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

Only Chess Forum

  1. Standard member SwissGambit
    Caninus Interruptus
    05 Dec '12 06:02 / 2 edits
    This was played on a site where it's much easier to enter conditional moves (😳), but it's my personal record: a 14-ply sequence of conditional moves was played. It arose from a desperate position in an endgame:

  2. 05 Dec '12 06:11
    Nice! I just had one around 10-ply recently and I was pretty excited, but it was a mating line, and not anything as cool as a pawn race. But 14-ply is pretty rad.
  3. 05 Dec '12 06:24
    Swissgambit, would 1..b5; makes a difference??
    Instead of 1..Kd3? you think??
  4. Standard member SwissGambit
    Caninus Interruptus
    05 Dec '12 06:30
    Originally posted by jcmessy
    Swissgambit, would 1..b5; makes a difference??
    Instead of 1..Kd3? you think??
    [fen]8/1p1r3p/p4p1K/4p2P/2k3P1/2P2P2/1P3R2/8 b - - 0 1[/fen]
    No, I think ...Kd3 was right. ...b5 looks too slow. I think his error was 38...Ke3? instead of ...e4!
  5. 05 Dec '12 06:37
    I used to think conditional moves should be visible to the opponent. I thought of them as "if moves" from the old days. (I played a few matches by postcard years ago.) The logic of the "if move" was to speed the game along and save postage costs.

    Side story: My favorite postal game:



    Back now ... I viewed conditional moves as "if moves" when I started here. Now, I'm not so sure. Computers aren't really stamps. They have the capacity to do more things, so it's really not the same. Basically, you are just saving yourself time with a new technology.

    I'd be interested in whether or not older players think conditional moves should be visibile to the opponent.
  6. Standard member SwissGambit
    Caninus Interruptus
    05 Dec '12 06:44
    Originally posted by paulbuchmanfromfics
    I used to think conditional moves should be visible to the opponent. I thought of them as "if moves" from the old days. (I played a few matches by postcard years ago.) The logic of the "if move" was to speed the game along and save postage costs.

    Side story: My favorite postal game:

    [pgn]1.d4 g6 {If any 2. ... Bg7} 2.Bh6 Bg7 3.Bxg7 {Resi ...[text shortened]... ether or not older players think conditional moves should be visibile to the opponent.
    I played chess by snail mail before I played online or OTB, and it seemed a little weird that the opponent couldn't see the proposed conditionals in an online game at first. But it makes sense. I don't want to reveal my entire planned sequence of moves up front if I can help it. In postal chess, it was necessary if you wanted to use conditionals; online, it isn't.
  7. 05 Dec '12 06:46
    🙂
  8. 05 Dec '12 06:48
    By the way, I didn't play the postal game above. I just got a big laugh out of it when someone showed it to me. I think it was in one of the Check Is In The Mail columns from Chess Life.
  9. 05 Dec '12 07:09 / 1 edit

    I say Black in this Position after 1..b5 is slightly better over White.
    because it's only drawish, but not so clear.
  10. Standard member SwissGambit
    Caninus Interruptus
    05 Dec '12 07:39 / 1 edit
    Originally posted by jcmessy
    [fen]8/3r3p/p4p1K/1p2p2P/2k3P1/2P2P2/1P3R2/8 b - - 0 1[/fen]
    I say Black in this Position after 1..b5 is slightly better over White.
    because it's only drawish, but not so clear.
    That may be, but I still think ...Kd3 must be stronger than ...b5. Isn't black winning after ...Kd3 f4 e4! ?
  11. 05 Dec '12 12:46 / 2 edits
    My longest is 16 ply, on this site a few weeks ago. Game 9657301

    Black has just played 20 ... c6



    As a former postal player I can say it doesn't bother me that the opponent can't see the conditionals here. On RHP you have the option to remove them before they are accepted so the old advice not to use them doesn't hold. I can remember one opponent sent me a conditional along the lines of "If you are following the analysis given in John Nunn's The Complete Pirc page whatever it was - then I'm happy to go up to move 15!" I'm not sure how you could do that in the electronic age.
  12. Subscriber Paul Leggett
    Chess Librarian
    05 Dec '12 15:09
    Originally posted by SwissGambit
    That may be, but I still think ...Kd3 must be stronger than ...b5. Isn't black winning after ...Kd3 f4 e4! ?
    Just offhand, my first instinct would be to move the king and leave my b-pawn back, as I would prefer to reserve those pawn moves for when I might need them later. I have a quote from Jonathan Speelman about "Tempi must be hoarded" going through my head.
  13. 05 Dec '12 15:38
    Super Swindle SG. Deserves to be more well known.

    You could have built a blog around it.
    Show 2-3 studies with with pawns outpacing a King. (not the Ret one - too well known.)
    1-2 studies where pawns on the 6th beat a Rook

    Then 'Is This of any Practical Use?'
    You show your game.

    Too late now, it's mine.
    Danny Kopec has got me to do a re-write of my section in Master Chess
    (not a bad book that, it was re-published 21 times including translated into Spanish.)

    I am adding a section about Interent Tactics - this is in (PM what site it was on)
    as will be a fair few other RHP examples. Expect the new version to be out in February 2013.

    As an old postal player I welcome the hidden conditional moves.
    You could not have sent that line in the olden days as the player would see
    what you were up to.
    Hidden conditionals are good. It's a pity you cannot see what was a conditional
    move after it has been played. I bet some real howlers have been sent.

    My max is one move! I gave up a long time ago trying to guess what the
    lads on here will do next.

    I'm sure I would not have guessed White's 7th move.

    Bobla45 - SammyJ, RHP 2008


    It can also be tough guessing what is coming next in OTB play.

    D.James (2270) - D.Bisby (2120) Hastings 1995


    White has 33 moves that don't mate him in one move.

    He chose a 34th. Castles.


    And was duly mated with Qxh2.
  14. Standard member SwissGambit
    Caninus Interruptus
    05 Dec '12 16:30
    Originally posted by greenpawn34
    Super Swindle SG. Deserves to be more well known.

    You could have built a blog around it.
    Show 2-3 studies with with pawns outpacing a King. (not the Ret one - too well known.)
    1-2 studies where pawns on the 6th beat a Rook

    Then 'Is This of any Practical Use?'
    You show your game.

    Too late now, [b]it's mine.

    Danny Kopec has got me to do a ...[text shortened]... 2/2p1pP2/1p4B1/PbpP4/2N5/1P2BPPP/R2Q1RK1 b kq - 0 14[/fen]
    And was duly mated with Qxh2.[/b]
    Blogs about endgame studies aren't my thing. 😛

    Feel free to publicize for me if you wish. 🙂
  15. 05 Dec '12 16:38
    "Blogs about endgame studies aren't my thing."

    Well I'm not doing them, I'd screw them up.

    (I gave you your, to date, sole thumbs up, so your swindle is now mine.)