- #1
- 1,995
- 7
quark said:1. c7 Kb7(...Kxa5 2. Rxa7++; ...b5 2. Qc8++) 2. Qc8++
Me either. It says I don't have permission to access that page. :(dextercioby said:Drat,i can't see the attachement.:grumpy:
quark said:First I will post and then read the other solution.
Not quite sure but if the previous step is a5 b5 then enpassant and white wins in second step. Or in continuation to my earlier game Qc8+ Kxa5 and Rxa7
Now I will see what Jimmy says.
Quite so..Rahmuss said:I thought enpassant could only be used as that Pawns first move?
arildno said:No, Rahmus, that is an IMPOSSIBLE history of the game!
Think again..
arildno said:Quite so..
Yes, but the continuation will require 3 moves in total.arildno said:However, quark's solution seems valid.
Yes, I just discovered that.Galileo said:Yes, but the continuation will require 3 moves in total.
It's appropriately enough called Fool's mate.Rahmuss said:I learned a possible two move check mate from start; but white has to be really dumb and black has to know what's going on. Even still... it would be fun to see it actually happen. Short game.
Nonetheless, standard chess jargon calls this a mate in 2. Go figure.Galileo said:Yes, but the continuation will require 3 moves in total.
arildno said:Yes, I just discovered that.
Great retrograde problem, Galileo.
Do you have Smullyan's books on this?
He has published at least two books solely concerned with retrograde analysis:Galileo said:Thanks.
No, I found this somewhere else in a book on heuristics.
I do have a Smullyan's book "The Riddle of Scheherazade", but I don't think this puzzle is in there.
xJuggleboy said:So in this problem blacks previous move had to be b7-b5.We know this becouse blace has no other legal moves that allow for this position.
Hope this cleared it up =-)
It would still have been a mate in two. Kb7 is not a legal move, Ka5 is forced and checkmate follows. Remember, capturing en passent after ...b5 is pretty much the same thing as a normal capture after ...b6.quark said:I would rather play ...b6+ 2. a5xb6 Kb7 etc.
jimmysnyder said:By the way, I believe it the custom in chess problems not to have pieces on the board that do not participate in the mate (with the possible exception of the white king which must be on the board in any case). If that is so, then since one of white's pawns is extraneous, it should be removed.
Chronos said:Only one possible solution - I assume this has been already solved:
pxp ep kxa5
rxa7 mate