CHESS PUZZLE. MATE IN 2.
Let's see:
1...Bc6+ 2.Rxc6++
1...f5 2.Qd6++
1...Rxc7 2.Nxc7++
1...f6 2.??? (no mate)
1...Bf6 2.Qg4++
1...(Rook to any square in the h column) (no mate)
Let's see:
1...Bc6+ 2.Rxc6++
1...f5 2.Qd6++
1...Rxc7 2.Nxc7++
1...f6 2.??? (no mate)
1...Bf6 2.Qg4++
1...(Rook to any square in the h column) (no mate)
1. ....f6 2. Qe4+ mate
And 1..Rook to any square on h column 2. Qxf2++
Very nice Puzzle....Basically the King is already trapped...All White needs to do is check... and each Back Piece is participating in some sort of protection from checking it. Once a black piece moves..white expolits what ever it was protecting.... Awesome !
I used to count combinations to find solutions to puzzles like this.
Now it seems more efficient to look for likely heuristics of the solution and then find combos that simultaneously satisfy the heuristics. E.g. white's rook probably needs to stay somewhere on line 7 to prevent black's rook from mating and somewhere on line c to counter black's bishop from mating - so white's rook probably stays on c7 and and isn't white's first move. Etc, etc until you notice that black is in zugzwang and white needs a good "stalling" type of move (keeping black's knight pinned by the bishop in this case) before white can choose an attack that doesn't allow black's king to escape or allow its attack piece to be captured or otherwise blocked.
Of course sometimes the likely heuristics lead to false assumptions that need to be broken to solve a puzzle (usually, in these cases, the puzzle will then seem to almost have a solution except for one pesky counter move).
So my question is: Is this approach the most efficient way to solve chess puzzles?
It is not a correct one as by moving Re7,you could mate in one move!!!
Please give next puzzle as a good one...