So many puzzles have false mate motif

@AquilaReale64 said ^

Please read the thread

Please read the description of the mats. Opera checkmate is a problem where a rook that is protected by a bishop. This does not mean that the king should stand where he stood in the opera. The king can generally stand at the vertical edge. The descriptions are correct, everything is correct.

https://lichess.org/training/xL47h

@RemRus said ^

Please read the description of the mats. Opera checkmate is a problem where a rook that is protected by a bishop. This does not mean that the king should stand where he stood in the opera. The king can generally stand at the vertical edge. The descriptions are correct, everything is correct.

I understand that thinking is hard. People say that thinking can even be painful because the brain has to use a lot of energy. If you'd be so kind as to at least read https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Checkmate_pattern, then you'll see the full descriptions of the motifs, rather than the shortened versions shown here on the website. If you were able to think, maybe you'd understand what it is mate motif. Scientists say that thinking skills are developed during childhood. But if yours haven't been developed, don't worry—most people are just like you. And you more than make up for it with your self-confidence. And yes, as was correctly noted above, the puzzle is Vucovic mate.

You are on the Lichess website. Read the descriptions accepted on the lichess website.

@RemRus said ^

You are on the Lichess website. Read the descriptions accepted on the lichess website.

I'm starting to realize that people just like you are now the site's target audience. And it's for you and people like you all these new bells and whistles on website are being created. The website developers have identified their target audience. The desires and opinions of the target audience are not disputed.

@RemRus said ^

Please read the thread

Please read the description of the mats. Opera checkmate is a problem where a rook that is protected by a bishop. This does not mean that the king should stand where he stood in the opera. The king can generally stand at the vertical edge. The descriptions are correct, everything is correct.

https://lichess.org/t...

This is nothing like an opera mate even according to Lichess's definition:

The Opera Mate works by attacking the king on the back rank with a rook using a bishop to protect it. A pawn or other piece other than a knight of the enemy king's is used to restrict its movement. The checkmate was named after its implementation by Paul Morphy in 1858 at a game at the Paris opera against Duke Karl of Brunswick and Count Isouard, known as the "The Opera Game".

There is no pawn or other piece of the enemy king that is used to restrict it's movement in this instance.

@Bishop1964

https://kingdomofchess.com/blog/mayets-mate
This article also compares 4 different mating patters which can easily be confused with each other : Mayet's Mate, Opera Mate, Anderssens's Mate, Pillsbury's Mate

Why do I feel like this article is a neuroslop? I've tested various models in the past, and they were all really bad at chess, but who knows how they are now. Especially if someone has specifically trained them.

Historical game for Mayet's mate is this one : Nimzowitsch - Alapin 1914 : https://www.chessgames.com/perl/chessgame?gid=1102375

I really don't understand why a mate motif comes out of a game where neither of the opponents is Mayet (Karl Mayet).

The description of the Mayet's mate is wrong.

I checked Wikipedia source link: "Renaud, Georges; Kahn, Victor (1962). The Art Of Checkmate. Translated by Taylor, W. J. New York: Dover Publications; reprint of: Simon & Schuster (published 1953)". The book really have this diagram (example) as a Mayer`s mate. But, yeah, most of internet articles think another way.
I found practically no printed material on the subject of mate motifs. The ones that are available describe common patterns: Anastasias mate, arabic mate, Bodens mate and so on.

It seems to me that the whole problem is that the site's users really want to label the mate puzzle one way or another. In fact, there are far too many ways to checkmate to name them all or reduce them to a specific number of typical patterns. And this abundance of variations makes chess so beautiful. I also believe that motifs should serve some purpose: either to be aesthetically pleasing, like Anastasias mate, Bodens mate, or to teach something, such as ballestra mate, arabian mate, Vucovics mate which are common motifs in endgames. Or to show as common mistakes in the opening like operas mate. Or to show that pieces standing next to the king may not protect him, but instead help the enemy: smoothered mate, epaulette mate, swallows and dovetails mates. If a motif simply exists without serving any purpose, most likely because it is too broad, I don't understand its meaning and purpose.

@AquilaReale64 said ^

If you were able to think, maybe you'd understand what it is mate motif. Scientists say that thinking skills are developed during childhood. But if yours haven't been developed, don't worry—most people are just like you.

Gratuitously insulting fellow posters that keep on-topic and are respectful is not the greatest display of thinking skills.

@m011235 said ^

If you were able to think, maybe you'd understand what it is mate motif. Scientists say that thinking skills are developed during childhood. But if yours haven't been developed, don't worry—most people are just like you.

Thank you for the unexpected lessons in rhetoric and etiquette.
And thank you for the off-topic post, which still brings the thread to the top of the forum.
Please offer your assessment of a hypothetical person who refuses to understand what has been written or to delve into the issue, but insists that he is right (even providing a flawed example as proof).
P.S. I hope you've read the thread and can share your thoughts on the issue I raised in my first message in topic. I'd really like to hear your opinion.