EfreetSK@lemmy.world to Comic Strips@lemmy.worldEnglish · 4 months agoChesslemmy.worldexternal-linkmessage-square65fedilinkarrow-up10arrow-down10file-text
arrow-up10arrow-down1external-linkChesslemmy.worldEfreetSK@lemmy.world to Comic Strips@lemmy.worldEnglish · 4 months agomessage-square65fedilinkfile-text
Source unknown, some sites assign it to Oppressive Silence comics by Ethan Vincent. But that website in the corner is shady
minus-squareEiri@lemmy.calinkfedilinkarrow-up0·4 months agoHuh? I thought having no valid moves that wouldn’t lead to the king’s death was a loss. How DO you lose then?
minus-squarePunnyName@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkarrow-up0·4 months agoHave to put him in check, while also preventing him from moving into another spot that could also put him into check. This would likely have been a stalemate anyway.
minus-squareAwesomeLowlander@sh.itjust.workslinkfedilinkarrow-up0·4 months agoKing and queen is fully sufficient to checkmate
minus-squarePunnyName@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkarrow-up0·4 months agoI said likely. I know it’s sufficient, but it’s not inevitable.
minus-squareAwesomeLowlander@sh.itjust.workslinkfedilinkarrow-up0·4 months agoIt is inevitable, there’s no maybe about it
minus-squareAwesomeLowlander@sh.itjust.workslinkfedilinkarrow-up0·4 months agoNot if the player with the queen has any idea at all what they’re doing. By your logic, it’s also possible to lose your queen by making a stupid move.
minus-squareSomeoneSomewhere@lemmy.nzlinkfedilinkarrow-up0·4 months agoIt’s been a long time since I played, but king+queen+bishop should be pretty achievable?
minus-squareAwesomeLowlander@sh.itjust.workslinkfedilinkarrow-up0·4 months agoIt is, king and queen is all you need
minus-squaregnutrino@programming.devlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up0·edit-24 months ago This would likely have been a stalemate anyway. How come? I’m not very good at chess personally but I was under the impression that queen-bishop-king was generally sufficient to force a mate.
minus-squarePunnyName@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkarrow-up0·4 months agoSomehow I didn’t even register the existence of the bishop. It’s possible to mate with just king and queen, but more pieces the better.
minus-squaresmeg@feddit.uklinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up0·4 months agoThat would be the case if the king was currently in check, but as he’s currently on a safe space then it’s stalemate
Huh? I thought having no valid moves that wouldn’t lead to the king’s death was a loss. How DO you lose then?
Have to put him in check, while also preventing him from moving into another spot that could also put him into check.
This would likely have been a stalemate anyway.
King and queen is fully sufficient to checkmate
I said likely. I know it’s sufficient, but it’s not inevitable.
It is inevitable, there’s no maybe about it
It’s possible to stalemate, too.
Not if the player with the queen has any idea at all what they’re doing. By your logic, it’s also possible to lose your queen by making a stupid move.
Correct
It’s been a long time since I played, but king+queen+bishop should be pretty achievable?
It is, king and queen is all you need
How come? I’m not very good at chess personally but I was under the impression that queen-bishop-king was generally sufficient to force a mate.
Somehow I didn’t even register the existence of the bishop. It’s possible to mate with just king and queen, but more pieces the better.
That would be the case if the king was currently in check, but as he’s currently on a safe space then it’s stalemate