Chess Masters: the Endgame

[Matt Mackenzie]

Maybe a second series might feature slightly stronger players, even if not top GMs?

[Christopher Kreuzer]

Maybe a second series might feature slightly stronger players, even if not top GMs?

Would be nice. But you would at some point as the strength increases have to explain what a draw is. Or engineer them out somehow.

[jholyhead]

The programme in this form likely won't bring in stronger players. They want blunders and elementary tactics that the viewer can understand. Their worst nightmare is a series full of opening theory, strategically winning positions with equal material, and rook endings.

We're not the audience.

That doesn't mean there isn't a format that would be appropriate for stronger players, but bake off wouldn't be bake off without the soggy bottoms, the apprentice wouldn't be the apprentice without brain-dead decision making and this wouldn't be Chess Masters the Endgame without the occasional mate in 1 blunder.

[NickFaulks]

That would be the puzzle that asks how many positions are there where you can put 8 queens on the board and have one or more squares not controlled by the queens?

EDIT: Found a position with 8 queens on the board, where there are six squares not controlled by the queens. Might be a maximal solution.

Interesting. I think the answer is 12 with seven queens, 10 with eight queens and 8 with nine queens.

In a mirror of the earlier and related puzzle, the odd numbers of queens are easier to work with, then you add or subtract.

[Christopher Kreuzer]

I am glad Nick F understood the new puzzle I had formulated (not the one John U was referring to).

My solution for 8 queens was to put them all on a1, a2, a3, b1, b2, b3, c1 and c2. How do you get a position with 10 squares not controlled by the queens?

EDIT 1: Oh, wait, do you put four in opposite corners? a1, a2, b1, b2, g7, g8, h7, h8? No, that is still only 6.

EDIT 2: Found it. a1, a2, b1, b2, a7, a8, b7, b8. The 6 uncontrolled squares are g4, g5, h3, h4, h5, h6.

But that is still 6 squares, not 10.

[Mark Hannon]

I enjoyed it, found the final very exciting maybe because of the exciting and music plus the fact it was the first decent hard fought game in the series (There was a quite hard fought 3pawns each game too between Kel and the Engineer from Iraq ). The different chess based puzzles and games were quite refreshing, while I wouldn’t go the whole Fischer 960 route to replace classical chess, it made the results much less predictable. Oh my days!

[LawrenceCooper]

https://www.chess.com/news/view/thalia- ... FEys1yNkQQ

[Mick Norris]

https://www.chess.com/news/view/thalia- ... FEys1yNkQQ

David Howell: "I’m extremely proud to have been part of this project. We gave everything to it. No matter what happens next, I’m glad that we tried. And we managed to put chess on national television screens! For the first time in too long. At primetime, no less.

It was an intense, intimate, and emotional experience, and I think we all learned a lot along the way. Obviously there were a lot of things we could have done differently, and stuff we could have improved, so hopefully we get a chance to go again…

My main passion these days is spreading the word of chess, so I’m hoping that this is just the beginning. If we inspired just a handful of kids to go out and play chess, then we’ve done our jobs.

A special shout out to Curve Media for taking on such an ambitious concept.

Above all, it was an honour to work alongside the contestants and see their journey throughout the series. Their excitement and energy was infectious, and it really reminded me of why I love chess in the first place. Congratulations to Thalia for winning the competition!"

[Dave Lightfoot]

I enjoyed the show.

Regarding stronger players. Has anyone streamed / remembers Checkmate, now on Amazon prime?

Pretty good show, would do well with a graphics overhaul.

[Paul Habershon]

Below in non-italics is a surprisingly generous Times review by Carol Midgley.
I largely concur, though I also agree with David Howell (above) that it was huge to get chess on prime time TV but also that much could be improved.

I think the most unfortunate aspect was to base elimination on the number of moves a player survived in the two simuls by Bodhana and David. You can play well but lose quickly in a thrillingly combative game and play badly and refuse to resign in a totally lost endgame.

I have long thought that TV producers think emotional breakdown makes good telly and will always choose clips in which an interviewee weeps. They duly captured Lula in the last episode emoting over her parents' support. I am old enough to remember Gilbert Harding (a celebrity on the panel game 'What's My Line?') being interviewed on a programme called 'Face to Face' by John Freeman. He broke down in tears when recalling the death of his mother. That made national headlines the next day, extraordinary that someone was caught crying on live TV. Nowadays it's commonplace and, in my opinion, occasionally an unnecessary intrusion on privacy.

(Review by Carol Midgley)
If the purpose of Chess Masters: The Endgame (BBC2) was to show that chess isn’t just for middle-aged nerds in cardigans staring at a board, then the finale did the job spectacularly. Spoilers ahead.

After eight weeks and many games, the competition was won by its youngest candidate, Thalia Holmes, 20, who with facial piercings and split-coloured hair confounded any “old fart” stereotypes. Leaping in the air in delight with the trophy, she declared it “probably the best day of my life”, which was a lovely thing to say. Richie Kelly, who, understandably, looked gutted that he had run out of time, had been beaten into second place.

Thalia’s moniker was the Tactician, while Richie’s was the Strategist, which I must say sound very similar, but then again throughout the series all the nicknames (the Smiling Assassin; the Unrelenting Warrior) have smelt suspiciously like they were made up for the purposes of the show. This series has had a difficult line to tread. It risked being not traditional enough for chess purists and not exciting enough for those who don’t play, despite the efforts of Sue Perkins to throw in some gags. Yes, it is a difficult game to televise, but it was a decent final and there is surely a place in the world for civilised, low-key TV.
★★★☆☆

[Nick Ivell]

That we did not see all the puzzles shows how profoundly unserious all this was.

I saw puzzle one and clearly Rxa6 was laughably easy. Then I found puzzle two harder. Not that it was intrinsically difficult - check and mate - but I am used to 2-movers that do not start with check!

As for the later puzzles, no idea as I saw nothing. No educational content whatever.

[NickFaulks]

My solution for 8 queens was to put them all on a1, a2, a3, b1, b2, b3, c1 and c2. How do you get a position with 10 squares not controlled by the queens?

Perhaps this should be a PM, since there may be only two people interested, but it's almost over!

That is the right idea, but there is a big improvement by moving the a3 queen, freeing three squares, to c3, where it costs none. You can then move the queen on c1, where it also controls three squares, to a variety of places which control only two.

I doubt that the resulting setup can be improved.

[Christopher Kreuzer]

That we did not see all the puzzles shows how profoundly unserious all this was.

I saw puzzle one and clearly Rxa6 was laughably easy. Then I found puzzle two harder. Not that it was intrinsically difficult - check and mate - but I am used to 2-movers that do not start with check!

As for the later puzzles, no idea as I saw nothing. No educational content whatever.

Paging Nick Ivell: puzzles to solve in Aisle 5!!

I have worked out what the puzzles were! (By laborious use of the pause button.)

No poll will be run to see which puzzle is the hardest, but you do see why they didn't use the additional footage that presumably exists of Thalia solving puzzles three and four and trying puzzle five.

Anyway, go and try them out! Nick, let us know if you find any of them educational.

ALL FIVE CHECKMATE PUZZLES FROM THE FINAL AND THE TIEBREAKER

[Nick Ivell]

Accepted apart from 5 because I prefer real-game positions.

Puzzle 3 took me about half a minute, because I was going down the false trail of smother rather than the non-intuitive a-file.

Puzzle 4 took me less than a minute; the main difficulty, if I am right, being the move which is NOT check (always much harder).

Educational? Yes, but I saw none of this last night and I don't have time to be Sherlock Holmes.

[Christopher Kreuzer]

Accepted apart from 5 because I prefer real-game positions.

Puzzle 3 took me about half a minute, because I was going down the false trail of smother rather than the non-intuitive a-file.

Puzzle 4 took me less than a minute; the main difficulty, if I am right, being the move which is NOT check (always much harder).

Educational? Yes, but I saw none of this last night and I don't have time to be Sherlock Holmes.

Interesting. I am presuming you have not even tried to solve puzzle 5 (or gave up)? Don't post the solution here! You can't really say that Puzzle 2 or Puzzle 4 are "real game positions" either. Puzzle 1 is a mating pattern, a fragment. Puzzle 3 is closest to a real game position, and also led me down the wrong path initially.

No-one is saying you were meant to see this last night. I agree that it was a big disappointment they chose to leave those out (this is perfect material for the 'full game' episodes). But then again, if you posted a genuine chess problem (of the sort seen at the World Chess Problem Solving Championships), most people would just stare blankly at the screen. I do hope they show more of this in the future, as some people are drawn to that side of chess and become deeply involved after that initial hook.