|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 4 OF 4 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
| Aug-27-12 | | stst: <Surely this puzzle should have started one move earlier, i.e. on move 12?>
--
Agreed, but still it's too easy & natural to have this development. |
|
| Aug-27-12 | | stst: <May I differ? This is not easy. It is hard, even very hard. It is of course, simple (one move and the trap is sprung), but that is something quite different. If you want to know how hard a puzzle is, you need to ask someone who did not get it. And in that respect I am your expert. I tried all kinds of desperate ways of killing off my queen, including Qe8, but never saw why it was the key. So can we reclassify this one as “very simple, but almost impossible to spot”? Well, well... depends on how you view it - in this case, it's both simple and easy, and very natural, after Qe8+, the only response is to kill the Q with R or N, then Nf6+ is natural. Not easy indeed to understand why it's not easy. On the other hand, something could be very simple, but never easy, like the open problem of Goldbach: Every even number = sum of two primes.
(Prove or disprove, not easy at all either way.)
Simple enough, but has lured math world over two hundred something years!!! |
|
| Aug-27-12 | | PaulLovric: is it a smothered mate or Phillador's something? |
|
| Aug-27-12 | | Castleinthesky: While this is a good Monday puzzle. For once, I saw the solution as soon as I looked at the puzzle. Maybe getting old does have its advantages. |
|
| Aug-27-12 | | gars: Let's praise the Lord for Mondays! |
|
| Aug-27-12 | | shaikriyaz: I once read it here some kibitzer mentioning a kasparov quote
<once your knight reaches the d3/d6 square, its only a matter of time before you win> |
|
Aug-27-12
 | | tpstar: I remember some quote about a Knight on the sixth means your game wins itself, but here's a counterpoint: "A final point to make about overrated knights has to do with knight outposts on the sixth rank. Traditionally, knight outposts on the sixth rank have been considered towers of strength, and barring a quick exchange of the infiltrating steed, the defence was supposed to crumble in short order. To be fair, knights on the sixth, if well-secured, can be very powerful. But players and annotators today are aware that this is just a probabilistic advantage, not a hard-and-fast rule." John Watson, "Secrets of Modern Chess Strategy" |
|
| Aug-27-12 | | bachbeet: Got it. Interesting because no matter which piece black captures the Q with, it's mate. |
|
| Aug-27-12 | | Moonwalker: Looking forward to the day I pattern-recognise a Thursday puzzle! |
|
| Aug-27-12 | | Tiggler: <Abdel Irada>: <<BillTaylor10: NN it means no name, and his opponent is anonymous.>
Actually, NN stands for the Latin phrase "nomen nescio": "I don't know the name" (literally, "(the) name not-I-know").> Anyone who plays a game like black did, and haven't we all, prefers to be NN or anon. |
|
| Aug-27-12 | | EXIDE: I started with Nf7+, and discovered that I had to retrace my moves in order to win. |
|
| Aug-27-12 | | Tiggler: <EXIDE: I started with Nf7+, and discovered that I had to retrace my moves in order to win.> Interesting point: 13 Nf7+ Ke8 14 Nd6++ still wins after 14 ... Kd8 or Kf8 |
|
| Aug-27-12 | | Abdel Irada: <stst>: <Every even number = sum of two primes.> Wouldn't a single counterexample suffice to destroy this hypothesis? Say 25 + 5 = 30? Here, in the first test case I thought of, we find the even number 30 consisting of the sum of a prime (5) and a composite (25). Now, I'm not a mathematician, and I may have misunderstood the stipulations in some way. For example, you may have meant to specify that two primes can be found that add up to each even number; in this case, say 23 + 7. If so, please point out my error. And incidentally, would 2 be a special case? Note that it consists of 1 + 1 or 2 + 0, and 0 and 1 are neither prime nor composite. |
|
| Aug-27-12 | | Abdel Irada: <tpstar: I remember some quote about a Knight on the sixth means your game wins itself....> One question: If a knight on king six is like a bone in the throat, is a king on knight six like the throne in a boat? |
|
| Aug-27-12 | | Tiggler: <shaikriyaz>: <I once read it here some kibitzer mentioning a kasparov quote <once your knight reaches the d3/d6 square, its only a matter of time before you win>> I imagine Kasparov was remembering his game 16 in Karpov-Kasparov II, when he was black and got a knight entrenched on d3, and proceeded to crush WC Karpov in astonishing style. Afterwards he said that such games remain with their creator for the rest of their lives. That was 1985. I did not look it up, so may have misremembered (not being the creator!) the exact reference. |
|
| Aug-27-12 | | Tiggler: <Abdel Irada>:
<One question: If a knight on king six is like a bone in the throat, is a king on knight six like the throne in a boat?>Without doubt, this is the wittiest post I ever read on CG.com. Kudos! |
|
| Aug-27-12 | | TheFocus: Bravo!! |
|
| Aug-27-12 | | sushijunkie: <Abdel Irada: <stst>: <Every even number = sum of two primes.>
Wouldn't a single counterexample suffice to destroy this hypothesis? Say 25 + 5 = 30? Here, in the first test case I thought of, we find the even number 30 consisting of the sum of a prime (5) and a composite (25). Now, I'm not a mathematician, and I may have misunderstood the stipulations in some way. For example, you may have meant to specify that two primes can be found that add up to each even number; in this case, say 23 + 7. If so, please point out my error.> You are not wrong or misunderstanding, <stst> did a poor job of quoting the Goldbach Conjecture: Every integer greater than 2, CAN BE EXPRESSED by the sum of two primes. CAN BE is much different from IS. IS means IS ONLY, while CAN BE means IS, but NOT ONLY. Also, back when Golbach made the conjecture, 1 was considered prime, while it is now generally accepted to be something other. That now changes the conjecture to "Every integer greater than 4...". |
|
| Aug-27-12 | | Tiggler: <TheFocus: Bravo!!> <"Oh frabjous day! Calloo! Callay!" He chortled in his joy.> |
|
| Aug-27-12 | | Tiggler: <Tiggler: <shaikriyaz>: <I once read it here some kibitzer mentioning a kasparov quote <once your knight reaches the d3/d6 square, its only a matter of time before you win>>
I imagine Kasparov was remembering his game 16 in Karpov-Kasparov II, when he was black and got a knight entrenched on d3, and proceeded to crush WC Karpov in astonishing style. Afterwards he said that such games remain with their creator for the rest of their lives. That was 1985. I did not look it up, so may have misremembered (not being the creator!) the exact reference> This is the game:
<Karpov vs Kasparov, 1985> IMO, one of the greatest of all time (but nothing like today's puzzle). |
|
Aug-27-12
 | | HeMateMe: Its a MOTHER, mate! |
|
Aug-27-12
 | | Peligroso Patzer: <Abdel Irada: <BillTaylor10: NN it means no name, and his opponent is anonymous.>
Actually, NN stands for the Latin phrase "nomen nescio": "I don't know the name" ***> That is indeed the origin of the abbreviation, as I noted on page 2 of this thread, but in English it is commonly rendered as "No Name", as <BillTaylor10> said. For more on "N.N.", see:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nomen_... |
|
| Aug-27-12 | | Shams: <For example, you may have meant to specify that two primes can be found that add up to each even number; in this case, say 23 + 7.> Yes, that's the formulation.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goldba... |
|
Feb-18-13
 | | FSR: Bird of Prey. |
|
Feb-09-24
 | | Sally Simpson: This 1869 game ends ...
click for larger view...a very similar way to Bird / Dobell vs NN, 1886 
click for larger viewThe only difference is the pawn on d4 and the Knight on c6. |
|
 |
|
|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 4 OF 4 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
Kibitzing
Annotations by 
sac: 13.Qe8+
