2 edits
Originally posted by SquelchbelchI found this solution on one site.
[b]I have the Mammoth Book of Chess & it is quite old you know & engines have moved on in the last 9 years since my copy was published.
I know Burgess quotes Fritz 6 as being the latest & best commercial engine.
It could of course be that 1.Nxc5 is the best move as Burgess doesn't quote the "winning" line in the book!
A modern engine may well n 1 minute per move with top 2 moves.
White to play took the pawn, <1.Nxc5? Kf6>, after which White had no forced win and the game was ultimately drawn. But had Pachman postponed the pleasure of capture for some 14 moves, he would have had a stock win: 1.Ne1 Bc3 2.Nf3 Bd4 3.Nh4+ Kf6 4.Kh5 Bf2 5.Nf5 Bg1 6.Nh6 Bd4 7.Ng4+ Ke6 8.Kg6 Bg1 9.Nh6 Bd4 10.Nf7 Be3 11.Ng5+ Kd6 12.Kf5 Bd4 13.Nf7+ Ke7 14.Nxe5 .... .
So it seems that computers don't ultimately rule chess yet. But it increasingly seems inevitable.
Originally posted by Dana TurnmireI've been told that in that line 11...Kd6?? is not very good. Instead 11...Ke7 is forced and holds the draw. Maybe we're back on square one.
I found this solution on one site.
White to play took the pawn, <1.Nxc5? Kf6>, after which White had no forced win and the game was ultimately drawn. But had Pachman postponed the pleasure of capture for some 14 moves, he would have had a stock win: 1.Ne1 Bc3 2.Nf3 Bd4 3.Nh4+ Kf6 4.Kh5 Bf2 5.Nf5 Bg1 6.Nh6 Bd4 7.Ng4+ Ke6 8.Kg6 Bg1 9.Nh6 Bd4 10.Nf7 Be ...[text shortened]... yet. But it increasingly seems inevitable.[fen]8/8/6k1/2p1p3/2P1P1K1/3N4/8/b7 w - - 0 1[/fen]
Originally posted by YugaFrom this position:
11...Ke7 Kf5 Bd4 Nh7 Bc3 Nf6 Bd4 Ng4 Kd6 Kf6 Kd7
and now if Nxe5+?? Kd6
White to move:
[fen]8/3k4/5K2/2p1p3/2PbP1N1/8/8/8 w - - 0 17[/fen]
I still cannot find progress - I find that Black's King can reach b4 in time...
1. Nh6 Kd6 2. Nf2+ Kd7 3. Kf5!
Wins the pawn.
Originally posted by Dana TurnmireJust glancing at this -- not really analyzing it -- but here are my thoughts about the salient features of the position:
[fen]8/8/6k1/2p1p3/2P1P1K1/3N4/8/b7 w - - 0 1[/fen]
1 Nxc5? This move throws away the win! "White's c-pawn cannot be advanced to the queening square without the help of the king, but this allows Black to counter by attacking the e-pawn" - Pachman.
I have yet to find a chess program that does not throw away the win! Maybe I should let them analyze longer?
(1) White's knight can capture either Black pawn at any time, thereby giving himself a passed pawn on the cleared file. Black's king can stop the passed pawn from advancing, but only if it remains on its own side of the board.
(2) Neither of Black's pawns can advance, meaning that Black must move either his king or his bishop when it is his turn.
(3) Black's bishop can only continue to protect one (or both) of his pawns by remaining on the diagonal.
From (1) it may follow that White's king has the freedom to move backward and attack Black's bishop or else drive it off the diagonal from which it protects his pawns. If Black's king moves forward to f3 (the only square from which it can attack White's e-pawn) then White gains a passed pawn while being able to prevent the Black pawn from queening.
Just an idea.
Originally posted by Dana TurnmireHas anyone figured out whether this position is from an actual game, or a composed problem? It might be interesting to know what Pachman was thinking.
[fen]8/8/6k1/2p1p3/2P1P1K1/3N4/8/b7 w - - 0 1[/fen]
1 Nxc5? This move throws away the win! "White's c-pawn cannot be advanced to the queening square without the help of the king, but this allows Black to counter by attacking the e-pawn" - Pachman.
I have yet to find a chess program that does not throw away the win! Maybe I should let them analyze longer?
Originally posted by Mad RookSome references...
Has anyone figured out whether this position is from an actual game, or a composed problem? It might be interesting to know what Pachman was thinking.
http://rybkaforum.net/cgi-bin/rybkaforum/topic_show.pl?tid=9634
http://www.chesscafe.com/text/mueller43.pdf
And from these, it's Pachman - Hromadka, Prague Ch 1944
Originally posted by VarenkaThank you!
Some references...
http://rybkaforum.net/cgi-bin/rybkaforum/topic_show.pl?tid=9634
http://www.chesscafe.com/text/mueller43.pdf
And from these, it's Pachman - Hromadka, Prague Ch 1944
So Karsten Muller believes that it's a draw, even if White doesn't immediately grab the pawn.
1 edit
Originally posted by Dana Turnmire
1 Nxc5? This move throws away the win! "White's c-pawn cannot be advanced to the queening square without the help of the king, but this allows Black to counter by attacking the e-pawn" - Pachman.
I have yet to find a chess program that does not throw away the win! Maybe I should let them analyze longer?
I took another look at this position today. Using Pachman's comment as a starting point for strategic analysis, it seems clear that White must make the Black king yield. The only way to do that is to use the knight to put it in check, then move the White king to h5, repeat the check as necessary, move the White king to g6, etc.
This would seem to necessitate a kind of knight's tour along the general lines of Nc1-b3-a5-etc. to bring the knight round the back to a square from which it can check the Black king, perhaps while threatening the Black pawns (in order to keep the Black bishop in control while it shuttles around).
Anything wrong with this?
Originally posted by Mark Adkinshttp://www.chesscafe.com/text/mueller43.pdf
[fen]8/8/6k1/2p1p3/2P1P1K1/3N4/8/b7 w - - 0 1[/fen]
I took another look at this position today. Using Pachman's comment as a starting point for strategic analysis, it seems clear that White must make the Black king yield. The only way to do that is to use the knight to put it in check, then move the White king to h5, repeat the check as necessary, m ...[text shortened]... to keep the Black bishop in control while it shuttles around).
Anything wrong with this?
I have come to the conclusion that GM Pachman was mistaken in his analysis and GM Mueller is correct in that there is no winning position.
2 edits
Originally posted by Dana TurnmireWell, Mueller's scenario (it's not an exhaustive analysis) shows the knight approaching from the same side of the board as the White king. Mine has them approaching from opposite sides, and when the pair of White pawns controlling the b5, d5, and f5 squares is added, the result is a pincer effect that potentially controls more squares and has greater flexibility than the knight/king same side approach. Mueller's scenario also depends upon a highly context dependent move: 15...Kc7, and this (or something like it) might or might not work in the context of a best-play pincer attack by White.
http://www.chesscafe.com/text/mueller43.pdf
I have come to the conclusion that GM Pachman was mistaken in his analysis and GM Mueller is correct in that there is no winning position.