Talk:Saavedra position
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Beautiful study by Liburkin. If that only won second prize in the competition, the first-prize winner must have been a real stunner. Krakatoa 03:10, 17 November 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Why move into a shorter forced mate?
When strictly analyzed, the Saveedra position is a forced mate in 26 for White, not in 12 moves as the article suggests. This is because Black has the option 3...Kb2. Then White must promote the pawn into a queen. This data is available in all endgame tablebases and easily explorable, for example, here. Shouldn't this be discussed in the article? I admit it sort of ruins the fun in it, but hey, what can you do? --ZeroOne 19:35, 14 May 2006 (UTC)
- You are right. I'll add it. I wish I could find a reference, other than referring to a tablebase, but I couldn't find one. Bubba73 (talk), 03:39, 5 June 2006 (UTC)
-
- Correct but naive. Do you really think no one noticed this possibility 116 years ago? This is an endgame study; lines that immediately result in a obviously theoretically lost position are considered sidelines, even when resistance is prolonged. Tablebases have of course modified the definition of "obvious." Billbrock 04:00, 12 July 2006 (UTC)
-
-
- Since I hadn't heard it mentioned elsewhere (and I looked up several sources), I did assume that people had missed it, and that it had just been discovered with tablebases. I was wrong to assume that. (Also, I'm usually not that interested in compositions/studies or familair with their rules. I plead ignorance.) I agree with your changes. Bubba73 (talk), 04:29, 12 July 2006 (UTC)
-
-
-
-
- OK. Given consensus, the third paragraph should probably be pulled back or moved in the article, but I'll let s/o else do that. Billbrock 14:15, 12 July 2006 (UTC)
-
-
