{In infra-functionaries (sometimes strangely called "provocative", which means nothing, while infra-functionary is symmetrical
of ultra-patrol, one wonders moreover why the patrol condition is less restrictive), one can play a unit without condition, it is
only to capture that one must be observed by an enemy unit.}
1.a2-a1=Q g7*f8=B
{a Queen promotion would activate the bQ, which would make the next move a self-check} 2.Qa1-h8 Bf8*h6 3.d2-d1=R f7-f8=S {}
4.Rd1-e1 Se2-d4+ 5.Re1-e5 Rc7-f7 { model stalemate.
Any move by the bQ would activate Rf7 or Nd6, which would then give check. A move by the
TN would allow the bQ to activate Nd4. And of course ...Kf6 would activate Rf7,
...Ke4 or ...Kg4 would activate Pf3. Two-color AUW.}
2 - serial h#3 disparates chess
Petkov, P.2010
white Pa7f4b3g2 Sd8b7 Ka2
black VAe4 LEg3 Kd5 LIh5 Ph7a6g6d4g4 ROb2
ser-h#3 disparates(7+10)4 solutions
b2: Rose🨺h5: Lion🨼e4: Vao🨐g3: Leo
a piece cannot play if an opposing piece of the same kind has just played
{}
{
If one side plays a piece, the opposite side may not play a piece of the same nature in reply.
Attention, it is a Rose on b2, a Vao on e4, a Leo on g3 and
a Lion on h5. In "normal" chess, if one can say with these strange
animals, there would be 4 mates in one move, 1 a8=X, X being one of these 4
fairy pieces. But in "disparate", a single move by the black figure in question
prevents the white figure from capturing the black king.}
1.LEg3-e1 {(Léo e1)} 2.LEe1-a1 3.VAe4-b1 a7-a8=WE# {Leo a1 is immobilised, he cannot, therefore, by playing any move,
paralyze his opponent a8}
1.VAe4-f5 2.VAf5-c8 3.ROb2-d7 a7-a8=WV# {Vao c8 is immobilised.}
1.ROb2-e5 2.ROe5-h8 3.LIh5-f7 a7-a8=WR# {Rose h8 is immobilised.}
1.LIh5-e8 2.LIe8-e1 3.LEg3-e3 a7-a8=WI# {Lion e1 is immobilised. Blocked units/blocking units cycle.}
3 - h#3 patrol
Von Meyenfeldt, FH.1979
white Sb6f6 Kc5
black Bg8a1 Kd3 Qe1 Pb3c2 Sf5 Rb4d4
h#3 patrol(3+9)
a piece can only capture if it is "observed" (patrolled) by a piece of its side
{Tries }
1.Rd4-d8 ? {would allow 4...Bxd5!, similarly} 1.Rd4-g4?{as opposed to} 1.Rd4-d6? {, it would allow 4...Rxd5!)
Note that if} 1.Rd4-h4 {, the rook is "patrolled" by Nf5 and thus prevents the passage of the king by d4.
Also } 1.Rd4-f4 {which "patrol" Nf5jeu réel}
1.Rd4-d7 ! Sf6-d5 {display-departure-file} {Pb3 prevents 2... Rb2 3 Kd4 Rb4+ 4 Ke3#.}
2.Qe1-e8 ! {(the only square: from e7, the bQ would support Rb4 and from e6,
it would support the Nf5)}
Kc5-d4! 3.Qe8-e1+! {(return, but not Qe3+? because wK, unsupported, could not capture this offered Queen)} Kd4-e3 #
4 - hs#6,5 Annan Chess
Bartel, E.2015
white Sd4f4 Ke4
black Kc4
hs#6.5 Annan(3+1)
: a unit catches the moving way of the friendly unit behind it
{ }
1...Kc4-c5 2.Sd4-e6 + {display-departure-file} Kc5-d6 3.Ke4-f5 + {+, the White King moving as a Knight. } Kd6-e5 + 4.Kf5-g7 Ke5-f5 5.Se6-f8 Kf5-g5 6.Kg7-h8 Kg5-h6 7.Sf8-h7 Kh6-g7 #
{ wK does not have access to its
only squares f7 & g6 !}
5 - PG 7,5 by quadruple check vertical cylindrical board
Caillaud, M.2016
white Bf1c1 Ke1 Qd1 Ph4a2b2c2d2f2g2 Sg1b1 Re6a1
black Bf8c8 Ka6 Qd8 Pa7b7c7d7e7g7h7 Sg5g8 Ra8h8
white Bc1f1 Ke1 Qd1 Pa2b2c2d2e2f2g2h2 Sb1g1 Ra1h1
black Bc8f8 Ke8 Qd8 Pa7b7c7d7e7f7g7h7 Sb8g8 Ra8h8
{ }
1.e2-e4 Sb8-a6 2.e4-e5 Sa6-g5 3.e5-e6 f7*e6 4.h2-h4 Ke8-f7 5.Rh1-h3 Kf7-g6 6.Rh3-e3 Kg6-h6 7.Re3-e2 Kh6-a6 8.Re2*e6 {++++ by quadruple check. Well, triple certainly, but Re6's "double" check is a bit of a strain !}
: the revival of a captured piece is at the discretion of the taker within the limits of the law
: to capture, you must be "observed" by a friendly unit
: Bouncer (1,3)
: Bouncer (2,3)
{}
a) {Camel e5}
1.nGd5-d2 nCAe5*d2[+nGd1] {(the neutral Camel, playing a white move, is supported by the white Queen)} 2.Kd3-d4 Qf5-d3#!
{(supported by the neutral Grasshopper d1, it does check, but the said Grasshopper, unsupported, cannot capture the Queen, nor can the Black King)}
1.Kd3-d4 Qf5*e5[+nCAd6] {(supported by the neutral Grasshopper d5)} 2.nGd5-d7 Qe5-d5 #{}
1.Kd3-c4 Qf5*e5[+nCAd7] 2.Kc4*d5[+nGd8] {(the bK is supported by the neutral Camel)} Qe5-d6 #{}
b) +nZe5 {zebra e5}
1.Kd3-d4 Qf5*e5[+nZf7] 2.Kd4*d5[+nGg8] Qe5-e6 #{}
1.Kd3-c4 Qf5*e5[+nZe6] 2.nGd5-f7 Qe5-d5 #{}
1.nZe5-g2 nGd5-h1 2.Kd3-e4 Qf5-f3 #{ Twice triple echo.}
{Attention, Kd7 is neutral. Illegal position, even in transmuted Kings (13 white holds)! Initially composed in 1989, but
finally corrected, except for this detail !}
1.nKd7-e7+ nKe7-e6+ {(the neutral K plays a black move, like a black pawn)} 2.nKe6*f7+ nKf7-f6+ {échec double} 3.nKf6-g8+
{(the neutral K, playing a white move, has the choice between playing a pawn move and a knight move, which he chooses)
(3 Rnxg7+? Cxh6!)}
nKg8-d5 {Rne6? 4 Rnxf5+ et mat au 7e} 4.Bh7-g8+! nKd5-e4+ {Rnh1? 5 Rng2+}
5.nKe4*f5+ nKf5*h6+ {double check} 6.nKh6*g4+ nKg4*h3 {the king is no longer in check...
he can now play a normal move !} 7.nKh3-g2+ nKg2-e1+ 8.nKe1*a5 # { : b7, c6, c4 & b3 are controlled.}
9 - h#2 Rifle Chess
Tritten, P.2016
white Pf3 Bg7 Re8d3 Kg3
black Pd6d5 Se6f6 Bb1 Ke5 Rf1
h#2 rifle(5+7)2 solutions
the capturing unit does so without moving, the captured unit disappears
{In "rifle", you capture without moving, as if you were "shooting" at the unit you want
to capture, which is disintegrated.} 1.Bb1-b1[-d3] Bg7-h8 2.Bb1-f5 {This move could have been played from d3 too.} Bh8-h8[-f6]# {}
1.Rf1-f1 [-f3] Re8-e7 2.Rf1-f5 Re7-e7 [-e6]# {
Note that it is not possible to reverse the two white moves : }
1.Bb1-b1[-d3] Re8-e7 2.Bb1-f5 Bg7-g7[-f6] {is not mat because of } 3.Se6-e6[-g7] {}
1.Rf1-f1 [-f3] Bg7-h8 2.Rf1-f5 Re8-e8 [-e6] {same punishment but by } 3.Sf6-f6[-e8]
Comments
1
Alain
On Monday, may 29, 2017
Je crois me souvenir qu'on donne bien la position finale (et donc c'est bien une PJ traditionnelle) car ce serait démoli avec l'énoncé "échec quadruple" contrairement au circé parrain du précédent cours. Le plus simple serait de demander à Michel, mais son emploi du temps draconien lui interdit visiblement de nous rejoindre.
2
Capron
On Monday, may 29, 2017
Problème Caillaud 2016. Y a-t-il échec double de la Te6 ?
Je n'ai pas d'avis sur la question, mais probablement la réponse est-elle "oui" puisque cela semble être l'avis de l'auteur, référence s'il en est !
Je me permets néanmoins une petite taquinerie :
A) Y a-t-il échec double de la Te6 ?
** Non, si pour définir le coup on ne considère que les cases de départ et d'arrivée.
** Oui, si on considère en plus le chemin emprunté pour effectuer le déplacement.
B) Donc, si il y a bien échec double, alors la solution présente un dual (véniel !) au 6eme coup !
Dernière remarque : pourquoi cet énoncé "PJ 7,5" que je trouve inadapté ?
Il me semble que "Echec quadruple en 7,5 coups sur échiquier vertical" me semble bien meilleur. On nous demande ici de trouver la position finale alors que dans une PJ, on nous la donne et on nous demande de trouver le chemin !
Comments
1 Alain On Monday, may 29, 2017
2 Capron On Monday, may 29, 2017
Je n'ai pas d'avis sur la question, mais probablement la réponse est-elle "oui" puisque cela semble être l'avis de l'auteur, référence s'il en est !
Je me permets néanmoins une petite taquinerie :
A) Y a-t-il échec double de la Te6 ?
** Non, si pour définir le coup on ne considère que les cases de départ et d'arrivée.
** Oui, si on considère en plus le chemin emprunté pour effectuer le déplacement.
B) Donc, si il y a bien échec double, alors la solution présente un dual (véniel !) au 6eme coup !
Dernière remarque : pourquoi cet énoncé "PJ 7,5" que je trouve inadapté ?
Il me semble que "Echec quadruple en 7,5 coups sur échiquier vertical" me semble bien meilleur. On nous demande ici de trouver la position finale alors que dans une PJ, on nous la donne et on nous demande de trouver le chemin !