Originally posted by SwissGambitI wonder why Kasparov is 'always' mentioned in relation to that problem - is he such an expert on solving this type of problem then, I never heard of a fiendishly difficult problem with the addition that 'Kasparov solved this in under 1 minute'.
In addition to that thread, there's the one that stumped Kasparov:
Originally posted by heinzkatIf Kasparov solves a problem in one minute, he is only doing what he is expected to do. If he fails, on the other hand, the solver is enticed with the notion that he can do something in chess that Garry Kasparov can't.
I wonder why Kasparov is 'always' mentioned in relation to that problem - is he such an expert on solving this type of problem then, I never heard of a fiendishly difficult problem with the addition that 'Kasparov solved this in under 1 minute'.
Originally posted by heinzkat"Series selfmate in 42" sounds scary. "Black mates on the 5th move" sounds innocent.
'he is only doing what he is expected to do'
Yes, that was my concern, I mean, has Kasparov solved that problem 'series selfmates in forty-two moves' in a minute? (I guess he hasn't, perhaps he hasn't even seen it, no-one knows)
I think most people just assume that Kasparov can solve most chess problems without realizing that solving is a somewhat different skill than playing [with the degree of difference depending on what type of chess problem is being solved].