You are on the backup site for Chessvariants.com. Any posts, moves, or other changes you make here will not be permanent, because the pages and database from the main site will be backed up here every midnight EST. Additionally, things may not be working right, because this site is also a testbed for newer system software. So, if you are not here to test, develop, or merely read this site, you may want to change .org to .com in the navigation bar and go to the main site.



The Chess Variant Pages




[ Help | Earliest Comments | Latest Comments ]
[ List All Subjects of Discussion | Create New Subject of Discussion ]
[ List Earliest Comments Only For Pages | Games | Rated Pages | Rated Games | Subjects of Discussion ]

Single Comment

Kamikaze III. If the lone queen checks, she wins.[All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]
Jeremy Lennert wrote on 2011-10-12 UTC
Proving that red does not have a forced win would be equivalent to proving that white has either a forced win or a forced draw.  Even if that's true, it would be quite a lot of work to prove.  However, even if red has a forced win, the game might still be nontrivial if it is sufficiently long and complicated.  (Remember we still don't know for sure whether either player has a forced win in orthodox Chess.)

I'm pretty sure red can win within 3 moves if white opens with anything other than e3.  Most openings allow 1...Qe8, 2...Qxe+.  If 1.e4 then Qd4 threatens Qxd2+ or Qxf2+ and white can't block both.  If 1.d3 or 1.d4 (so the Bishop can jump in front of e pawn), then 1...Qh5 2.g4 Qxg4 and 3...Qxe2+ can only be stopped by 3.d3 Qh4+.

I'm not seeing any short forced win if white opens with e3, though there are several sequences red can try where white has to make exactly the right counter several moves in a row.

A computer could probably tell us by exhaustive computation whether red has a SHORT forced win, at least (say, within 10-20 moves).  Of course, that might be construed as 'ruining' the game.