Chess 3: Weirdest Stipulation Ever

These chess problems require you to understand the rules of chess.

Expected difficulty MediumComment/E-mail if you want a solution to be published

Stipulations Color the pieces so that there exists a game where this position is illegal due to FIDE Chess Law 5.2b (also known as Dead Reckoning), but legal otherwise.

Made from phone, so it’s hard to add comments, but it’s basically a really stupid problem. I might put the solution soon. And I’m expecting a cook here, that there exists other solutions I didn’t consider or something. But if there’s none then, well, good.


2 thoughts on “Chess 3: Weirdest Stipulation Ever

  1. I like the stipulation idea “…so that there exists a game where this position is illegal due to DR”. But I don’t like the colouring notion so much here, because we are losing a nice try with WKc7, WPb6, BKa8. So maybe some kind of illegal cluster idea “Arrange WK, WP & BK (with BK on Qside)…” What do you think?

    • Interesting idea. Initially this is made with “this position is illegal but previous positions are legal” stipulation without reference to DR, in which it’s trivial with wKb6 and bPc7: last move was King stepping into check. But then last move might also be wKh1-b6, obviously illegal move and hence illegal position. So that was a recent modification which I haven’t expanded again. Let’s see with your illegal cluster idea…


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s