actually chuck norris just pushed 2 black pawns bakc at the beginning of the game and made a black bishop and a white bishop
thats why black has only 6 pawns
Longest checkmate problem-290 move
Sort:
Boring...not easy but boring.
This should be the daily puzzle
"Insert position or game" button on the top left side of the message box where you write your comments. From there, you'll have to kind of read the instructions. PGN codes can be obtained from any game on chess.com, and I believe it's FEN strings to play from a particular position. Like I said, the rest you'll figure it out as you use it a few times.
Got every move correct when I got the hang of it until it started to change
SO COOL I ALMOST SOLVED THE WHOLE THING
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7p0Hyry-8bk
( Above you can see the longest mate which was ever composed - it is my mate-composition from 2015 with mate in 552 moves ! )
DID YOU HEAR ABOUT THE NEW CHESS.COM?!CLICK THIS https://www.chess.com/forum/view/general/quotsecretquot-new-chesscom?comment=28534058#comment TO FIND OUT HOW TO ENTER THE NEW CHESS.COM!!!
Here my worldreord from 2016 : Mate in 553 moves
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GC3oecykcC8
There is NO 50M rule at FIDE for worldrecords like above
My chessproblems ( over 300 chessproblems WITH 50M rule ) anybody can find at gameknot.
You can klick here and try to solve them directly by clicking :
http://gameknot.com/chess-puzzles.pl?s=0&a=1&u=chesscode&m=0&s=9
kindly regards and have all a nice day with my chesspuzzles
Lutz Neweklowsky
Moremover schreef:
Here my worldreord from 2016 : Mate in 553 moves
There is NO 50M rule at FIDE for worldrecords like above
Actually, because it is a composition, the 50-M rules does not apply (unless you were to present it as a retrograde problem :D).
Tablebase results in themselves are neutral as they could be used both in actual chess games as in compositions and this could render different outcomes. But the verdict on your composed extension is unambiguous - no 50M rule!
... and here is the whole story since 1889 ... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bqnq580ozAI
Caliphigia wrote:
The possition is illegal because one of white bishops must be promoted pawn, yet there are 8 white pawns on the board. 50 move rule doesn't aply here: it is draw if no piece is taken OR PAWN MOVED. Here black pawn moves every 17 moves.
On second thought, if the possition is already illigal, why can we put black pawns on h4, h3 and h2? That would make problem 392 moves long, if I calculated correctly!
Right! Even modestly put, one would expect at least one extra black pawn on h4 since no one could object to a black configuration with 8 pawns + 2 dark squared bishops when the same is already present on the white side in the diagram!
Well, Blathy could as he exercised a very peculiar logical approach best categorized as "chess box logic". He was completely disinterested in postional legality in the dynamic way we conceived it from the 20th century onward. All he looked at was the material in his chess box and he arbitrarily distributed it across the chessboard when creating a problem. One exception: each pawn might be replaced by a promotion piece - which stands to reason. So why did he not add a black pawn on h4? Simply because there were only 2 black bishops + 8 black pawns in his chess box, not enough to place 3 black bishops and 8 black pawns on a chessboard. On the white side though, all was OK with just 2 bishops and 8 pawns. He did not care about light and dark squares at all. He just took neutral bishops from his box and placed them anywhere he liked.
I explained in my comment on Blathy's #102 that this view is very close to the orthogonal geometrical view of mathematics on the languages of formal systems. What Blathy did was not absurd, it was only absurd in the light of current retrograde practice. Note for instance that his positions might indeed be legal in extensions of our chess960 setups. Imagine it is permittable to start a game with 2 dark squared bishops. Imagine we were allowed to initially pile up some pawns from the 2nd rank upward (e.g. h2,h3,h4,h5) and Blathy's constructions no longer transgress modern retro-analytical guidelines!
Lenudan wrote:
THIS needs to be put up in puzzle rush on April 1st..........
With the added condition that it must be completely solved before the next puzzle is presented 
hi
Solved 287/290 :D