Now that's entertainment! Now that clandarkfire has added a cool one, others are going to add to this thread, and I'm going to have to check back hourly!
I'm almost at the point where I WANT someone to drag me out so I can participate in the chess finger-painting!
Originally posted by clandarkfire Here's another one I found: Game 7004487
I see the artist has been banned though; I'd don't know why.
I think that is one that I wouldn't mind my opponent forcing me to play out, simply because having to come back to the position that many times would really cement the B&N vs K into my mind.
I don't care about that ending all that much per se ( I have played over 1000 USCF OTB tournament games without it EVER occuring, or even being a possibility that I recall), but the choreography would be good tactical practice with minor pieces.
Just wanted to show my support! I read your latest entry with fascination so I really hope you stick with it. Your blog is great for the community too I hope you realize that. So many of us are humorless nerds... *sob*
Black lost two minor pieces to blindness. But with less pieces on the board, your remaining pieces have that much more mobility, like in billiards; or at least that's what I tell myself.
Black keeps posing questions until suddenly he has won.
Originally posted by Paul Leggett I think that is one that I wouldn't mind my opponent forcing me to play out, simply because having to come back to the position that many times would really cement the B&N vs K into my mind.
I don't care about that ending all that much per se ( I have played over 1000 USCF OTB tournament games without it EVER occuring, or even being a possibility that I recall), but the choreography would be good tactical practice with minor pieces.
As I've said before - learn ALL basic endings. I've won that one before in blitz. It is not hard. (Apparently, nothing is hard if you cheat but you should be able to learn that mate in a couple of days work and your increased understanding of the cooperation of B + N is worth the effort.)
[People that say you don't need to learn it are just too lazy to do the work.]
Originally posted by clandarkfire I'm too lazy to do the work.
Of course, you could argue that your time would be better spent learning something else. (If you're doing endings, rook endings seem most applicable.)
Yeah, I understand. Why would you need to know how a N and a B can work together? It is not like you start every game having Ns and Bs. I usually try to start with 6 Rooks.
Originally posted by clandarkfire I'm too lazy to do the work.
Of course, you could argue that your time would be better spent learning something else. (If you're doing endings, rook endings seem most applicable.)
I was thinking the same thing (that time on endings is most efficiently spent on endings more likely to actually be encountered, and it is less efficiently spent on endings less likely to be encountered), but I bit my tongue.
Six rooks would be nice, but I have spent some time on rook endings, and am now happy to report that I only need one to deliver mate (king sold separately).
One beneficial aspect of learning the B+N mate is that you're forced to look at which squares the pieces cover and can cover over the next few moves; rather than staring blankly at the squares the pieces are on. Your thinking also becomes more purposeful as you picture the mate and then work towards it.
19 Jul '10 21:33
To Resign or Not to Resign (latest blog)
Back to Top