in time stress, all the sacrifices are objectively the best moves. I checked it with a computer too, it's all legit. It's kind of hard to tell since I don't tell you where the pieces came from, but this composition definetely can contend for best study.
It's not hard to believe this is the best study the OP has ever seen, since we were not told how many studies the OP has ever seen.
@n9531l: Considering his ratings, I doubt the OP hasn't seen any better studies (e.g. the Saavedra endgame) but his judgement is off. To like or dislike a sacrifice fest is a matter of taste, but to understand that you shouldn't start with a king in check parried by capturing the attacker requires only generic understanding of what puzzles are about. Even without knowledge of checkers one can see that starting with the forced capture of six checkers is not the sign of a high level problem.
ajian schreef:
... This was not done in time stress ...,
It was not a game. Most likely it was an assignment in a composition tourney which required completion within a few days or a few hours; time stress for the composers. Given more time, they would have certainly found a better entrance to the (nice) subsequent combination.
Arisktotle wrote:
To like or dislike a sacrifice fest is a matter of taste, but to understand that you shouldn't start with a king in check parried by capturing the attacker requires only generic understanding of what puzzles are about.
The study was better than that, but for some reason the OP chose not to start at the beginning. Actually, it was the 1st prize winner at the Avni 50 anniversary jubilee tourney 2005. http://www.arves.org/arves/index.php/en/awards/118-avni-50-jt-2005
Right, that changes the whole verdict! Great study with excellent opening moves! Now I can imagine it is somebody's 'best study'.
How did you find the origin? On a partial pattern match?
Arisktotle wrote:
How did you find the origin? On a partial pattern match?
Position search of HHdbV using Fritz-15's GUI.
Nope, in Jacob Aagard's Practical Chess Defence, as an excercise for white.
Another study:
WTF is 1!
Is this is the second best study you've ever seen?
n9531l schreef:
Arisktotle wrote:
How did you find the origin? On a partial pattern match?
Position search of HHdbV using Fritz-15's GUI.
I'm afraid I don't quite get it. Did the Fritz GUI search the HHdbV database? Is that a database by Harold van der Heijden? Can I find it somewhere?
Yes, yes, and yes. http://hhdbv.nl/
n9531l schreef:
Yes, yes, and yes. http://hhdbv.nl/
Thanks, see it for the first time! But apparently has no free access. I assume commercial GUIs like Fritz use a sublicense key to search it. Good to have you around for source checkups!
White to move