|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 4 OF 5 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
| Apr-01-09 | | PhilFeeley: Nope. This is their joke this year:
http://www.chessbase.com/newsdetail... |
|
| Apr-01-09 | | patzer2: <A good April Fools puzzle. Castling long here is legal since Black's king is never in check.> Also, the squares through which the King moves during the castling maneuver are not under attack (i.e. c8, d8 and e8 are not under attack by any enemy piece). The fact that b8 is under attack and that the Rook castles through this attack does not prevent Queen-side castling. However, if c8 were under attack, the King could not castle because he would be castling into check. Similarly, if d8 were under attack, the King could not castle because he would be castling through check. |
|
| Apr-01-09 | | patzer2: For a good discussion of castling rules see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Castling. |
|
| Apr-01-09 | | Smothered Mate: <Nostrils> I'm glad someone else noticed that. <Sneaky> Then it would not be black to move on move 11. |
|
| Apr-01-09 | | PinnedPiece: <Phil:>
http://www.chessbase.com/newsdetail... |
|
| Apr-01-09 | | Marmot PFL: Would be a good Monday puzzle. |
|
| Apr-01-09 | | kevin86: This is dead easy-Castle Queen Side with check and capture the rook next turn. |
|
| Apr-01-09 | | dzechiel: <newzild: Further to <dzechiel>'s mention of an Averbakh game in which the Grandmaster didn't realise a rook can castle over an attacked square, I recall Tal saying that Korchnoi once had to ask a tournament director about the same rule in a very important tournament.> <newzild> is on the right track here. In the game referenced above, Korchnoi's rook was under attack (presumably from a bishop or queen) and he asked the TD if he could still castle using that rook. |
|
| Apr-01-09 | | KingG: <newzild>, <dzechiel> Yes, this was the game in question: Korchnoi vs Karpov, 1974. |
|
| Apr-01-09 | | A.G. Argent: And here's where Mr. NN really gets sucker punched with a 0-0-0#. You'd think he'd learn.
A Kvicala vs NN, 1875 |
|
| Apr-01-09 | | YouRang: Well, like most others I presume, I spotted 11...O-O-O+ quickly. I don't if it's easy because of April Fools, or if they just thought it was trickier than it was. A good "April Fools" puzzle should have been some spoiler where it looks like an easy solution, but it really leads to a deadly counter-attack. I don't suppose puzzles like that are so easy to find though. :-) |
|
| Apr-01-09 | | tivrfoa: For me you couldn't castle if there's an opponent piece threating the path between the rook and the king. |
|
| Apr-01-09 | | zenpharaohs: This must have been the fastest I've ever spotted a move in one of these, and there have been a couple other really fast ones. I forced myself to then spend time looking for a mate, since once I find a win, I have a natural tendency to stop inspecting other possibilities. I suppose the April Fool was that there wasn't another move to find. |
|
| Apr-01-09 | | swordfish: Not difficult, but really cute. |
|
| Apr-01-09 | | Marmot PFL: <A.G. Argent:> The only problem with that example is that Rd1+ is also mate. |
|
| Apr-01-09 | | zanshin: This feels like a Monday puzzle. |
|
| Apr-01-09 | | Jedzz: Since this puzzle was so easy, here is a true Wednesday puzzle to solve:
click for larger viewWhite to move and mate in 6. |
|
| Apr-01-09 | | Kwesi: <<TheTamale>:Also, I moved the pieces around instead of doing it in my head. Is that cheating?> Yes. |
|
| Apr-01-09 | | hedgeh0g: A simple puzzle, but unless you play through the game, you have to assume Black still has qside castling rights. Somewhat trivial, I know, but I just thought I'd make the comment. |
|
| Apr-01-09 | | patzer2: <Jedzz><puzzle> 1. d4. |
|
| Apr-01-09 | | number 23 NBer: <Jedzz> I suppose the concept is a little difficult, but if you play it out over the board, all moves are the only legal moves. |
|
| Apr-01-09 | | GreenFacedPatzer: <Jedzz>
I must congratulate you on that profound puzzle. Many, many times, I've felt I solved a puzzle without completely working out every variation. But this is the first time I worked out every variation, clear to the checkmate, without feeling that I solved the puzzle. In fact, if it had been possible to make a wrong move, I am certain I would have done so, but the puzzle was so constructed that I found myself unable to go wrong. I thus acheived the checkmate without seeing it coming, planning for it, or anticipating it in any way. Well played, sir. |
|
| Apr-01-09 | | ruzon: The quickest way to explain the rule is that the King cannot castle out of check, into check, or through check. Nobody has mentioned that we had a similar puzzle a long time ago, only it was White who played O-O-O+. I can't find it, though. |
|
| Apr-01-09 | | WhiteRook48: 11... 0-0-0+ easy |
|
| Apr-01-09 | | gauer: <<patzer2> ... a good discussion of castling rules ... >
A "traditional" way of describing a to castling motion is: K -> over two squares, followed by R fills in the gap (so long as both unmoved pieces wishing to move - King's original first move used to be that he had a leap of two squares, much like a Kt, with some variations that the K might not move at all in the game until he was checked once - are not going into, exiting or through a check). Therefore, does white have a case that black cannot play 11 ... 0-0-0+ since K@e8->d7->c8+R@a8->d8 would be considered a path "through" a checking square?! <winks> Also, does the K necessarily have to wind up at c8 or f8 during the end of castling, & can the Rook wind up at the gap-filling sqaure of d7 in the hypothetical case above, not moving laterally like a traditional Rook on the same move? Also, if white had a Knight on d8 in the above game, is black allowed to make a capture of it, either with K or R, as part of castling?! |
|
 |
|
|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 4 OF 5 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
Kibitzing
