I hardly dare to maintain my objection, but I still think this is NOT a unique solution! What about the…
On No.1688 (AG&DP)
Oh my god, how embarrassing! Yes your're absolutely right, it's a unique ser-h#8 then, how could I've lost sight of…
On No.1688 (AG&DP)
Honestly? A good problem is one that combines illegality (impossibility) of the diagram with disregard of standing principles (rules)? I…
On No.1688 (AG&DP)
I cannot really understand : economy is not an aim in itself. The authors want to show 4 switchbacks -moreover,…
On No.1688 (AG&DP)
If my (modest) understanding of series-mover is correct, then economy considerations ("Zeit-Ökonomie") have to be applied? So, what about shorter…
On No.1688 (AG&DP)
on point 1) : C is for "computer" not for "correct" C+ means computer tested, not more about "legality" or…
On No.1688 (AG&DP)
ad 1) C+: yes, I agree, this would be the intention of a C+ mark. After much testing I have…
On No.1688 (AG&DP)
Your suggestion of a white knight g5 is C+ and the position, with a white pawn g6 seems legal
On No.1688 (AG&DP)
ok... so 1) C+ means that a dedicated program (here : winchloe) found a solution, and only one, unless there…
On No.1688 (AG&DP)
Jacques Rotenberg: Yes, I read it. Unfortunately I misread it as "with WHITE pawns on e7 and f7 it is…
On No.1688 (AG&DP)