@MrPushwood obviously there are people who are helping, of course there are also people like you making bad jokes all day and not helping anybody. Please stop harrassing me.
@sgtlaugh said in #8:
> I don't know about the hardest, but this was a hard one for me. I usually struggle with puzzles like this - lichess.org/training/rUgbj
this is the reason why i dont like puzzles here, no one finds nd8, its so unhuman, thats why i prefer doing on chesstempo cos they are instructive cos they are manually chosen by humans
> I don't know about the hardest, but this was a hard one for me. I usually struggle with puzzles like this - lichess.org/training/rUgbj
this is the reason why i dont like puzzles here, no one finds nd8, its so unhuman, thats why i prefer doing on chesstempo cos they are instructive cos they are manually chosen by humans
@dr-bongstein said in #12:
> this is the reason why i dont like puzzles here, no one finds nd8, its so unhuman, thats why i prefer doing on chesstempo cos they are instructive cos they are manually chosen by humans
Chesstempo is good. I used to practice there before Lichess. However, I enjoy doing puzzles here. These puzzles are automatically extracted from real-life games between users. So these are positions that can and do occur during play. Sometimes, these unhuman or engine-like moves can help improve and broaden your mindset. Sure, finding a crazy tactic to win material and checkmate the opponent is fun, but you won't always get such opportunities in games. So playing for long term advantage often helps improve your overall level.
> this is the reason why i dont like puzzles here, no one finds nd8, its so unhuman, thats why i prefer doing on chesstempo cos they are instructive cos they are manually chosen by humans
Chesstempo is good. I used to practice there before Lichess. However, I enjoy doing puzzles here. These puzzles are automatically extracted from real-life games between users. So these are positions that can and do occur during play. Sometimes, these unhuman or engine-like moves can help improve and broaden your mindset. Sure, finding a crazy tactic to win material and checkmate the opponent is fun, but you won't always get such opportunities in games. So playing for long term advantage often helps improve your overall level.
@CheerUpChess-Youtube said in #1:
> Hey I am thinking about creating a blog on this topic and also want to know myself: Can I solve every puzzle with enough time given? Or will I simply fail at some?
In theory, you could solve every mate in N by just trying every possible move. But this quickly become unfeasible if N gets larger, and if there are more pieces on the board.
However, that doesn't help with problems of the form "white to play and win". You don't know how deep you have to go. Furthermore, even if you know white is going to have a decisive advantage after N moves, you may lack the insight to decide whether in a given position white has a decisive advantage.
> Please post the hardest puzzle you can think of (something where the solution is about 5-10 moves deep) and the side you play has to find the winning advantage (not draw)
I just happened to watch a YouTube earlier today about "infinite chess" (chess on an boundless board). It mentioned people have created "mate in w" puzzles (where w is lower case omega, indicating the smallest infinite number). You certainly won't be able to solve that by trying out all possible moves.
> Hey I am thinking about creating a blog on this topic and also want to know myself: Can I solve every puzzle with enough time given? Or will I simply fail at some?
In theory, you could solve every mate in N by just trying every possible move. But this quickly become unfeasible if N gets larger, and if there are more pieces on the board.
However, that doesn't help with problems of the form "white to play and win". You don't know how deep you have to go. Furthermore, even if you know white is going to have a decisive advantage after N moves, you may lack the insight to decide whether in a given position white has a decisive advantage.
> Please post the hardest puzzle you can think of (something where the solution is about 5-10 moves deep) and the side you play has to find the winning advantage (not draw)
I just happened to watch a YouTube earlier today about "infinite chess" (chess on an boundless board). It mentioned people have created "mate in w" puzzles (where w is lower case omega, indicating the smallest infinite number). You certainly won't be able to solve that by trying out all possible moves.
@Abigail-III said in #14:
> In theory, you could solve every mate in N by just trying every possible move. But this quickly become unfeasible if N gets larger, and if there are more pieces on the board.
Of course I am not trying out every single move, only in my head, but not on a board, that would be cheating.
> You don't know how deep you have to go.
Oh yes, most of the time you know. You have to go so deep that you know most strong players could win it easily from there. But of course it would be useful to know more or less how deep to go. Well in the worst case you have to play it out in your head until the endgame lol.
> you may lack the insight to decide whether in a given position white has a decisive advantage.
That is absolutely correct! That is why I want to test this out in praxis.
> I just happened to watch a YouTube earlier today about "infinite chess" (chess on an boundless board). It mentioned people have created "mate in w" puzzles (where w is lower case omega, indicating the smallest infinite number). You certainly won't be able to solve that by trying out all possible moves.
I am not sure what you mean by that. But please just send me "impossible" puzzles. The only exception is that I don't want to solve some checkmate in 250 moves puzzle right now xD
> In theory, you could solve every mate in N by just trying every possible move. But this quickly become unfeasible if N gets larger, and if there are more pieces on the board.
Of course I am not trying out every single move, only in my head, but not on a board, that would be cheating.
> You don't know how deep you have to go.
Oh yes, most of the time you know. You have to go so deep that you know most strong players could win it easily from there. But of course it would be useful to know more or less how deep to go. Well in the worst case you have to play it out in your head until the endgame lol.
> you may lack the insight to decide whether in a given position white has a decisive advantage.
That is absolutely correct! That is why I want to test this out in praxis.
> I just happened to watch a YouTube earlier today about "infinite chess" (chess on an boundless board). It mentioned people have created "mate in w" puzzles (where w is lower case omega, indicating the smallest infinite number). You certainly won't be able to solve that by trying out all possible moves.
I am not sure what you mean by that. But please just send me "impossible" puzzles. The only exception is that I don't want to solve some checkmate in 250 moves puzzle right now xD
White to move an win. Make 23 only-moves in a row.
lichess.org/analysis/8/8/7p/7n/k7/8/2K5/3R4_w_-_-_0_1
Surprisingly, engines solve this pretty easily, even without tablebases.
lichess.org/analysis/8/8/7p/7n/k7/8/2K5/3R4_w_-_-_0_1
Surprisingly, engines solve this pretty easily, even without tablebases.
lichess.org/analysis/rn3R2/pp3Np1/4p3/3NP2p/2p3kP/1P2B3/P4nK1/q7_w_-_-_0_1?color=white#0
Forced checkmate in 16 moves.
source : chesspuzzle.net / game Szabo - Stepanenco played in the Romanian championship 2023
Forced checkmate in 16 moves.
source : chesspuzzle.net / game Szabo - Stepanenco played in the Romanian championship 2023
@corvusmellori @Bishop1964
Actually I have said something that is 5-10 moves deep, because when going over 10 moves it not only gets hard to calculate, but mainly it also becomes a visualization problem! Now I will still try to maybe solve them as they both look very interesting - however I think that a puzzle that goes 15 to 25 moves deep might aswell take me a month to solve.
Now the endgame position kind of looks important and if Bishop says the checkmate is forced that might be interesting aswell. So I will at least give it a try. For further posts please consider that I said 5-10 moves deep, which is very deep already. Now the point here is to find out if a human can solve every puzzle problem, not to become a cyborg xD Still thank you for your interesting examples, I will give it a try, because I feel challenged :P
Actually I have said something that is 5-10 moves deep, because when going over 10 moves it not only gets hard to calculate, but mainly it also becomes a visualization problem! Now I will still try to maybe solve them as they both look very interesting - however I think that a puzzle that goes 15 to 25 moves deep might aswell take me a month to solve.
Now the endgame position kind of looks important and if Bishop says the checkmate is forced that might be interesting aswell. So I will at least give it a try. For further posts please consider that I said 5-10 moves deep, which is very deep already. Now the point here is to find out if a human can solve every puzzle problem, not to become a cyborg xD Still thank you for your interesting examples, I will give it a try, because I feel challenged :P
This one is hard
White to move, mate in one.
White to move, mate in one.
@Mr_Kuryakin I HATE EN PASSANT PUZZLES. dxe6! Please don't ever do this again. It's not funny xD Okay maybe it is, but please don't do that to me, thank you xD
This topic has been archived and can no longer be replied to.