Polgar 638

[nonevero]

I am wondering if this might be something universally known to the cognoscenti: In Laszlo Polgar's 5334 Chess Problems, number 638 seems to be given a wrong solution (638) 1.N×e6+ K×c3 2.Qd2#, ignoring 2....Kxb3; when the correct solution appears to be 1.Qe5, either K or Q x e5, 2. Ne2. It doesn't look like it could be a typo, because there are three non-nonsensical moves leading to a real pseudo-mate. I wonder if it could be a little trap to see if the reader is awake (or originally, if the three sisters were awake). Also, I should note that this is on a Chinese, likely non-official, download version, but which otherwise seems to be reliable. Another thing is, he doesn't really stick to the conventions of problem writing - not that I know anything much about those - doesn't exhaust all variations in analysis, doesn't bother about cooks. But this is a different thing. Just wondering if it's a thing he does from time to time, and everyone knows about it.

[antichrist]

I am wondering if this might be something universally known to the cognoscenti: In Laszlo Polgar's 5334 Chess Problems, number 638 seems to be given a wrong solution (638) 1.N×e6+ K×c3 2.Qd2#, ignoring 2....Kxb3; when the correct solution appears to be 1.Qe5, either K or Q x e5, 2. Ne2. It doesn't look like it could be a typo, because there are three non-nonsensical moves leading to a real pseudo-mate. I wonder if it could be a little trap to see if the reader is awake (or originally, if the three sisters were awake). Also, I should note that this is on a Chinese, likely non-official, download version, but which otherwise seems to be reliable. Another thing is, he doesn't really stick to the conventions of problem writing - not that I know anything much about those - doesn't exhaust all variations in analysis, doesn't bother about cooks. But this is a different thing. Just wondering if it's a thing he does from time to time, and everyone knows about it.

If I could locate my copy I may be able to reply. Easy to lose when so tiny.

[Ian Rout]

I am wondering if this might be something universally known to the cognoscenti: In Laszlo Polgar's 5334 Chess Problems, number 638 seems to be given a wrong solution (638) 1.N×e6+ K×c3 2.Qd2#, ignoring 2....Kxb3; when the correct solution appears to be 1.Qe5, either K or Q x e5, 2. Ne2. It doesn't look like it could be a typo, because there are three non-nonsensical moves leading to a real pseudo-mate. I wonder if it could be a little trap to see if the reader is awake (or originally, if the three sisters were awake). Also, I should note that this is on a Chinese, likely non-official, download version, but which otherwise seems to be reliable. Another thing is, he doesn't really stick to the conventions of problem writing - not that I know anything much about those - doesn't exhaust all variations in analysis, doesn't bother about cooks. But this is a different thing. Just wondering if it's a thing he does from time to time, and everyone knows about it.

In my copy Qe5 is given as the solution so this may well have been a mistake corrected in a later edition.

The position is below. Of course few in their right mind would play Qe5 in the event of achieving this improbable position, seeing that it gives away a Queen with check whereas Ne6 is a safe win (mate in five), but this is in a section devoted to mate in two.

638.jpg

[nonevero]

Thanks Ian; makes sense.

[nonevero]

Thanks Ian. That makes sense.
Antichrist: "tiny?" I first became aware of this compilation from my local library a few yeays ago. In unminiaturised form it is a monster, four or five kilos, a couple of bibles and a metropolitan phone book combined. I borrowed it once or twice, then someone from a branch in another town requested it. I found the online, Chinese version and downloaded it twice, so that I can open both, one to the next problem, one to the corresponding solution page.

[MichaelBaron]

In my copy Qe5 is given as the solution so this may well have been a mistake corrected in a later edition.

The position is below. Of course few in their right mind would play Qe5 in the event of achieving this improbable position, seeing that it gives away a Queen with check whereas Ne6 is a safe win (mate in five), but this is in a section devoted to mate in two.

638.jpg

Not sure how useful it is to solve such positions from a practical improvement perspective though. Its more like a challenge for problem solvers.

[antichrist]

Thanks Ian. That makes sense.
Antichrist: "tiny?" I first became aware of this compilation from my local library a few yeays ago. In unminiaturised form it is a monster, four or five kilos, a couple of bibles and a metropolitan phone book combined. I borrowed it once or twice, then someone from a branch in another town requested it. I found the online, Chinese version and downloaded it twice, so that I can open both, one to the next problem, one to the corresponding solution page.

I know it is many kilos plus - I was making a joke. Sure it is in my basement if I check but previously was using Lloyd's problems - somehow preferred the layout or stories??? cant remember now.