Please turn on javascript in your browser to play chess.
Only Chess Forum

Only Chess Forum

  1. 02 Mar '08 07:34
    "Place a white knight at b1 and a black queen at d4. The
    knight has to tour the board without ever being put en prise to
    the black queen or capturing it. It should visit squares in the
    order c1, e1, f1, h1, a2, c2, e2, g2, h2, a3 and so on to g8
    (h8 is controlled by the queen)."

    "The task may sound simple but is demanding on concentration,
    spatial aptitude, and willpower. Many people cannot even
    manage the first stage from b1 to c1, which takes nine steps.
    It is a timed test, so you need a watch as well as a
    chessboard and the two pieces."

    "Levitt says that anyone who can do the full tour in less than
    10 minutes at the first attempt has real aptitude. Michael Adams,
    a world title contender, took 5½ minutes, other GMs up to seven."
  2. Standard member hammster21
    Endgamer
    02 Mar '08 09:02
    11 minutes So close. That was freaking hard, although it got alot easier at the end. The first two rows took me 5 minutes, but after that I got used to the patterns and the fact that you use alot of the same squares. That was definitely an interesting challenge though. Anybody else try it?
  3. Standard member wormwood
    If Theres Hell Below
    02 Mar '08 15:48
    Originally posted by tomtom232
    "Place a white knight at b1 and a black queen at d4. The
    knight has to tour the board without ever being put en prise to
    the black queen or capturing it. It should visit squares in the
    order c1, e1, f1, h1, a2, c2, e2, g2, h2, a3 and so on to g8
    (h8 is controlled by the queen)."

    "The task may sound simple but is demanding on concentration,
    spatia ...[text shortened]... ptitude. Michael Adams,
    a world title contender, took 5½ minutes, other GMs up to seven."
    I wonder if this is an urban myth, because I've seen many different versions of this. and it just sounds so stupid, one problem to 'accurately' predict future success in a complex and multifaceted game like chess. I just don't buy it.
  4. 02 Mar '08 19:35
    Originally posted by wormwood
    I wonder if this is an urban myth, because I've seen many different versions of this. and it just sounds so stupid, one problem to 'accurately' predict future success in a complex and multifaceted game like chess. I just don't buy it.
    It doesn't predict future success really. You could do horribly at it now and end up a GM or you could do really good at it and never get past master...its really hard work that gets you there..but this probably is trying to show that if two people put the same amount of work in who would reach higher levels..and it doesn't really "measure" its just if you get it under ten minutes then you have aptitude. Having said that, I don't really know if it is true or not I just found it and posted it.