@tpr said in #24:
#21
"my puzzle would have to be chosen, wouldn't it?" * Do not think so.
"impossible scenario" * Both are legal positions, i.e. can result from the initial position with a series of legal moves. Both are unnatural positions, i.e. cannot result from the initial position with a series of reasonable moves.
"it requires an unnecessary move" * No.
"it could have been done in one less move" * No.
"move 2 squares for your initial pawn move" * No. Then there is no checkmate.
Aren't newspaper chess puzzles usually with no more than two moves for a checkmate? Yours has more than a dozen moves, so on that basis alone I think my puzzle would get chosen!
Also, maybe your puzzle has some hidden criteria? I think that it's demonstrably false that you can't initially move white's pawn two squares. Your puzzle is more of slideshow, showing how you want your puzzle to be solved. It would be more fun to let the user just be able to play with it. I wouldn't mind doing that...maybe I'll copy your puzzle just so that there is an interactive version of it, which you can play around with and no legal moves barred.
The initial starting position of your puzzle is very artificial. I had to create a similar artificial position in order to checkmate an 'AI' opponent with my 9 queens on the board and no missing pieces on my side, re https://lichess.org/forum/general-chess-discussion/anyone-played-this-ai-chess-app
You make a lot of assertions in your reply and I have to say that I disagree with them. Intuitively, looking at our two boards' starting position, you'd have to agree that mine looks closest to something which might have been arrived at by people playing chess. Your puzzle looks like something which could only arise by plonking pieces down in your starting positions*. There might be some sort of plausible scenario for my puzzle's starting position...maybe you can involve Magnus in that scenario. That wouldn't really work for your puzzle, I don't think. With your puzzle, it looks like you literally could have both sides make an infinite number of moves yet no progress being made. Sure, you can say that about any game but it applies to your puzzle more. You could illustrate that point by imagining which outnumbered side Magnus would prefer to play in an actual game. There's just nothing for him on your board...unless he counted on playing a blunderbuss.
Again, assertions are all very well and good, but to take this discussion to somewhere more interesting, we really need some visual recreation of how our two puzzles' starting boards came to be. Without that, it's just two people in a stalemate with differing opinions.
- The only scenario where a board like yours could be arrived at without being surprising would be if you had a blunderbuss playing against a team of LLM AI, with each AI controlling a piece. Then, sure...
@tpr said in #24:
> #21
> "my puzzle would have to be chosen, wouldn't it?" * Do not think so.
>
> "impossible scenario" * Both are legal positions, i.e. can result from the initial position with a series of legal moves. Both are unnatural positions, i.e. cannot result from the initial position with a series of reasonable moves.
>
> "it requires an unnecessary move" * No.
>
> "it could have been done in one less move" * No.
>
> "move 2 squares for your initial pawn move" * No. Then there is no checkmate.
Aren't newspaper chess puzzles usually with no more than two moves for a checkmate? Yours has more than a dozen moves, so on that basis alone I think my puzzle would get chosen!
Also, maybe your puzzle has some hidden criteria? I think that it's demonstrably false that you can't initially move white's pawn two squares. Your puzzle is more of slideshow, showing how you want your puzzle to be solved. It would be more fun to let the user just be able to play with it. I wouldn't mind doing that...maybe I'll copy your puzzle just so that there is an interactive version of it, which you can play around with and no legal moves barred.
The initial starting position of your puzzle is very artificial. I had to create a similar artificial position in order to checkmate an 'AI' opponent with my 9 queens on the board and no missing pieces on my side, re https://lichess.org/forum/general-chess-discussion/anyone-played-this-ai-chess-app
You make a lot of assertions in your reply and I have to say that I disagree with them. Intuitively, looking at our two boards' starting position, you'd have to agree that mine looks closest to something which might have been arrived at by people playing chess. Your puzzle looks like something which could only arise by plonking pieces down in your starting positions*. There might be some sort of plausible scenario for my puzzle's starting position...maybe you can involve Magnus in that scenario. That wouldn't really work for your puzzle, I don't think. With your puzzle, it looks like you literally could have both sides make an infinite number of moves yet no progress being made. Sure, you can say that about any game but it applies to your puzzle more. You could illustrate that point by imagining which outnumbered side Magnus would prefer to play in an actual game. There's just nothing for him on your board...unless he counted on playing a blunderbuss.
Again, assertions are all very well and good, but to take this discussion to somewhere more interesting, we really need some visual recreation of how our two puzzles' starting boards came to be. Without that, it's just two people in a stalemate with differing opinions.
* The only scenario where a board like yours could be arrived at without being surprising would be if you had a blunderbuss playing against a team of LLM AI, with each AI controlling a piece. Then, sure...