Page 1 of 1

We have a chess queen, but do you know the queen of chess?

Posted: Tue Aug 11, 2020 10:10 pm
by Dann Corbit

Re: We have a chess queen, but do you know the queen of chess?

Posted: Wed Aug 12, 2020 6:06 pm
by Dann Corbit
Some of Gilbert's very long mate announements:
https://www.chess.com/blog/batgirl/mate-in-35

Re: We have a chess queen, but do you know the queen of chess?

Posted: Thu Aug 27, 2020 9:06 am
by corres
Dann Corbit wrote:
Tue Aug 11, 2020 10:10 pm
Yes.
Judit Polgar. She had OTB Elo 2710 - among men chess player. There is no lady with higher Elo.

Re: We have a chess queen, but do you know the queen of chess?

Posted: Thu Sep 17, 2020 4:55 am
by Uri Blass
About the mate announcements I doubt if all of them are correct.

I found no proof for the mate in 11 claim and I am also practically sure it was impossible without a computer to write a tree that proves the mate.

If somebody has not mate claim but proof that there is a forced mate with the relevant number of moves then it may be interesting to see the proof.

I doubt if it is practically possible to prove the long mate in 35 without a computer only with a pen and paper.

Re: We have a chess queen, but do you know the queen of chess?

Posted: Sun Sep 27, 2020 1:03 am
by MikeGL
Uri Blass wrote:
Thu Sep 17, 2020 4:55 am
About the mate announcements I doubt if all of them are correct.

I found no proof for the mate in 11 claim and I am also practically sure it was impossible without a computer to write a tree that proves the mate.

If somebody has not mate claim but proof that there is a forced mate with the relevant number of moves then it may be interesting to see the proof.

I doubt if it is practically possible to prove the long mate in 35 without a computer only with a pen and paper.
I remember Paul Morphy or was that Paulsen who, (according to a newspaper chess column) during a blindfold simul exhibition, announced mate higher than 10 moves.

Re: We have a chess queen, but do you know the queen of chess?

Posted: Tue Nov 17, 2020 7:04 am
by mhull
Uri Blass wrote:
Thu Sep 17, 2020 4:55 am
About the mate announcements I doubt if all of them are correct.

I found no proof for the mate in 11 claim and I am also practically sure it was impossible without a computer to write a tree that proves the mate.

If somebody has not mate claim but proof that there is a forced mate with the relevant number of moves then it may be interesting to see the proof.

I doubt if it is practically possible to prove the long mate in 35 without a computer only with a pen and paper.
But there have been chess compositions at depth 11. Some years ago I posted a puzzle from something like a 1910 American Chess Bulletin that had all the pieces on the board. White OR Black to play and mate in 11 moves. The problem was dubbed "The Kaleidoscope".

That's from the early 20th century.

The problem was examined by the Chest problem solver. One of the mates was proved shorter by one move, if memory serves. Pretty amazing.

I still have the American Chess Bulletin with that chess problem. I can reproduce it if anyone cares.