Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: Is this legal?

Author: Laurens Winkelhagen

Date: 06:08:29 11/22/04

Go up one level in this thread


On November 22, 2004 at 07:18:53, Uri Blass wrote:

>On November 22, 2004 at 05:28:41, Laurens Winkelhagen wrote:
>
>>On November 22, 2004 at 05:23:57, Laurens Winkelhagen wrote:
>>
>>>On November 21, 2004 at 23:48:34, Peter Darin wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>>IMO In the position black can mate and it is a mating material because of the
>>>>White pawns which can obstruct the white king and white can be mated.
>>>>
>>>>If a game is Knight vs Knight or Bishops vs Bishops (with no pawns) it is a draw
>>>>due to insufficient material.
>>>>
>>>>Regards
>>>>
>>>>Peter
>>>
>>>By that reasoning even KNvKN and KBvKB are not cases of insufficient mating
>>>material. In both cases the one piece can obstruct it's king so that the
>>>opponents piece can mate. Earlier in this thread we already saw an example of
>>>KBvKB. KNvKN is similar of course. (hmm lets try some FEN of the top of my head,
>>>forgive me when this diagram fails)
>>> [D] kn6/2N5/1K6/8/8/8/8/8 - - 1 0
>>
>>retry:
>>
>>[D] kn6/2N5/1K6/8/8/8/8/8 b - - 0 1
>>
>
>If you replace the knights by bishops it is a draw by insufficiant material.
>KB vs KB when the bishops have the same color is a draw.

but not if they are of different color: I just wanted to discuss peter's
point;-)
>
>Note that in KN vs KN it is impossible to get mate in more than 1 move when in
>the relevant diagram it is possible to get even forced mate in 4 moves as I
>showed.

True of course, Laurens.
>
>Uri



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.