DKW's all-purpose chess thread

The Game Room
1

Hi. Over the past few years, there’s been a lot of fun stuff that’s disappeared from my life…video rentals, game rentals, pretty much anyplace to buy comics, all but one bookstore, all the good arcade games, freeways that aren’t overstuffed nightmares…and long story short, I’m thinking of getting kinda into chess again.

Now, a disclaimer: I’m not interested in playing a full game, and I sure as hell don’t give a damn about getting any good. Mainly because I’m resigned to the fact that it’s just not going to happen, and even if I did have the desire to spend the months and months and months and months and months of back-breaking effort to reach the level of, oh, let’s call it “mediocrity”, the energy just isn’t there. (The same reason I never got any good at fighting games, BTW, but that’s another topic.)

The three things I’m looking for in particular, right now, are:

  1. A quality chess program,
  2. books about the subject that won’t bore the everloving crap out of me, and
  3. websites that might have some fun discussions.

For #1, the things that are absolutely required are the ability to set up positions and/or problems (pretty much the only “games” I’ll ever bother with) and a large library of classic games. Lots of different boards and pieces and funny animations are a plus, but not absolutely required. Seriously, I reached the point where watching someone else play is a helluva lot more enjoyable than playing myself. (Not unlike fighting games.) I was able to find something called Chessmaster 10th Edition, but for some reason am completely able to reach any kind of webpage where I can actually buy the dang thing. Oh, and just so we’re clear, PC only. I’m not buying a PS4 for a freaking chess program.

As for #2, I recently ordered Raymond Smullyan’s two “retrograde analysis” (where you start with a given position and have to determine a certain aspect of the gameplay up to that point…whose move is it, can this side castle, is a certain piece original or promoted, etc.) books, The Chess Mysteries of Sherlock Holmes and The Chess Mysteries of the Arabain knights. Not my cup of tea, but I liked reading the stories. I also ordered Chess to Enjoy, one of my favorite chess books ever as a kid. It had all kinds of weird problems like a triple checkmate after promoting two pawns to Black kings, defeating the entire Black force with a single pawn, a 50-move win where the king crosses the entire board 3 times, a solution with 11 straight double checks, etc. Anyone else can recommend any other books of this ilk that are not about lessons and brilliancies and tactics and positions and tempos and swindles and zugzwang and lessons and good lord, it’s 2015, why is every single freaking chess book still like this??

#3…well, just to give an example, there was a previous lengthy discussion here about stalemate, which led to the Wikipedia page, which I found absolutely fascinating (I’m definitely going to try out that 10-move stalemate sometime!). That, in turn led to the endgames page, which had, among other things, a theoretical 549-move win. That’s what I’m looking for, all the neat, cool, amazing, or just plain weird stuff. Variants, fantastic. Oh, and if anyone can point me to an actual game that was actually played under one of these variants, that’d be even better. I always found it sad that the old, staid game is so sacrosanct and inviolable and holy and untouchable that all these variants exist and no one freaking talks about them ever.

And while I’m on the subject, what’s going on with the super-advanced chess computers? The last I heard was that Deeper Blue won one match against one player under very sketchy circumstances, including what may have been an instance of outright cheating, and that proved that machine had surpassed man and Skynet and Robotron and we’re all doomed auuuugh, and, the matter being duly settled, no one ever spoke of it again. Then I hear of something called Houdini, which is so powerful that several top grandmasters have faced it and no one has ever won. How is it that I had to dig up an old thread on this board to learn this? You think it’d be pretty big news. Any hard information would be much appreciated.

2

For the last question, it wasn’t a single moment but rather a slow progression. Top computers got increasing capable of beating top humans, and in November 2005 a human beat a top computer for the last time. Like with the moon landings, the first incident got a ton of press and everything after received but a fraction.

The reason that computers of all stripes are now so good is basically one of marketing and curiosity as to what is possible; people want to buy the ‘best’ chess software as measured by rating, so programmers focus on that, even though most any program would be sufficiently strong for any amateur player. There’s also the fact that all chess software has a common structure (top programs need to squeeze everything they can out of the CPU, and there is generally one optimal method) that makes it relatively easy to write, as compared to something like a word processor or a web browser. So you’ve got high demand for strong chess engines along with relatively low barriers to entry, which accounts for the explosion in performance.

3

I typed “grandmasters versus chess computers” into Google, and got the Wikipedia article, “Human-Computer Chess Matches.” Short answer: computer chess programs can now kick anyone’s butt. As of 2009, a chess program running on a freakin’ cell phone was playing at a high grandmaster level.

If computers ever start caring whether they’re turned on or off, we’re doomed. :wink:

4

My answer to #2 would be Winning Chess by Reinfeld and Chernev. It’s the book that took me from kinda floundering in the middle game, to actually being effective there, and added a few hundred points to my USCF rating as a result. And it’s also the least boring chess book I’ve ever read.

The authors were big fans of “moves that smite” as a way of narrowing down the possibilities to a limited number of genuinely useful possible moves, so that you could think them through and see what was coming. In this context, they showed how to set up and use pins, forks, discovered attacks, and the like.

The original version, “Winning Chess: How To See Three Moves Ahead” has been out of print forever, but is available used. It’s also in old-fashioned descriptive notation (1 P-Q4, N-KB3 instead of 1 e4, Nf6). But I mention it because it’s got 48 reviews on Amazon - 47 five-stars, and one 4-star review. So it’s not just my opinion that this is a great book.

An update, “Winning Chess: How to Perfect Your Attacking Play” is now in print and available through Amazon and elsewhere. Other than updating to algebraic notation, I don’t know what changes were made. It still lists Chernev and Reinfeld as the authors, even though they’ve both been dead for decades, so I assume any other changes were minimal.

5

For your third question, you may already be aware of it as it may be where you saw the 549 move endgame, but I would say Tim Krabbe’s Chess Curiosities should be right up your street. It’s not updated as often as it used to be, but there is a huge amount of material there, all of which is worth reading and re-reading in my view.

6

Yeah, Tim Krabbe’s site is great for the type of thing you describe.

There are several chess sites that you might be interested in. Chess24.com is a fairly new one that offers a lot: tactics puzzles, articles, commentary on current tournaments, etc. For example right now the Women’s World Championship is on, and the site is broadcasting the games with video commentary and computer evaluations of all the games. They charge for access to some stuff, but a good amount of what’s offered is free.

Also chessbomb.com and chess.com have some similar stuff.

7

You might want to check out books by Silman, I really enjoy his work.

Any program will be super powerful and great for quick blunder checks of games. I’m still running Fritz 8 and have not seen a need to upgrade.

Chessgames.com is good for discussion of games and players in the kibitzing section.

You tube has lots of good chess videos (and lots of crap). The St. Louis chess club is a good place to start looking for you tube videos. Greg Shahade has a wonderful series of online blitz games in which he free associates his thoughts about the game as he plays. That is a favorite of mine. It can also be entertaining to watch videos of top players in blitz games – good fun factor there.

With online play you can get any type of game almost anytime, ranging from light blitz to long serious games. I play at playchess.com but there are lots of free sites too.

8

I came in to say the same thing! Easiest access to chess tactics available – even if you have to resort to a used (or library) copy.

9

Nice suggestions. Thanks as always. For the program, I’ve decided to go with Chessmaster 10th edition (out of print, had to get used) unless something better comes up, which looks unlikely. I already tried the demo, and it was all right.

Another question: Is there any particular reason that algebraic notion has become something of the international standard? Personally, I’ve always had a soft spot for descriptive notation; it’s elegant and just plain sounded nice. If we really needed a switch to something simple and understandable to everyone, the obvious answer would be coordinate notation…e2-e4, g8-f6, a7xb8, etc. (In fact, you pretty much have to use a variant of this for international audiences The weird thing about algebraic is that the piece being moved is always indicated, but the destination is always a coordinate whether or not there’s a capture. Also, captures are still indicated by x, but moves are indicated by nothing. That always struck me as…well…arbitrary. And now everyone uses it. The only advantage I could see for this is that it’s possible to say the moves really, really fast (“bishopeffsixrookeeeightrookdeeonepawntakesdeefour knighttakesdeefourqueentakesdeefourpawntakesaichfive”); why this would matter for chess, I have no idea. Heck, when Bennett Foddy made his “Speed Chess” program, which requires machinegun dictation, he went with a modified descriptive. Just no substitue for “Queen takes king, checkmate!” (Oh, uh, in his program you need to capture the king to win. Here, see for yourself.

Incidentally, you know any other websites with completely nonserious stuff like this, that’s the YouTube stuff I’m looking for. I remember a 3-move checkmate after black plays Ke7 on the second move, but I can’t find it. I think it had “TAS” in the title.

10

Can’t help you with the website, but in the unlikely event you are just looking for the helpmate, it would be:

  1. e4 e5
  2. Qh5 Ke7
  3. Qxe5#
11

Okay, Chess to Enjoy finally arrived. This, actually, more than anything, is what convinced me to make another attempt at having some fun with this game. The links you’ve all given me are okay, but I’d like to get into some specifics. Does anyone have any books, sites, discussions…anything, about the following:

Sui-mate - Force the opponent to checkmate you. I’ve seen this in at least one book.

Retroanalysis - As seen in The Chess Mysteries of Sherlock Holmes and The Chess Mysteries of the Arabian Knights. You’re presented with a certain (often highly weird-looking) position and are asked to deduce something about it…can Black castle, which space is the king supposed to be on, is the missing piece White or Black, etc. The only other problem I’ve seen is that one on Grey Labyrinth.

Reconstruction - Similar to retroanalysis, except that you’re presented with a certain stated position, say, a White queen on the Black queen starting square and vice-versa, and have to create that position in the fewest move possible. Chess to Enjoy even starts with one, put a White rook on h8 and a black rook on h1 in only 5 moves. The solution is 1. h4 a5 2. h5 Ra6 3. h6 [anything that permits the next move] 4. hxg7 Rh6 5. hxh8® Rxh1. Chess to Enjoy claims that “there are two other solutions”, but of course refuses to give them. Cool. :mad:

Variants, and at least one full game played with each - How would an actual game of Grand Chess play out? Patt-schach? That one with the giraffe (powers of bishop, rook, and knight)? The three-way one with the circular board? I, someone who finds typical chess analysis to be the most sickeningly boring thing imaginable, would be fascinated to no end with this.

Offbeat problems - Black King on a8, White queens on a2, a3, and a4 (no king), White to play and mate in 7 without moving any queen off the first rank. Move the knight to all 64 squares without touching any square more than once. Five bishops of same color against enemy rook pawn; play and mate.

And speaking of which, maybe someone could help me find another book (these are all library books I’ve cribbed these problems from in the past). There was this one that has something called “the king’s journey” or somesuch. Here’s what I remember: It was just kings and pawns. The Black king could only move between b8 and a7 because otherwise the White pawn on b7 would promote. (I think there was another White pawn that kept it from going to c7.) The White king started off completely away from the action, and what he had to do was capture a Black pawn, move to the upper left to force Black to make a pawn move, travel all the way black and…well, anyway, the White king had to cross the board something like three times before being able to make the pawn move to seal the deal. It took a total of 50 moves. I remember the words “dreary sentry duty” re. the Black king’s enforced movements.

See, that’s what I’m going for. Offbeat, unusual, quick, dirty, weird, crazy, something I can put on a board and get amazed by. If it’s possible to recreate on my newly-purchased Chessmaster program, that’s even better.

12

It’s good to have some fun books on chess for reference. If you can’t see the next best move, just check, mate!

A group of chess enthusiasts were gathering in the hotel lobby after a chess tournament they had just attended. Several of them were bragging very loudly and energetically about their victories causing the hotel manager to come over and say, “I’m going to have to ask you to leave.” “But why?” they asked. The manager replied, “I can’t tolerate chess nuts boasting in an open foyer.”

My friend and I were playing chess just yesterday, and he said, “Let’s make this interesting.” So we stopped playing chess. :smiley:

13

There’s a big archive of retrograde-type problems at The Retrograde Analysis Corner. You might start with the “masterworks of retro-analysis” link - I seem to recall that it had some good ones, although I haven’t looked at this stuff for years.

You mention the Grey Labyrinth. There were a number of these types of problems posted in the forums there years ago. You could probably get at them with proper googling, if posts that old are still online.

Regarding algebraic notation, I’ve always found it to be much more intuitive than coordinate notation or the old descriptive. Probably this is mostly because it’s what I’ve always used, but I think it’s the most natural as it matches my thought process for a move - I’m putting this piece on that square.

Sometimes the x is omitted for captures, as it’s unnecessary. Also, sometimes “figurine” notation is used instead, where an icon of the moved piece is used in place of its letter. This avoids the language problem, but (at least for me) it’s harder to read.

14

Well, here’s a “sort of” reconstruction problem, although I don’t know how popular it is, so you may have seen it before:

  1. … Rh1 mate
    What were the first 9 moves of the game?
    (Note that’s “Rh1” and not “Rxh1”)