Chess Riddle

the game played out as follows:

1 Nc6 Nc3 2 Ne5 Nf3 3 Nd3++

how is it that this game is over so quickly?

(yes; this is a legal win; as it does not violate any of the rules for checkmate)

Because this is a wild game. The black king sits at e1 not e8 as it usually does. The black pawns capture towards the bottom of the board, such that they cannot take the Nd3. They are one square away from promoting.

the moves that you gave kinda gives the answer away don't you think?

legal win, impossible position

Originally posted by Sam The Sham
legal win, impossible position

sometimes it helps to read the previous posts 😉

Originally posted by crazyblue
sometimes it helps to read the previous posts 😉

Sometimes it helps to know what you're talking about. It is an impossible position that can't occur in a game. What's your point?

Originally posted by Sam The Sham
Sometimes it helps to know what you're talking about. It is an impossible position that can't occur in a game. What's your point?

By "reading previous posts" I meant Dejections posting. As he said, it is a "wild" game. This is a certain variation of chess with a different starting position. I play it myself on fics server sometimes. So it definitely can occur in a legal game.

Originally posted by crazyblue
By "reading previous posts" I meant Dejections posting. As he said, it is a "wild" game. This is a certain variation of chess with a different starting position. I play it myself on fics server sometimes. So it definitely can occur in a legal game.

"Wild" chess with different starting positions are not legal games. They are not Orthodox Problems which assume a legal starting position. Neither the pawns or the pieces in the problem can be where they are, all I did was point that out, since it wasn't given in the problem and was basically a cheapo, hoping the solver wouldn't notice the misplaced Queens and Kings and assume it was a standard opening array. Then you came along and made a big deal out of it and claimed I hadn't read the previous post.
Enjoy your problem. I'm done here.

hey relax, i didnt mean any offense. i guess its just a matter of definition. i played it in a legal game, so to me its a legal position. but thats just my opinion. 🙂

Originally posted by crazyblue
hey relax, i didnt mean any offense. i guess its just a matter of definition. i played it in a legal game, so to me its a legal position. but thats just my opinion. 🙂

it is a matter of definition. it is the matter of who is entitled to give the definition. if it is not according to the FIDE tournament rules it is not a legal game.

when i was young i played games where white is required to make two moves on match start, followed by two moves of blacks. it doesn't make it a legal game.

Originally posted by Zahlanzi
it is a matter of definition. it is the matter of who is entitled to give the definition. if it is not according to the FIDE tournament rules it is not a legal game.

when i was young i played games where white is required to make two moves on match start, followed by two moves of blacks. it doesn't make it a legal game.

Nobody is claiming that this is an orthodox chess problem. The game is obviously a chess variant: a game, otherwise resembling chess, in which some of the rules are deliberately changed [in this case, the starting position].

The legality arguments in this thread are thus a total waste of breath.