< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 4 OF 4 ·
|Feb-03-09|| ||kevin86: A few things about the R-T game.
First,it took place AFTER this game.
Second,Reti actually mated with his BISHOP!
|Feb-03-09|| ||playground player: Wouldn't it be nice if national leaders could learn from history like chess players do? Anyone who's seen the famous Reti-Tartakower game will quickly find the answer to this puzzle.|
|Feb-03-09|| ||patzer2: <cyclemath> Thanks for pointing out that there is an exception case where the King can simultaneously capture a checking piece and flee after a double check. One instance I suppose is where a Bishop gives check on an unprotected square adjacent to the King, while simultaneously exposing the monarch to a check by a Rook.|
So I need to modify my statement to indicate that after a double discovered check, the King must flee unless the discovering piece is on an unprotected square adjacent to the King. In that case, the King can simultaneously capture the adjacent checking piece while fleeing the capture of the other.
P.S.: Such a double discovered check would make for an interesting decoy combination. I'd be interesting in seeing one if anyone has an example of a game where such a tactic was played.
|Feb-03-09|| ||SmotheredKing: This is very simple, 15. Qe8+, forcing ...Kxe8, then 16. Bb5+ double discovered check with 17. Re8# to follow|
|Feb-03-09|| ||Avarus: <gus inn>: "<Once> If pawng7 (e.g) takes f8 = Q+ (black king on g8)and another Queen on , let us say ,g1 - both Queens check.
Otherwise , you cannot doublecheck with doublebishops,rooks and horses , as far as I can figure out."|
More nit picking coming since it seems to be the deal of the day: replace the Q with R and you do have a double rook check!
I used to dream about constructing a tripplecheck- which(unfortunately(?)is not possible.But it is fun trying to.
I remember a joke themed puzzle "white to checkmate in one" where the answer was to move the king into tripplecheck as the rules that day (at least according to this tale) said the king can not be in check or doublecheck.
|Feb-03-09|| ||mkrk17: <mockingbird: Sorry to be nit-picking.
<dzechiel: ".. When a king is in double check, he must move the king (there is no capturing the checking piece, and there is no interposing)..."> In the following position, the King is under double check but can capture one of the checking piece>|
Sorry to be nit-picking, but in the position you showed, how is it possible to happen in a real game. Can you give a possible position one move before this position.. ?
If you look at your position, the King is already in check with either the queen or the rook. Then then second piece comes and gives check.
I would say "not possible'.
|Feb-03-09|| ||ruelas007: got it in 1 second, 2/2 so far =D (At last)|
|Feb-03-09|| ||Kasputin: I have always loved the power of the double check -- potentially both of the pieces delivering checks could be threatened with capture, but it is the opposing king that has to move in order to escape the check. That isn't happening here, but with a forced mate and a clearance sacrifice, this position is a real beauty (unless you are on the wrong end of the checkmate).|
The queen goes to e8; the king captures the queen; the bishop goes to b5; and then next move the rook goes to e8 and it is checkmate.
|Feb-03-09|| ||Once: <Avarus> You are quite right - it is possible to double-check with two rooks. I had always assumed it was impossible. Here is the position:|
click for larger view
1.fxe8=R+! So we can double check with two queens or two rooks. I am assuming that two knights is impossible. Anyone care to demonstrate double check with two bishops?
This is the position one move before <mockingbird>'s position. Now f8=Q+ sets up the double check which the king can escape by Kxg8.
click for larger view
Isn't chess just wonderful to offer up such delights?
|Feb-03-09|| ||TheChessGuy: This must be queen sac week.|
|Feb-03-09|| ||TheTamale: This was easy for me because it's thematic of so many famous chess games--ones that even I know.|
|Feb-03-09|| ||njchess: Much like Monday, another queen sac starts the sequence. Ahh, the perils of the Evans gambit. It isn't played much anymore since it is not the most sound. The fireworks begin with 7. ... Qf6. Less forcing is Qe7 which evades the pawn thrust.|
White plays the ambitious and not terribly sound 8. e5!? and even exchanges into check!? But Black more than returns the favor by playing 10. ... Qh5+? completely overlooking dxc3!
After 12. Re1, Black still has the advantage but Kd8 is not as strong as Ne7. Finally, 14. ... Qf5?? lets White win. The simple Bf5 would have saved the day.
|Feb-03-09|| ||PinnedPiece: Hah! Saw Qe8 in about a minute, took another 20 sec to confirm.|
I'm fairly sure I would see this in a game. Could I get to this position? Probably not.
Tuesday Goal: 90 sec.
Bring on Wednesday, CG!
|Feb-03-09|| ||SamAtoms1980: Bang, wham, zing.
I love these kind of positions because you don't actually have to do any solving. You just sit back and watch the pieces solve the problem for you.
|Feb-03-09|| ||DarthStapler: Got it easily|
|Feb-03-09|| ||1. h4: Well, it's early in the week, obviously...|
|Feb-03-09|| ||TheBish: Kaldegg vs Zeissl, 1903|
White to play (15.?) "Easy" (1.5 stars)
There is a saying (which I just made up, as far as I know) which says "the only thing more forcing than a check is a double-check!" Feel free to quote me on that!
15. Qd8+! Can't be any more forcing than that! 15...Kxd8 16. Bb5+ (the old double-check trick!) Kd8 (or Kf8) 17. Re8 mate. Pretty and simple!
|Feb-03-09|| ||johnlspouge: < <zb2cr> wrote: Hi <johnlspouge>,|
Odd that you hadn't see the Reti vs. Tartakower game before; it's quite famous. >
It's not really that odd. I am not as deeply steeped in chess lore as many on this site. I do not mind admitting my ignorance: I hate to do it, so the admission helps fix things in my mind.
< I think it was T. H. Huxley who said the: "The great tragedy of science is the slaying of a beautiful hypothesis by an ugly fact." >
Yep. I recall that Huxley said words to that effect, so my mnemonic methods have had some effect :)
|Feb-03-09|| ||muralman: Not being a chess player, it took me a long while to see why c6 couldn't block the queen or the bishop taking it's place. I knew exposing the d1 rook gave a line for checkmate. Just what would keep that pesky c5 from blocking the plan. |
Then I ran the queen all the way to e8, The black king takes. Bishop moves to the checkmate position vacated by the queen, and what do you know, the king is double checked by the rook on e1 and the bishop. The c5 pawn is useless. The black king has nothing it can do but move. Now, the rook runs up to the protected e8 square for checkmate.
Question, why didn't Zeissl quit before the trap was sprung, saving some face?
|Feb-03-09|| ||xrt999: Prior to the formation of the thought of the solution, prior to the light refracting off of the monitor screen and hitting my eyeballs, registering an image which traveled to my brain, and created said thought, prior to all this, the intention of thought was in between these thoughts. In the space between the cells of my brain, in betweeen the molecules that make up these cells, in between the atoms that make of these cells, there exists nothingness, only space. What lies in that space is the power of pure potentiality. Within that space of intention the solution appeared to me. I cannot even say when it appeared to me, or label it with a time; within the field of all possibilities there exists no time.|
|Feb-03-09|| ||redmaninaustin: mkrk17: <mockingbird: Sorry to be nit-picking. <dzechiel: ".. When a king is in double check, he must move the king (there is no capturing the checking piece, and there is no interposing)..."> In the following position, the King is under double check but can capture one of the checking piece> Sorry to be nit-picking, but in the position you showed, how is it possible to happen in a real game. Can you give a possible position one move before this position.. ?
If you look at your position, the King is already in check with either the queen or the rook. Then then second piece comes and gives check.|
I would say "not possible'.
the pawn promotes to a queen, checking the enemy king, and at the same time exposes the check from the rook. not a prudent move, but definitely "possible."
|Feb-04-09|| ||zb2cr: Hi <njchess>,
I'm not tracking you. You said:
"After 12. Re1, Black still has the advantage but Kd8 is not as strong as Ne7. Finally, 14. ... Qf5?? lets White win. The simple Bf5 would have saved the day."
How does 14. ... Bf5 save the day? Doesn't 15. Qxa5, Bxb1; 16. Qa4 still leave Black in a world of hurt?
|Feb-04-09|| ||Once: <xrt999> Wow! Whatever you are on is probably illegal in some states ...|
|Feb-04-09|| ||zb2cr: Hi <xrt999>,
<I cannot even say when it appeared to me, or label it with a time; within the field of all possibilities there exists no time.>
Uncertainty principle says energy is complementary to time; thus to be completely and utterly uncertain of time requires that energy be defined with complete certainty. Since previously the most precise definition of energy had been the zero-phonon emission at 2.5 x 10**-15, you appear to have achieved a new scientific breakthrough! May I congratulate you, and inquire when you will be publishing your results in <Physical Review D>?
|Feb-15-09|| ||WhiteRook48: Reti-Tartakower mating pattern?!|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 4 OF 4 ·