Does anybody else have a theory about today's puzzle? Why would CG pick this game?

On the face of it this game wouldn't even make the cutting room floor.

1.Games have a single correct answer.

2.Right answer = mate or won material

<1> This game has many correct answers, but the move played was not one of them, in fact white is way ahead 9.49 (an enormous lead), 29Nxg7 reduces the lead to 3.55 30Qd4 slashes the lead even more 2.07 and its not until black blunders 36Bc8+ that white can win....

<2>Correct answer= well the the text answer = nothing. No material, in fact white is down a piece. Mate? nope. Whites moves do nothing to force mate, almost the opposite in fact. Black blunders 8 moves after 29Nxg7 & that's how white wins.

Does anybody else think this a bit strange?

30 Qxd5 threatens Ne7+ winning the queen, which has no moves to escape. If 30...Kh8 31 Bh6 with many threats.

30 g4 protects the knight and forces Qh3. This attack f3 but after Qd4 white threatens Qxf6 and mate on g7.

And another reason is black has a bishop which can not protect all weaknesses on dark squares.

But the win is not so fast how was described by <Ray Keene> or <dzechiel>.

After 29.Rxf6 game can continue like this 29...gxf6 30.g4 Qg6
31.N e7+ Kg7
32.Nxg6 fxg6 and black can continue fighting.

In the early days, the good folks at chessgames.com were idealistic. You might call them dreamers - a race of godlike creatures inhabiting a silicon olympus. They had this vision of a community of chess players, where the grizzled greybeards would help those with unlined faces and buttocks like ripe apples.

And in those hopeful days, the moderators would indeed walk amongst their flock. They would speak to us, as the ancient deities would oft-times commune with humans. It has even been rumoured that they did take the form of bulls and goats and impregnate human women. But I never held truck with <those> stories.

It was a time of peace, and of new beginnings. So it was held that time that each puzzle of the day would have only one solution. And that the game continuation would be that one solution. Or else the notes to the game would tell the truth. And so it was written in the FAQ.

But there was a flaw with their plan. A fatal flaw, as there always is when someone tries to build a utopia.

Who can know what started the change? Perhaps we started to outgrow our mentors. Or maybe they simply ran out of puzzles with just one solution. Boredom. A celestial civil war. We may never know.

Then came a darker time. The moderators walked less and less upon the face of the forum. For they had discovered a different pastime. Instead of a puzzle with a single truth, they had learned to embrace a multiplicity of truths. Complex positions where each side has a myriad of options. Far more interesting than straight-forward "insert tab A into slot B" sorts of puzzles.

And then we were no longer disciples of their teachings, where the object of each puzzle was to discover for ourselves what the moderators had already found. Now we were the teachers. The conversation, the kibitzing, the chatter - it had become more than the game, more than the "truth". We and the moderators were discovering things together.

And now they offer us positions, like the gods making offerings to their followers. They are saying: "Here, here is a story. Here is a position. There is no right or wrong here. Make your own truths from it. Teach yourselves, teach us, explore. Write history, here and now, in this place."

Chessgames is not a library of puzzles. These are fragments of real games, full of man's hope and ingenuity and weaknesses. And the ultimate truth, perhaps, is there is no such thing as a single right answer. Life (and chess) is far more complex than that.

And ultimately there is great beauty in that complexity. If you can reduce something down to a single truth, then there is nothing more to learn, no mystery, no sense of wonder. Give me variety and imprecision and chaos instead.

The only problem is ... while these godlike beings were taking their own personal journey of discovery ...

... someone forgot to rewrite the FAQ.

... someone forgot to rewrite the FAQ.>

Priceless!

29. Rxf6 gxf6 30. g4 Qh3 31. Nh6+!? Kg7 32. Nf5+ Kg6 (32...Kg8/Kh8 33. Qd4 winning) and now 33. Rb6! which leads to an advantageous endgame for White. Sure, it is not an immediate win, but White has all the winning chances here, while Black must pray for a miracle.

As a conclusion, 31. Nh6!? although interesting and still advantageous for White, does give Black a glimmer of hope - albeit a faint one - and therefore good on you for noticing that.

I must admit that something has not been escaping my attention over the past week.

That's as much as I'll allow myself to say right now.

However, note that Black has 33...Qf1+ taking the game into an endgame where White has some truly serious winning chances.

I posted this line - which, starting from 33. Rb6, is Stockfish's - shortly after having posted my own analysis on viking78's idea.

As long as the position is interesting, does it matter?

After all, in a real game we will sometimes find ourselves with more than one way to win. Learning how to deal with that is as much about chess as solving pure puzzles with only one solution.

There is a Russian parable about a donkey which is placed exactly in the middle of two buckets of water. Because it cannot decide which bucket is closest it dies of thirst.

Is this a lemon amongst peaches? I guess it depends on your point of view. I'm a glass half full sort of chap. A lemon is simply a fruit with a different taste. Let's slice it up and put it in our gin and tonic.

Try 29.Rxf6 gxf6 30.Qxf6 threatening Ne7+ winning the Q. If 30...Kh8 to stop the N check, 31.Bh6 renews the threat indirectly and 31...Rg8 to guard g7 does not work: 32.Bg7+ Rxg7 33.Qxa8+ Rg8 34.Rb8 and the back rank mate threat wins further material. Time to check:
====
I saw 29.Nxg7 but thought my line was stronger. Crafty Endgame Simulator interactive link: http://www.chessvideos.tv/endgame-t... My line wins a Rook against the ES.