A Chess forum. ChessBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » ChessBanter forum » Chess Newsgroups » rec.games.chess.misc (Chess General)
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

What is more difficult, mating with bishop and horse, or winning withqueen against rook?



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old September 27th 17, 12:59 PM posted to rec.games.chess.misc
Eliyahu
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 80
Default What is more difficult, mating with bishop and horse, or winning withqueen against rook?

Bs"d

I know how to checkmate with horse and bishop against lone king, but with queen against rook is difficult, I still don't know it.

Which one would you says is more difficult to learn?
  #2  
Old September 28th 17, 12:09 AM posted to rec.games.chess.misc
Rainer[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 29
Default What is more difficult, mating with bishop and horse, or winningwith queen against rook?

On 27/09/2017 13:59, Eliyahu wrote:

Bs"d

I know how to checkmate with horse and bishop against lone king, but
with queen against rook is difficult, I still don't know it.

Which one would you says is more difficult to learn?


The latter is more difficult.

Back in the 1990s, I spent an afternoon practising KBN v K against
tablebase defence until I was able to deliver the checkmate with no more
than 30 seconds on the clock. It wasn't overly difficult.

KQ v KR is a completely different beast. Against best possible defence,
I might even have problems to find a win with 30 seconds per move but
finding the best defence is also much harder.

Cheers,
Rainer
  #3  
Old September 28th 17, 12:37 PM posted to rec.games.chess.misc
Eliyahu
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 80
Default What is more difficult, mating with bishop and horse, or winningwith queen against rook?

On Thursday, September 28, 2017 at 2:10:01 AM UTC+3, Rainer wrote:
On 27/09/2017 13:59, Eliyahu wrote:

Bs"d

I know how to checkmate with horse and bishop against lone king, but
with queen against rook is difficult, I still don't know it.

Which one would you says is more difficult to learn?


The latter is more difficult.

Back in the 1990s, I spent an afternoon practising KBN v K against
tablebase defence until I was able to deliver the checkmate with no more
than 30 seconds on the clock. It wasn't overly difficult.

KQ v KR is a completely different beast. Against best possible defence,
I might even have problems to find a win with 30 seconds per move but
finding the best defence is also much harder.



Bs"d

That's what I thought. And there is not even a decent youtube which explains you how to do it. It only goes in bits and pieces, you have to watch and learn a whole load youtubes to get it in your fingers.

Maybe chess is just too difficult for me. Maybe I should find another hobby, like knitting or something. Something useful might come from that one.
  #4  
Old September 30th 17, 06:18 AM posted to rec.games.chess.misc
M Winther[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 19
Default What is more difficult, mating with bishop and horse, or winningwith queen against rook?

On 28/09/2017 13:37, Eliyahu wrote:
On Thursday, September 28, 2017 at 2:10:01 AM UTC+3, Rainer wrote:
On 27/09/2017 13:59, Eliyahu wrote:

Bs"d

I know how to checkmate with horse and bishop against lone king, but
with queen against rook is difficult, I still don't know it.

Which one would you says is more difficult to learn?


The latter is more difficult.

Back in the 1990s, I spent an afternoon practising KBN v K against
tablebase defence until I was able to deliver the checkmate with no more
than 30 seconds on the clock. It wasn't overly difficult.

KQ v KR is a completely different beast. Against best possible defence,
I might even have problems to find a win with 30 seconds per move but
finding the best defence is also much harder.



Bs"d

That's what I thought. And there is not even a decent youtube which explains you how to do it. It only goes in bits and pieces, you have to watch and learn a whole load youtubes to get it in your fingers.

Maybe chess is just too difficult for me. Maybe I should find another hobby, like knitting or something. Something useful might come from that one.


There's no need to study KQ vs. KR. It seldom occurs, and if it does,
one must get closer with the king and try to separate the rook from the
enemy king. This enables one to capture the rook, typically by giving
check several times first.

Opening study is required.

Mats
  #5  
Old October 1st 17, 08:29 AM posted to rec.games.chess.misc
Paul
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 82
Default What is more difficult, mating with bishop and horse, or winningwith queen against rook?

On Saturday, September 30, 2017 at 6:18:13 AM UTC+1, M Winther wrote:
....
There's no need to study KQ vs. KR. It seldom occurs, and if it does,
one must get closer with the king and try to separate the rook from the
enemy king. This enables one to capture the rook, typically by giving
check several times first.

....

In the recent World Cup in Tbilisi, it occurred twice.
The detailed theory of the ending, as in Nunn's book Secrets of Pawnless
Endings, was required to win. Just knowing what you outlined is not
enough.

Paul


  #6  
Old October 1st 17, 05:49 PM posted to rec.games.chess.misc
Andy Walker[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 55
Default What is more difficult, mating with bishop and horse, or winningwith queen against rook?

On 01/10/17 08:29, Paul wrote:
On Saturday, September 30, 2017 at 6:18:13 AM UTC+1, M Winther wrote:
There's no need to study KQ vs. KR. It seldom occurs, and if it does,
one must get closer with the king and try to separate the rook from the
enemy king. This enables one to capture the rook, typically by giving
check several times first.

In the recent World Cup in Tbilisi, it occurred twice.
The detailed theory of the ending, as in Nunn's book Secrets of Pawnless
Endings, was required to win. Just knowing what you outlined is not
enough.


I agree with the last bit, but I'm less convinced that Nunn's
theory is needed. There is too much emphasis [IMHO] on perfect play
these days. There are enough moves "to spare" in the optimal lines
to allow for several sub-optimal moves, as long as they don't concede
too much. So there is scope for an algorithmic solution along the
lines of:

(a) If you can mate or win the R within N ply, then do so.
(b) Otherwise, if the position is in this database of P positions,
then play the move given in the database.
(c) Otherwise, reject any move that loses or draws within M ply.
(d) Otherwise, play the move suggested by the first of the following
heuristics to apply: (i) FOO, (ii) BAR, (iii) ....

In this, if N is large enough [60-odd], then this is a solution by
brute force search, but the expectation would be M == N == [say] 9,
being the sort of distance within which any competent player can spot
a forced win/draw/loss. Similarly, if P is large enough, then we are
back to the "optimal" tablebase solution, but you might need to learn
many thousands of positions, so we want to get P down to a handful
[perhaps ten?] of positions where the winning move is counter-
intuitive. FOO, BAR, ... would be the sorts of things Mats is
thinking of -- approach with the K, give a check that drives the
opposing K back, anything else you can think of.

Given a plausible set of FOO, BAR, ... and N, the database can
be constructed by brute force to search for a positions that isn't won
algorithmically, and adding it to the database, rinse and repeat until
all positions are correctly [not necessarily optimally] determined.

I did some work on this a few years back, but never managed to
get P below 1000, too many to memorise [but the heuristics alone still
do at least as well as the average GM]. An ability to detect that you
aren't making progress would be really helpful.

--
Andy Walker,
Nottingham.
  #7  
Old October 4th 17, 02:43 PM posted to rec.games.chess.misc
Eliyahu
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 80
Default What is more difficult, mating with bishop and horse, or winningwith queen against rook?

So queen against castle endgame is a bitch.

But then again; who said life is easy?
  #8  
Old October 6th 17, 12:02 PM posted to rec.games.chess.misc
Paul
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 82
Default What is more difficult, mating with bishop and horse, or winningwith queen against rook?

On Wednesday, October 4, 2017 at 2:43:09 PM UTC+1, Eliyahu wrote:
.... who said life is easy?

Many pop songs have the theme that life is easy, so the answer
is that many pop singers have.

Examples include the song that goes:
"I'm just sitting watching flowers in the rain
Feel the power of the rain
Making the garden grow."

and the one that goes

"That's why I'm easy
I'm easy like Sunday morning"

Paul
  #9  
Old October 6th 17, 12:05 PM posted to rec.games.chess.misc
Paul
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 82
Default What is more difficult, mating with bishop and horse, or winningwith queen against rook?

On Friday, October 6, 2017 at 12:02:40 PM UTC+1, Paul wrote:
On Wednesday, October 4, 2017 at 2:43:09 PM UTC+1, Eliyahu wrote:
... who said life is easy?

Many pop songs have the theme that life is easy, so the answer
is that many pop singers have.

Examples include the song that goes:
"I'm just sitting watching flowers in the rain
Feel the power of the rain
Making the garden grow."

and the one that goes

"That's why I'm easy
I'm easy like Sunday morning"


Or how about Ryan Paris's song "Dolce Vita" from 1983
which contains the lyrics:

"We've made it down in the Dolce Vita
Wipe all your fears away
We live it like in the Dolce Vita
A game of yesterday"

Paul

  #10  
Old October 7th 17, 02:18 AM posted to rec.games.chess.misc
Rainer[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 29
Default What is more difficult, mating with bishop and horse, or winningwith queen against rook?

On 06/10/2017 13:05, Paul wrote:
On Friday, October 6, 2017 at 12:02:40 PM UTC+1, Paul wrote:
On Wednesday, October 4, 2017 at 2:43:09 PM UTC+1, Eliyahu wrote:
... who said life is easy?

Many pop songs have the theme that life is easy, so the answer is
that many pop singers have.

Examples include the song that goes: "I'm just sitting watching
flowers in the rain Feel the power of the rain Making the garden
grow."

and the one that goes

"That's why I'm easy I'm easy like Sunday morning"


Or how about Ryan Paris's song "Dolce Vita" from 1983 which contains
the lyrics:

"We've made it down in the Dolce Vita Wipe all your fears away We
live it like in the Dolce Vita A game of yesterday"

Paul


Another old song. Not exactly pop music, but much closer to the essence
of KQ v KR:

Life's a bore but you have to live it
haven't got much but you've got to give it

Life's a lung and you're the cancer
always questions and never an answer

https://youtu.be/qlP43fiYNPs

Cheers,
Rainer
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 06:33 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 2.4.0
Copyright 2004-2017 ChessBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.