|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 3 OF 3 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
| Sep-04-17 | | malt: Went for 57.Ng4+ Kh7
(57...hg4 58.Rh1# )
58.Qg8#
Did not see 57.Bg5+ |
|
| Sep-04-17 | | jith1207: Jan Gustafson isn't a professional anymore. He is into media role and he is excellent at that. He is sort of freelancer when it comes to playing. He seems to like to travel to Thailand and That's the only open he plays every year, apart from few club leagues. |
|
| Sep-04-17 | | jith1207: Let's be honest, it's Monday. The first thing we all checked was a queen sac. The second thing we all tried was to make Nf5 royal check work. By the time, we were tired of not getting both and the moment we got one working mate-in-two, we stopped because.... After all, It's Monday. |
|
Sep-04-17
 | | Willem Wallekers: Yesterday we had the yearly market in our street.
That didn't feel like a sunday.
Today doesn't feel like a monday. |
|
| Sep-04-17 | | morfishine: <57.Bg5+> and mates next move *Didn't notice 57.Ng4+
<stst> On your comment: <yeah, correct but incomplete. As a kblitzer and a trainer for self, should be able to give complete solution. IN this case, two possible, equally quick solutions. Be patient next time, try harder to see it all !!> This is your philosophy, which I do not agree with. I was trained that once you find a winning line, stop calculating. After all, once you have found a winning continuation there's no point in searching further since you are winning. One can explore other moves or branches in post-game analysis: Don't waste time and energy exploring additional lines during a game: Time and energy are too precious to waste during a game ***** |
|
| Sep-04-17 | | jith1207: Agree with both philosophies, but I guess analysing all moves could be possible in early week puzzles and probably the gist of the earlier post by <stst>. Of course, one will have to be so great at calculation and visualisation in order to analyse all the winning moves with the time available OTB. However, I have come to realize, to my own dismay, that one has to analyse all the winning moves the opponent has, in order to not lose. |
|
| Sep-04-17 | | zb2cr: I went for 57. Bg5+. |
|
Sep-04-17
 | | Willber G: <stst: yeah, correct but incomplete. As a kblitzer and a trainer for self, should be able to give complete solution. IN this case, two possible, equally quick solutions. Be patient next time, try harder to see it all !!> Nah, if you see a mate in two, play it, shake hands, and make your way to the bar. |
|
| Sep-04-17 | | Prosperus: I found 57. Ng4+! hxg4 58. Rh1#; 57. ... Kh7 58. Qg8# |
|
| Sep-04-17 | | Iwer Sonsch: No queen sac today. Just 57.Bg5+! with mate in two. |
|
| Sep-04-17 | | EdC: How does white continue after 54...Kg7 |
|
Sep-04-17
 | | Once: <EdC: How does white continue after 54...Kg7?> 55. Qxf8+ looks pretty painful. Then one line might be: 55...Kh7 56. Bg8+ Kh8 57. Bf7+ Kh7 58. Qg8+ Kh6 59. Qxg6# |
|
| Sep-04-17 | | malt: <EdC>
55.Q:f8+ Kh7 56.Bg8+ Kh8 57.Bf7+ Kh7
58.Qg8+ Kh6 59.Q:g6# |
|
| Sep-04-17 | | tjshann: I saw the knight mate and stopped looking. The bishop move is blunter and arguably less "elegant", but no less effective. Hope this is a one-off. Hard enough to find one solution! |
|
| Sep-04-17 | | ChessHigherCat: I don't know whatever happened to the old "chess puzzle rules" but I believe I recall that a "valid" puzzle never had two possible solutions and the first move was never a check, but of course that applies to "classic puzzles", not combinations extracted from games. Does anybody know of any reference works about the "principles of classic chess puzzles"? |
|
| Sep-04-17 | | ucbu: I haven't come to chessgames for awhile and it seems that <chrisowen> now speak in Zoombie or High Valyrian :P I see 1. Ng5+ hxg5 2. Rh1# (1. ... Kh7 2. Qg8#) and stop calculating. |
|
Sep-04-17
 | | Breunor: I usually think of Janowski as a tactics guy; some patient positional play though before the fireworks at the end! |
|
Sep-04-17
| | Once: <ChessHigherCat> A chess "problem" is generally considered to be cooked if it has more than one solution. More about problems here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chess...
CG games of the day or positions of the day aren't chess problems as such. They belong to the wider group of chess puzzles where almost anything goes. There can be more than one winning move or sometimes no winning moves at all. The challenge is simply to find the best move. |
|
| Sep-04-17 | | lzromeu: Mate in 2, by 2 ways. OK. It´s monday.
Do you want philosophies???
How about:
sac the bishop or sac the knight???
That´s the question.
How computer does??? |
|
| Sep-04-17 | | WorstPlayerEver: Obviously Bg5 is more subtle than Ng4. Ng4 isn't subtle at all. |
|
| Sep-04-17 | | lzromeu: <Richard Taylor:>
I like this line of thinking.
Of course to all of us, chess is not a punishment, then, @#$% the bar. Go to study solutions.
Agree about the aesthetic of knight move, that's my choice, my first solution, and I stop here. However the B sac is more simple, a machine move, certainly. |
|
Sep-04-17
 | | Richard Taylor: <lzromeu: <Richard Taylor:> I like this line of thinking.
Of course to all of us, chess is not a punishment, then, X the bar. Go to study solutions. Agree about the aesthetic of knight move, that's my choice, my first solution, and I stop here. However the B sac is more simple, a machine move, certainly.> Maybe don't swear ("cuss") on here, the system here doesn't like it and leaves "ats" and dollar signs etc.... Otherwise I agree in gen. with what you say. And I take your comment as a compliment. I was ranting on a bit. I liked the problem as it was relatively easy... Of course a lot of my comments are slightly satirical. Of course it doesn't matter whether anyone solved it or which way or how much they saw...after all a lot of us gave up because they thought it was Monday, but here in Kiwiland (Aotearoa) it was Sunday! Or it was part Sunday then part Monday... So for me it was a Sunday/Monday puzzle... |
|
Sep-04-17
| | Richard Taylor: <Breunor: I usually think of Janowski as a tactics guy; some patient positional play though before the fireworks at the end!> Lasker knew that Janowski disliked endings so he steered for them in their match and won most games. Janowski said to the effect that if it wasn't a win in the middle game he wasn't interested. Probably a bit apocryphal but it is a good story... |
|
| Sep-04-17 | | leRevenant: < jith1207: Let's be honest, it's Monday. The first thing we all checked was a queen sac. The second thing we all tried was to make Nf5 royal check work.
By the time, we were tired of not getting both and the moment we got one working mate-in-two, we stopped because.... After all, It's Monday.>
i like it |
|
| Sep-04-17 | | ChessHigherCat: <Once: A chess "problem" is generally considered to be cooked if it has more than one solution. More about problems here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chess... Thanks for the link. There are some cases where puzzles of the enigma and in-game (two anagrams) types can overlap, such as O Bernstein vs Smyslov, 1946 61...Black to move.
That's like a composed puzzle in terms of the difficulty and shock value but it still doesn't meet the strict criteria because the first move isn't supposed to be a check or obvious. It could be a spoiler, though, since almost everybody would immediately play Rh2+ and get stalemated. "62. white to play and draw" would be a valid composed puzzle, but it's very short. |
|
 |
|
|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 3 OF 3 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
Kibitzing
