Media comments on chess

[Kevin Thurlow]

What was your intended answer to 6?

I note he was called "Borg", which is "Grob" backwards...

[Roger Lancaster]

Maybe a slightly dodgy question 5. Overstep the time with K+N versus K+N and it's a loss. Trickier with K+B v K+B when it depends on whether the bishops are on squares of the same colour.

[Peter Hornsby]

So with 6 it was 'it can jump', though of course it moves in an 'L' shape as well. He got it right!

And good point about question 5, just as well that wasn't chosen

[Matt Mackenzie]

Maybe a slightly dodgy question 5. Overstep the time with K+N versus K+N and it's a loss. Trickier with K+B v K+B when it depends on whether the bishops are on squares of the same colour.

If the bishops are of the same colour square a mate is impossible, so shouldn't it automatically be declared a draw anyway?

(ie the question of "losing on time" does not apply)

[Ian Thompson]

So with 6 it was 'it can jump', though of course it moves in an 'L' shape as well. He got it right!

And good point about question 5, just as well that wasn't chosen

A couple of slightly dodgy questions:

6. Doesn't a king jump over a rook when castling, or vice versa, so a knight is not unique in jumping over other pieces?

9. Shouldn't say "opposition piece" because it's any piece or pawn in front of the pawn.

[Roger Lancaster]

Maybe a slightly dodgy question 5. Overstep the time with K+N versus K+N and it's a loss. Trickier with K+B v K+B when it depends on whether the bishops are on squares of the same colour.

If the bishops are of the same colour square a mate is impossible, so shouldn't it automatically be declared a draw anyway?

(ie the question of "losing on time" does not apply)

Yes, if the players understand - or at least one of them does - law 5.2.2. Now, suppose I've K+B v K+B+P with same-colour bishops and I play KxP (removing his last pawn) but, as I reach for the clock, the flag falls. Does the old Rumens/Mabbs principle apply or is this unique to checkmates?

[Ian Thompson]

Yes, if the players understand - or at least one of them does - law 5.2.2. Now, suppose I've K+B v K+B+P with same-colour bishops and I play KxP (removing his last pawn) but, as I reach for the clock, the flag falls. Does the old Rumens/Mabbs principle apply or is this unique to checkmates?

Every clause in Article 5.2 says the event "immediately ends the game" so the consequence of a flag fall must be the same for all of them.

[Stewart Reuben]

Pearl Bailey a famous singer in the day. One number
THEY'E EVEN TO YOUNG O TOO OLD.
One line she sings 'a snappy game of chess'.

[Roger Lancaster]

Yes, if the players understand - or at least one of them does - law 5.2.2. Now, suppose I've K+B v K+B+P with same-colour bishops and I play KxP (removing his last pawn) but, as I reach for the clock, the flag falls. Does the old Rumens/Mabbs principle apply or is this unique to checkmates?

Every clause in Article 5.2 says the event "immediately ends the game" so the consequence of a flag fall must be the same for all of them.

Yes, that's my reading too. The concept of a "completed move" (relevant in the case of illegal moves) appears not to apply in any of the circumstances where the laws say, of the move in question", "This immediately ends the game". And apologies to those who feel, quite rightly, that I have diverged too far from the topic.

[Stewart Reuben]

I wrote about Pearl Bailey before seeing the discussion about checkmate.

5.2.2 The game is drawn when a position has arisen in which neither player can checkmate the opponent's king with any series of legal moves.The game is said to end in a 'dead position'. This immediately ends the game, provided that the move producing the position was in accordance with Article 3 an Articles 4.2-4.7.
Take White Ke1 Qf1 Pd2.
Black Kh8 Qd3.
The only legal continuation is 1...Qxf1+ 2 Kxf1 stalemate. You can line up three moer queens for each player, all attacking f1 in due course. After four moves it results in a forced stalemate. I designed the first position and Geurt Gijssen the second, after seeing my one.

5.2.2. was introduced in 1996 after the late Bruce Birchall asked that all such positions be listed. I told him, 'there are much too many'. I put the problem to the Rules Commission, of which I was secretary. Igor Vereschagin RUS recommended, more or less that wording.

I have never heard anybody refer to a 'dead position'. Is it any wonder some have problems with the Laws?

I have raised the following before. I would like this anomaly to be removed from the Laws in the next edition.

1 e4 d6 2 Bb5+ f6 illegal White does not claim. Instead he plays 3 Qh5#.

[Geoff Chandler]

'They're Either Too Young Or Too Old' by Pearl Bailey

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xgitGbMiRlI

[Nigel White]

Question 5 from this week's edition of Round Britain Quiz: https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/m001m4fw

"Why might Sarah Mullaly and Paul Butler be mates with: someone playing the fool in Paris, a flag-carrier in Rome, a mobile home owner in Tbilisi, and one who never forgets in Moscow?"

[Geoff Chandler]

The Four Just Men in an episode called 'Money to Burn' first shown in the 17th February 1960. It was shown recently on the Talking Pictures channel.
Ben Manfred was Black and just played 1...Nf7 to g5. Jock played 2.Bxg5 and shouted Checkmate!
3kb2P/8/8/6n1/Q1R5/2N5/B4K2/2B5 w - - 0 1
No mistake, there was a white pawn on h8.

[NickFaulks]

"Why might Sarah Mullaly and Paul Butler be mates with: someone playing the fool in Paris, a flag-carrier in Rome, a mobile home owner in Tbilisi, and one who never forgets in Moscow?"

Did they get it? ( I expect they did ).

[Nigel White]

"Why might Sarah Mullaly and Paul Butler be mates with: someone playing the fool in Paris, a flag-carrier in Rome, a mobile home owner in Tbilisi, and one who never forgets in Moscow?"

Did they get it? ( I expect they did ).

Yes - eventually.