Forum Rules

Forum rules

(1) Posts are to be made in the relevant forum. Users are asked to read the forum descriptions before posting.
(2) Off topic posts are limited to active members who have actually posted on-topic in one of the chess-oriented sections in the past. Any user whose first post does not relate to chess will be banned permanently. Posts in the Introduction section do not count.
(3) Members should post in a way that is respectful of other users. Be tolerant at any time. Flaming or abusing users in any way will not be tolerated.
(4) Discussions on political and religious topics are not allowed. Posts containing elements thereof will be redacted or deleted and a temporary or permanent ban may be placed upon the user.
Discussions on politics in chess organisations and the way politics affect chess are allowed.
(4a) Drug use references are not allowed and discussions on drugs are not allowed.
(5) Members are asked to not act as "back seat moderators". If members have something to report they are welcome to bring it to the attention of moderator either by a PM or in this thread:
(6) If you wish to report a PM please forward the PM to a moderator and leave a post here: Don't hesitate to report a PM if you believe it violates the forum rules, even if someone else has already reported a (similar) PM by the same user; having more reports makes it easier for the moderators to take action.
(7) These rules apply to forum posts as well as private messages (PMs).
(8) Members should post in a way which is consistent with "normal writing". That is users should not post excessive numbers of emoticons (smilies), large, small or coloured text, etc. Similarly users should not SHOUT or use excessive punctuation (e.g. ! and ?) in topic titles or posts.
(9) Members should use an appropriate, descriptive title when posting a new topic. Examples of bad titles include; "Help me!", "I'm stuck!", "I've got an error!", etc. Examples of good titles include; "New Game: Perseus - SomeOtherPlayer", "Two Knights Defense: Fritz Variation and sidelines", etc.
(10) Spam is not tolerated here under any circumstance.
(11) Continuously linking your own website to promote it is not allowed. You may use your signature (which will come up beneath all your posts) for this purpose.
(12) Members should refrain from posting without adding to the discussion. Posting just to increase postcount is not allowed.
(13) Combine your comments into one post rather than making many consecutive posts to a thread within a short period of time. This can be done by clicking the 'edit' button next to your post.
If your last post, which is the last in the thread, is very old you may use the following trick to make sure it's bumped up to the new posts. Click on the 'edit' button of your last post. Copy the content of the post. Click delete and delete your last post. Paste the content of the now-deleted post in a new post, add what you will and click 'submit reply'.
(13a) You are not allowed to make consecutive posts. If you post more than once without a reply from another user, all posts after the first will be deleted.
(13b) Exceptions may be made for specific types of threads.
(14) Warez are intellectual property (software/music/movies/tv-series/tv-shows/etc) either through download, serial, or crack in a manner that breaks its copyright and/or license. You are not allowed to give/link to/ask for/advocate/provide information for obtaining and the use of warez.
Bittorrent links are not allowed.
(14a) The following international treaties apply:
-Berne Convention for the Protection of Literary and Artistic Works (Berne Convention) (Berne, 1886)
-Universal Copyright Convention (UCC) (Geneva, 1952)
-Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) (Marrakesh, 1994)
-World Intellectual Property Organization Copyright Treaty (WIPO Copyright Treaty) (Geneva, 1996)
(15) Books published before 1920 are considered free of copyright and e-books thereof are not warez. Books published after 1920 with permission from the author are considered free of copyright and e-books thereof are not warez provided it can within reason be established that permission has been given. All other books are considered copyrighted and e-books thereof are considered warez.
(16) Usernames that contain obscene or vulgar language or denigrate individuals and/or organisations are not allowed.
(17) Users may only delete their own posts on the grounds that they constitute a severe breach of these rules. Even when this is the case, the editing of the post to effect repairs must at all times be considered first.
The emptying of posts (substituting the content by non-content) is explicitely considered a breach of this rule.
Deletion of whole batches of posts harms thread continuity and the forum as a whole and the Moderation team will take action; in the most extreme case an account may be permanently banned to preserve the posted.
(18) Administrators (Admins) and Moderators (Mods) reserve the right to edit or remove any post at any time. The determination of what is construed as indecent, vulgar, spam, etc. is up to them and not to forum members.
(19) Aforementioned Admins and Mods reserve the right to edit this list of rules at anytime.
See more
See less

Please help with example from book

  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Please help with example from book

    Hi. I don't play so much Chess anymore, but I still dig my stuff out now and then. I've been re-reading Chess Tactics for Champions by Susan Polgar and Paul Truong, and I'm up to the chapter on saving yourself from losing by setting up a perpetual check.

    I'm looking at one example (on page 270) of how White could do so. It looks like this:

    The book gives the answer "1. Rf8!. Black can now capture the e-pawn right away or delay it by giving a few checks first, but in either case White gives endless checks on the f-file with the rook. 1. ... Qxe3 3. Rf7+ Kg8 3. Rf6+ Kg7 4. Rf7+ Kh8 5. Rf8+."

    So far, I follow.

    But then the book continues "White only needs to be careful after, for example, 1. Rf8 Qd2+, to move to a square (f1 or h1) where the e3-pawn will not be captured with check."

    Why? What's so bad about losing the e-pawn? Surely it's only the g-pawn that White needs to keep the black king from escaping.

    For instance, after...

    1.Rf8 Qd2+ 2.Kg3 Qxe3+ 3.Kg2

    ...the black queen could keep chasing the white king with moves like...

    3... Qf3+ 4.Kg1 Qg4+ 5.Kh1 Qh3+ 6.Kg1 Qg3+ 7.Kh1 Qe1+ 8.Kg2

    ...and so on. If the queen keeps the king in check, it's a draw, which is all White is going for anyway. And if Black gives up with a move like...

    8... Qh4

    ...then White's perpetual check thing will still work all the same, right? For instance...

    9.Rf7+ Kh8 10.Rf8+ Kg7 11.Rf7+ Kg8 12.Rf6+ Kg7

    ...and so on.

    Or am I missing something?

  • #2
    I have to assume that if White makes mistakes and loses the e, f, and g pawns while in check then the B King has an escape route.


    • #3
      So if White is sloppy enough to lose the e-pawn, it starts him down the slippery slope of carelessness that could then lead to him losing the f- and g-pawns as well? Is that what you're saying?

      But technically, even after the loss of the e-pawn, the white king could still dance around without Black putting him in check and taking the f-pawn in the same move, right?


      • #4
        It could just be a mistake in the book. It happens. Even grandmasters aren't perfect.

        "Don't be afraid of ghosts! Always play the moves you want to play unless you see a genuine tactical drawback." --Grandmaster Neil McDonald


        • #5
          Yeah, that's what I figured. I only asked in case better players than myself might see something I missed.

          For instance, someone might have said "If Black plays such-and-such a move, White can't prevent the black queen from forking the king and f-pawn, and then the king and g-pawn." Or maybe there could be an entirely different answer of a nature I never considered.

          But yeah, I never thought that this book - much as I love it - is perfect. I already found 3 editing mistakes and 1 dubitably worded answer.
          Last edited by Black Dalek; 01-13-2015, 05:50 PM.