Is this position reachable?

Sort:
Avatar of cobra91
zerobounds wrote:

no because theres no other material to allow the e pawn onto the f file for promotion on the dark square, black's light bishop cant get out for this purpose.


 Not so fast. Was White's last move necessarily Rxg7? There are other possibilities...

Avatar of cobra91
Dragec wrote:

what is your answer, you can not just popping questions, you know?


 Heh, heh... just because I keep popping questions, that doesn't mean you have to try and answer them ;) And the only reason I asked about the Black pawn making any difference was that the original position HAD a Black pawn on f3, but I carelessly forgot to put it there, and didn't notice until many hours (and comments) later.

Avatar of omnipaul

White does have another last move.  Someone stated that the Rook on d1 couldn't have moved because on e1 it would be checking the black king.  They also stated that the King couldn't move because it was fully contained.  I maintain that both those pieces could move: 0-0-0.  With the Rook on a1, it would not be checking the Black King.  The White King is not in check on e1, and thus, presumably, could legally castle.  Proving that castling is legal is another matter, but if adding a pawn on f3 makes Rxg7 not possible, then the implication would be that castling is then a legal last move.

Avatar of zerobounds

doesnt work with black keeping the pawn on f3, if 0-0-0 was the last move then the h1 rook would have been trapped by the king and pawns the whole game and be captured but a knight or queen. white would have to promote another pawn to a rook and he does not have enough material left that can reach the dark squares the pawns need to capture on.

Avatar of zerobounds
Steinar wrote:

Can't the c-pawn promote to a rook without black giving material?

Apologise for my rather ignorant post before - I simply missed that it's black to move.


yes but the rook would have to be used to get the e (which must capture over to d) pawn to the c file.

 

(and i made the same dumb mistake on the move too :P )

Avatar of PepeSilvia
Dragec wrote:

eatherquake : how would you put a bishop on h2?

I couldn't figure it out, not with the pawns still there.


by moving g3 after the bishop goes to h2.

Avatar of Loomis
PepeSilvia wrote:
Dragec wrote:

eatherquake : how would you put a bishop on h2?

I couldn't figure it out, not with the pawns still there.


by moving g3 after the bishop goes to h2.


I think you're the 4th one to give this answer. But I just like counting things.

Avatar of cobra91
Steinar wrote:

Ah I get it. Basically with a black pawn on f3 it's illegal because we would need:

1. In the Rxg7 scenario, the 13 black pieces on the board, plus Pf3, Bc8, captured piece to allow dark square bishop and captured piece on g7 totalling 17 black pieces

or

2. In the 0-0-0 scenario, the 10 white pieces on the board, plus 5 pieces to be captured on dark squares to allow the current pawn structure, the light squared bishop and the rook on h1 to be captured, totalling 17 white pieces.

 

Loomis if you like counting things you must have loved this puzzle.


 That's a great synopsis of the position, which is, indeed, illegal with a black pawn on f3 (and congrats to zerobounds for being the first to figure this out). The only other thing worth mentioning is the possibility of 0...Rcxb2+  1.Kc1, but this is similarly refuted by the fact that b2 is a dark square, so once again it couldn't be White's light-square bishop that was captured there.

Avatar of zerobounds

hey this is a really great puzzle, these open ended ideas are very cool to play with. Thanks for posting it up!

Avatar of cobra91

Well, if you really liked this puzzle, I might as well post one more. Here's the position:

Avatar of cobra91

Wow - two weeks already and nobody's solved it?? I thought this was actually easier than the first one! I guess I'll give the solution myself in a few days, if nobody posts it here before then.

Avatar of gambit156

nt at all possible

Avatar of zerobounds

a big, epic, no.

Avatar of cobra91
zerobounds wrote:

a big, epic, no.


 Are you sure about that? Both sides have one (and only one) king, neither side has more than 16 pieces, only one king is in check[mate], and neither king is triple-checked (or even double-checked). So, what's wrong with it then?

Avatar of zerobounds

the g4 pawn breaks it. take it away and it should be fine but i havent look much at the position of the white king, he doesnt have any legal previous moves besides moving the king around so it could be impossible to lock in him like that without stalemating before black can play Ng5#.

Avatar of cobra91

Correct (more or less)