White to mate in 3 (SERIOUSLY HARD!!!)

Originally posted by BLReid
At the very least, there's nothing of value that you have to teach me.

For starters, I could teach you how to solve mate in 3's...

Originally posted by marinakatomb
I totally agree, the extra pieces are there to confuse. I would love to know the number of mates in 4!! They must run into the 30s-50s!!

It's generally considered bad form to have needless pieces in a chess composition, but certain composers like Sam Loyd often defied this convention...

Originally posted by BigDoggProblem
It's generally considered bad form to have needless pieces in a chess composition, but certain composers like Sam Loyd often defied this convention...

It works well here. It distracts the solver from realizing the zugzwang. The simple solution is always too tempting, that's why it took me so long to solve! It is also why i like it so much!! I love to see a position that grabs your attention. This one looks simple as pie at a glance, but in reality it is anything but.

What about Ne3?

Originally posted by FixarN
What about Ne3?

1.Ne3? Rd2!

LOL. Hey BDP... My my this position looks familiar to SM 😉

Originally posted by Mortadulo
LOL. Hey BDP... My my this position looks familiar to SM 😉

Was testing a theory...some in this thread have opined that having more pieces makes the problem more difficult. Judging from the SM thread, I don't think this is so...

Is there ever a good reason to have needless pieces in a chess problem? I haven't found it yet.

I think in SOME positions more pieces add to the intrigue of a position... If there are minimal pieces it is a lot easier to try every variation until you get it if you are truely stumped... Throw in a few extra pieces and those that do not understadn the theme are going to have to put in a lot more time figuring it out.

On the other hand... Lower rated players might give up with added pieces... Then again, quitters never become GM's either 😉 It's 50-50 😛

Originally posted by Mortadulo
I think in SOME positions more pieces add to the intrigue of a position... If there are minimal pieces it is a lot easier to try every variation until you get it if you are truely stumped... Throw in a few extra pieces and those that do not understadn the theme are going to have to put in a lot more time figuring it out.

On the other hand... Lower rat ...[text shortened]... give up with added pieces... Then again, quitters never become GM's either 😉 It's 50-50 😛

Can you find an example of a problem that is made better by having needless pieces on the board?