Author: Andreas Stabel
Date: 08:38:49 02/18/00
Go up one level in this thread
On February 18, 2000 at 10:09:47, Steve Coladonato wrote: >On February 18, 2000 at 09:51:10, blass uri wrote: > >>On February 18, 2000 at 09:32:43, Steve Coladonato wrote: >> >>>On February 18, 2000 at 09:15:35, Dan Andersson wrote: >>> >>>>If the knight is placed on g5 there is a way to get to the position w. a forcing >>>>variation. If the last move was an exchange of rooks or queen f.ex. The correct >>>>way of adjudicating N v. B is to let one of the players make one move after the >>>>capture. >>> >>>I still think that the position in the diagram has to be reached by the bishop >>>going to h7. If the position was reached by a black move then the white bishop >>>just moves away. And if in fact the position was reached by a white move, make >>>the capture with the king instead of the bishop. But, I'd like to see the FEN >>>and solution you propose. >> >>You are right about the position in the diagram but you are not right about the >>position when there is a knight at g5 when the last move of white was BxQh7 >> >>The knight at g5 protects the queen at h7 so white must take the queen with the >>bishop. >> >>Uri > >I stand corrected. Would the internet server announce a draw with the knight at >g5 and black to move, as the scenario that is being discussed is now forced >moves as Dan suggested? > >Steve An example of an endgame position which may lead to this mate is [D]3n1k1K/1q5Q/8/8/8/8/8/1B6 b - - 0 1 1... Qxh7+ 2. Bxh7 Nf7# Rather nice I think :) I tried to match myself on ICC and made a game with this end and at least then the server did not claim the draw, so perhaps it has logic to handle this. But with a very stupid oponent it would still be possible to mate, so my claim stands. Regards Andreas Stabel
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.