And the rook on b3 without doubt had the same opinion.

At first sight it looks like a smart trap, and knight c6 and rook e8 safely protect from any invasion.

But this is only an illusion, because in reality the castle is empty, and black king can't escape because all doors are closed.

So, if white can remove the defender Nc6 (Bxc6), only one rook e8 will protect the black castle.

a. 22...Bxe3 23. Bxe8

b. 22...Rxe4 23. Rb8+ and mates

Good will oust.

Bet your bottom it dollar I plunged it the mix in really it bru

team c6 in exchange it voila in knight bishop.

Right the way it double in dig 22.Qe4 Be5 at war on efile.

2. Ka1 is the defense against this line as found by <jackalope> also. White needs only one tempo. So it seems there is no 'cook'.

The only thing I can tell you, sevenseaman, is that I wrote you a stronger-toned note to bring about the seriousness of the respect I have for you as my fellow kibitzer. I know I myself have made mistakes in the past in my kibitzes: Like labelling a certain move "(best)" when in reality there was a better defence.

For example, last week with the Thursday Qd2/Qc1 puzzle. You accurately pointed out a splendid defence with ...Qa5. Which was only slightly weaker than ...Qb4 in that it did not control the d6/e7 diagonal. However in the lines I was looking at it was fantastic as it covered c7. Furhtermore, even though I found the alternate solution of sacrificing the N on g5 with check ...Qa5 proved that White would still have to prove his win in an endgame (favourable of course, but still having to prove the win entirely)!

Did I come up with ...Qa5 in my initial post: No. So, that's when I realized, "sevenseaman has a keen vision, look at his posts each time to see what if he's come up with other interesting lines."

That being said, the mistakes I have made have been in my own analysis and not in the 'meat'/position of a challenge issued to fellow kibitzers.

I knew when you posted your side puzzle today that almost no-one was going to reply. It happens with another fellow kibitzer, Jimfromprovidence, quite a bit also. The reason is that it takes courage, effort and time to get up in a public forum and go, "Ok, I'll play." There are many kibitzers here who have courage, but not time and have the time but don't want to put the effort and so on.

I just felt, ok, sevenseaman has issued a challenge and I love to solve puzzles so I'll take it up! But I also knew somewhere that I was gonna be one among a limited few to take you up, man.

And I didn't appreciate what I felt was a little bit of goading from you. You addressed me respectfully...yes. But I personally, would never issue you a challenge and then "say, well, shucks sevenseaman, I expect better from you and you shoud know that by now already..."

It's not appropriate.

I look forward to your posts, sevenseaman. And although I'm sorry that my tone was harsh towards you, I'm glad that you have understood that some fellow kibitzers care about what you say, and therefore you have to ensure to be accurate when delivering a challenge.

That said, as you can see, I am one those who looks forward to reading your posts, as I know you have keen chess vision.

Your friend in chess,

Not good. Definitely not good.

We are competitive people. Almost by definition, because we play a competitive game. And that can sometimes bring some heat into the conversation.

But I think it's just the heat of competition. Nothing more. All is well.

So let's change the subject with a joke...

Man watches a dog licking its own genitalia. He casually remarks to a colleague: "I wish I could do that."

The colleague replies: "I'm sure he'd let you if you ask nicely enough."

That is why I am able to evaluate your advice in the right perspective and spirit and not just fly off the handle merely because the dagger has not been clothed in satin.

Most people ignore the challenges and I find their silence <more> hurtful. I am now old enough on the forum to know that only a select few will respond. When I post something I feel good about, those few are the constituency I aim at.

At times no one responds and I have to live with that too. Its the risk one has to take when one's convictions impel one to share ones 'eurekas' with others.

When colleagues like you respond, I do feel grateful for being merited a consideration. Similar reasons impelled me to urge <Once> to come back to the forum when he lately had taken an exception to it.

Thanks <Once>. There's no real friction. Its a matter of individual <style> and I am sure both of us can take peccadilloes in our stride.

Reminds me of a small joke; (perhaps it will be a repetition but I'll risk that).

An old man riding a rickety bicycle in rainy weather slipped and fell. Some urchins standing close by had a hearty guffaw (usual thing when people see others in a sorry predicament) but had enough decency to rush to his aid.

'Sorry sir', said they while trying to help him get up.

The proud man would have none of it. "Sorry, what for?" and shook away any assistance.

'Well sir, you just fell'.

Black's back rank is supported by one Rook and Black King does not have an escape square if checked. Knight on f6 supports b8 square where White Rook can land for a possible check. Eliminating the Knight should be the first move:

21.Bxc6 Rxc6
22.Qe4!
<if......Rxe4 23.Rb8+ and Black Rook and Queen can not stop checkmate>

22...........Rf8
23.Bxf4 Qe6
24.Qxe6 fxe6
25.Be5 Rxc4
26.Rd1 Rc5
27.f4

White is ahead by a Bishop for a pawn and one of the a and c pawns can be taken by White.

I sincerely appreciate reading your posts.

Cats and dogs living together.

Please follow this line of reasoning, bear in mind that this was done very quickly, and I had not checked it with any engine at the time ...

The entire mode/reasoning that allows the Qe4 "trick" to work is that Black cannot capture on e4 due to the back-rank threat. I errantly thought that KxB/h2 would be a blunder because of ...Qd6+. Now if Kg1, then RxQ is playable, as Black now has the defense of ...Qf8; in response to a check on b1 (at anytime) by the White <♖> ... ... ... and now Black might even emerge ahead in material.