Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: Mate study -- who's wrong: David Paulowich or Chest 3.19?

Author: José Antônio Fabiano Mendes

Date: 07:27:43 01/03/01

Go up one level in this thread


On January 03, 2001 at 09:25:29, leonid wrote:

>On January 02, 2001 at 21:22:01, Dann Corbit wrote:
>
>>On January 02, 2001 at 20:02:14, leonid wrote:
>>
>>>On January 02, 2001 at 19:37:15, Dann Corbit wrote:
>>>
>>>>[D]8/8/8/8/7K/1p6/7Q/1k6 w - - acn 12240607; acs 147; bm Kg3 Kg4; ce 32746; dm
>>>>11; pv Kg4 b2 Kf3 Ka1 Qe5 Kb1 Qc5 Ka2 Qd5+ Ka3 Qb5 b1=Q Qxb1 Ka4 Ke4 Ka5 Kd5 Ka6
>>>>Kc6 Ka7 Qb7#; c0 "Chancellor Chess - a mate in 5 study by David Paulowich";
>>>
>>>Given position do not contain mate in 5 moves. I tried it by mate solver in
>>>LLchess. Tried even 6 moves deep thinking that maybe there is some mistake in
>>>number of moves. Some programs count moves differently. No mate even for 6
>>>moves.
>>
>>I finally figured out what is going on.  "Chancellor Chess" is a chess variant
>>where the piece moves have different rules.
>
>Surpise! I could never figure out this special condition. If it was really some
>new way of playing chess, please explain briefly what kind of game it was.
>
>Thanks,
>Leonid.

  Please see: http://chessvariants.com/usualeq.dir/chancellor2.html   JAFM
>
>>
>>Under standard chess, it is a mate in 11 (as shown above correctly by Chest).
>
>Is is still pretty good. Search by brute force 11 moves deep should take pretty
>long time to solve. It probably used some kind of selective search and
>successfully.



This page took 0 seconds to execute

Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700

Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.