Thanks for the feedback! I am totally on board with that (pun intended). I like to credit the composer in the description (if I know them), but I think the screen would be a bit better because I want their effort and work to be recognized. After all, these puzzles are incredible and I just want to show them to spread the beautiful game of chess. 🙂

@@ChessforCharity _the screen would be a bit better_ Very much better, I'd say. ;) Great video, thank you.

7k

there's something so cool about the idea that this puzzle was crafted over a century ago

Still, it should be WHITE gives mate in one.

Correct!

Верно

Exactly. I found it funny when he said: try it with your friends they might think there’s a mistake in the puzzle. Oh gee i wonder why, because there is 🤪

The mistake he makes is, he should say WHITE gives mate in one. Not completely correct, but much better, since it can't be white's move, it has to be one move for black and THEN mate in one.

yea this guy doesn’t know what he’s talking about lol

Most puzzle positions are contrived rather than impossible. There is however a genre of problems where previous history of positions has to be deduced in order to be able to solve the puzzle. The typical one is arguing that you can take en passant due to a unique prior move by the opponent.

@@levborisov8590 Those still have the correct player to move according to how the puzzle is worded. Puzzles where you have to deduce whose move it is are a whole different variety of retrograde puzzles. This one is pretending not not to be one of those when it is. It should be written more like "Prove which side has the move, and find mate in 1 for the other side."

That's exactly what I was thinking. Plus mate in one implies that it was the current move to mate. I wasted my time on this:(

Only in particular puzzles which are designed to be unusual in some respect. In all standard mate in X problems or win/draw studies, the convention is that the starting position has to be legal.

Yeah also when you realize white can't do it in 30 seconds the logical thing is to go "Ok can black do it?" and realize they can't in another 10 seconds. You don't need the logical mumbojumbo he is using. This is the reason why puzzles like that piss me off sometimes - Tell people who's move it is and what direction on the board are pawns moving.

😂😂😂😂😂😂

My thoughts exactly. Hence the title is click bait.

I also had the same thought 💀

The thesis statement of the puzzle is a scam. The fastest way to mate black requires 2 moves. The explanation can be found in the chess notation of the puzzle solution (assuming the first move in the puzzle as move 1 and that the original score was 0-0): 1. ... black_move (1. ... black_move+) 2. white_move# 1-0

@@kotelnikovmikail wrong. chess is played 1 move at a time. each player gets a turn. for example, a game may start with: 1. e4 e5 Notice how blacks move e5 is not 2? It is 1 move. Hence, you are wrong. It would go: 1. black_move white_move# ONE MOVE

Correct, and this puzzle is cool (to me) because if one proceeds with that assumption, they realize that it isn’t not possible for it to be white’s move. It is all fun stuff! Thanks for watching! 🙂

@@ChessforCharity From that position neither black nor white have "checkmates in one" Id just be a bit pissed because what you are asking is formulated incorrectly just for the joke.

Yeah, I see that point, but I would argue that white does have mate in 1, but they are just waiting for black to make their move. I was trying to make is less of a “trick” and more of a logic puzzle. Thanks for the feedback! 🙂

@@MonsieurRob It's all about conventions. Chess Problems have somewhat different rules from Chess Games, such as the a posteriori and retro strategy conventions. The idea that white is always the one to deliver mate is a fundamental rule of chess problems, and thence the convention that black still moves first if white is the proven last move is an obscure rule, but nonetheless one that definitely exists in the codex. It is not a joke or cheap trick; it is literally in the rules for chess problems, whether you like it or not, and there are hundreds of compositions that use the same theme.

@@eifbkcn Agree. That said, the problem makes use (plays off) of the default standard for tactics training (including Mate in X problems) where you are always initiating the move...whether the first (white) or last half (black) of one full game move. The "trick" here lies in ignoring that reality. Black's move closes out game move N. White then makes use of N+1 to deliver mate. N does not equal N+1.

Nice work! I am glad you were able to figure it out! 🙂

me too actually figured it out took a couple minutes

There are many puzzles where white has to make the first move in order to not stalemate black

@@ChessforCharity It's not relevant. Chess puzzle positions don't have to be reachable positions.

Wrong. There's no way black's king could've gotten there if white previously moved. Black's king would've been on c8 and the pawn on b7 would've had to be moved from b6 to check the king but the rook was on c7 checking the king.

get a gun and kill your opponent, brilliant checkmate

I like that you were starting to go down that path! Thanks for watching!

use a gun and shoot the opponent

There is a different illegal move that would result in mate in 1 if it were white to move. Pawn captures c8 promote to rook/queen. There's nothing on c8 to capture, ofc, but it would result in mate

I was thinking about an illegal move for white, qxb7. it is illegal because pawn is white. But I think there's an actual chess variant where you can capture your own pieces

I saw once a puzzle where the only way to checkmate in 2 was to "overpromote" your pawn to opponent's King, they would have only 1 legal move and then you could checkmate both Kings at once.

Wtf? It seems chess was a lot more fun before this rule change.

I won't exactly call it cheating, but it is tricky, like he said. I think the point is to realise there IS no M1 for white, analyse the position, and THEN realise its black's turn. Amazing puzzle!

@@jaideepshekhar4621 Yep, that is what I was going for. I was not trying to clickbait or 'cheat' anyone. I just wanted to present a tricky logic puzzle. :)

But the knight can block the check with ....Nb6! Or Black can play then even better...Kxc7. The solution is the only correct one.

If you were to plug this position into stockfish and say "black to move, what is the evaluation?" it would say "M1 for white".

Yeah, that is the *logic* part of the puzzle. The fact that one can figure out that black is to move by simply studying the board is pretty cool (to me, at least). Thank you for watching!

​@@ChessforCharitythat's a wonderful puzzle (The catch is, I never said that I'm speaking a proper English. In fact I'm speaking a dialect, in which "wonderful" means "terrible".)

I agree! It is even crazier that an underpromotion can lead to mate in two different ways! Thank you for watching! 🙂

Nope, it is quite common in chess puzzles to promote to knight instead of queen.

I am glad you figured it out! Nice job persisting for the solution! ⭐️

I mean it's a cool puzzle. But the title is misleading since it's not actually what the puzzle is asking. The actual answer is that it's not a mate in 1. The puzzle title is worded, it's saying "There's mate in 1. How do you do it?" And... you can't. You can't win in one move. Even if you made the argument that black and white each moving a piece counts as a single chess turn, that logic still doesn't work in this case since moving from black to move to white to move would cause the chess game to move on to the next turn. And regardless, the starting position cannot be considered a mate in 1 until the turn player can mate.

@@andrewkandasamy That’s incorrect. White can mate within one move, so it counts as mate in one. You’re thinking “mate on the same move, numbered from move 1,” but the starting order doesn’t actually matter because the puzzle doesn’t start from the beginning of the game. Plug this position into an analysis board with black to move and it’ll be evaluated as mate in 1.

🤣 I was trying hard to not make it a trick problem, but this one was so cool, I had to share. Thanks for watching!

@@ChessforCharity its a very nice puzzle... foR A TRICKSTER!!! nice vid tho

Yeah, it is a different type of puzzle. To use your analogy, this puzzle is like finding a person dead and trying to figure out whether it is a murder or a suicide. Happily, with logic, we are able to figure out this one. Thanks for watching!

@@ChessforCharity Think even more out of the box. Pull out a hammer and smash the board to force ur opponent to surrender. Is it much better? Thx for reading my comment!

​@@ChessforCharity i wasted 7 minutes of my life

@@ChessforCharity No. It is not. We are explicitly told something(mate in one position, or “it is murder”), which ends up being categorically incorrect.

same !

Yes!! That is the essence of the puzzle. Now that you logically deduced that it would be impossible for white to be on move, you know it is black to move. No matter what they do, it is mate on the next move. You figured out the logic part that many people didn’t. Nice work and thanks for watching. 😃

no, it won't, because the king will take the rook

Actually if black makes any more it loses during white's next move.

I completely agree. I think 'outside the box' puzzles can be controversial because it feels like a trick even though it is just a different type of puzzle. I view them more like logic puzzles operating within the game of chess. 😀

@@ChessforCharity the problem is many puzzles are not real game examples and some are not possible to occur in a real game so many assume the puzzle’s start does not have to make sense.

@@balancemaster55 Yep, you are right about that. So, when one sees there is no mate in 1 if it is white's move, they have to question those assumptions and then deduce that it can't be white's move. I will try to explain that better in the future. Thanks for watching.

@@ChessforCharity I'd say that it is controversial due to presentation. It isn't a chess puzzle at all and won't really assist anyone in their chess thinking in the slightest because it is rooted in a trick, not actually gameplay skill. I would put it akin to freeze framing a basketball game and asking what you should do next but aha, you've tricked the viewer because in reality, the actual official game ball got knocked over to the bench and the one that appears to be in play was actually accidentally thrown onto the court by one of the fans. Presenting that as a problem for decision making on the basketball court would be seen as deceptive and a waste of time to whoever you told that too. The same is true in this case. The trick here isn't that the position itself is tricky. It is that you (and or the composer) are misrepresenting the situation by intentionally asking someone to make a decision in a situation where the player literally cannot make a decision on what to do next because it isn't their move but you're just not telling them that. Similarly, any player on that court would have known which ball was in play. Freeze framing it and asking someone to analyze it is a waste of their time and people don't like it when they realize after they walked over that the guy who said "Hey, come over here!" intentionally brought them over to waste their time. I agree that that's not any better than "Hey, there's a black piece on c8 that got knocked off the board" or "It is there but only a few pixels. Too bad you couldn't see it" or "Yeah, we're not actually playing chess. We're actually playing Bughouse. I take the rook and hand it to my partner who delivers checkmate with it on the other board". Calling it mate in 1 also carries implications. A checkmate in 1 position implies either white to play and mate in 1 or black to play and mate in 1", similar to how the sentence "Go!" in the English language really implies "You go!". I would also add that chess puzzles are not necessarily legal positions so using the lack of the ability for there to have been a previous legal black move to reach the position is not valid reasoning and even if there was, it doesn't change the above. While I don't prefer the idea of masquerading one type of puzzle as another, I think if I were to present this, the wording I'd use is "This is the position. On his next move, white checkmated black. How is this possible?" You can tell them that "This is the legal position" if you want to use the working backwards logic. This separates it from standard chess vernacular which sidesteps the implications and using the question "How is this possible?" helps to divorce it from the expectations of normality better than saying to think outside the box while also giving the audience a heads up that there's often going to be trick answers and that this likely isn't much a chess puzzle at all. Thus when you tell them the answer there will a lot less controversy to follow as missing information is a hallmark of "How is this possible?" problems.

@@NevarKanzaki I really like that reframing of the question, it turns it into a puzzle rather than a trick.

The promotion to the knight is checkmate because of the rook. The knight is protected by the queen and the black king is being checked by the white rook. Therefore, it is checkmate. Thank you for watching! :)

Yes, that is true. There are a bunch of mate in 2s from that position, but the key is to be able to recognize that it is actually black's move to begin with. Thanks for watching!

@@ChessforCharity I mean, even if it's black's turn to move, it's still mate in 2. A mate in 1 only occurs when the turn player can checkmate by moving a piece.

@@andrewkandasamy I see what you are saying, but black has not completed their turn yet. So, if you want to get technical, each side has a 1/2 move to play in order to checkmate.

@@ChessforCharity Right, which is why it is not a mate in 1. Because black moving would end the chess game turn since chess game turns always end after black’s half move.

@@andrewkandasamy I think it is a terminology thing then. If each side makes a 1/2 move, then the game is over in 1 full move. Sorry if that wasn't explained well. I am working on improving my explanations.

That isn’t comparable at all in my opinion. You can logically deduce that it is black to move in this position. To me, that is the part that is super important. Sorry you didn’t enjoy it, but check out some of my other videos.

@@ChessforCharity You can also logically deduce that you can't drive to Paris in 1 hour.

@@ChessforCharity I will not check out your other videos, because this one feels intellectually dishonest. Why would I want educational content from someone like that?

It is verbal trickery combined with chess. I've never like these types of puzzles because it violates the definition of puzzles that are 'mate in 1'.. which always starts with the person playing the pieces that start on the bottom (in this case white) and the # = the number of friendly moves to reach some conclusion. Some folks think it is cute.. I just think chess is difficult enough without puzzle makers trying to intentionally confuse the situation by violating the definition of the puzzle.

Good question! You right click a square and then use either 'CTRL', 'Shift', or 'ALT' depending on what color you want. 🙂

Then, yes, it is black's turn.

I appreciate that! Thanks for coming back to watch some more. 🙂

What’s S?

Haha, I like the way you are thinking though!

Glad you enjoyed it! 🙂

yea it's mate in 2. The "puzzle solution" is that it is not mate in 1 lmao

It is an unconventional way of counting that makes it a mate in one. We arrive on the position and make 2 half moves. :)

@@ChessforCharity makes sense, thank you

I am sorry you feel that way. There was never any intention of cheating the audience. I am simply presenting the logic puzzle. The cool part is that we can figure out who is to move without being told that it is black. I think that is cool - it's what makes it an 'out of the box' type of logic puzzle. If you are interested in regular chess puzzles, check out my (many) other videos. Thank you for watching!

Exactly. I am glad you were able to figure it out. Thanks for watching!

Well here is the problem. There is 0 logic in this sentence. BLACK TO MOVE AND M1 FOR WHITE. if its BLACK TO MOVE then it has to be M2 FOR WHITE. Ur logic in this Video is completely false. And congrats on losing subs for clickbaiting

​@@kilianlechner5400The checkmate clock doesn't count the opponent moves. A checkmate in two for white is a position that white moves, black moves then white checkmate.

​@@kilianlechner5400 If you put this position into an Engine it says Mate in 1

Nice work! Thank you for watching! 🙂

You can't promote to a King.

@@dinosaurtimeandfunnyvideos no 💩

I like the creative ideas!

Sorry you feel that way. I think it is cleaver because there is a logical deduction necessary to know that it is black to move. It is about the logic, not about being deceptive. Hopefully one day I can gain your subscription back. Thanks for watching.

@@ChessforCharity you will never gain me as a subscriber because I will never watch another of your videos. Cheers.

Bruh

It is unconventional counting for sure, but 1/2 move + 1/2 move is 1 full move. I would say it is a bit 'out of the box'.

​its not out of the box, its just wrong.

​@@whisperwalkful Ask a Engine and it will say Mate in 1

Thank you!

Notation is that move 1 in a game is white then black. Move two is white then black, etc. Same reason a mate in 2 involves 3 moves, two for one player and one for the other.

I see what you are saying, but I think about it as the next move for white results in checkmate. We just aren’t told that it is black’s move from the beginning. We are seeing the second ‘half’ of black’s turn. It is all fun to think about. Hopefully you enjoyed the puzzle. Thank you for watching! 🙂

This is a good point to ask about. For mate in n, if we flip the player on move because it's illegal with white to move, then by the relevant footnote to Codex Article 15, Black gets an extra move, and White has to come with answers to everything that Black can play. But the stipulation still says "mate in n".

Definitely a fun puzzle! Enjoyed solving it.

The evaluation of the position is M1 for white.

Perhaps the compose of the puzzle was mistaken. I thought that the half move for black and the half move for white would constitute 1 move. I see it is ‘tricky’, but it seems like a mate in one to me. Thank you for watching!

That is a bit too outside the box. 😅

Ah, I like that! If you ever find it, feel free to share! I will have to look into that! Thank you for watching! 🙂

Technically that is "mate in one and a half"😂

@@ChessforCharity I found it! I remember where I saw it. It wasn't originally a chess puzzle, but inspired by a Gothamchess video. ukposts.info/have/v-deo/b3V_prCYfXqlwmg.htmlsi=DEZJfv_1YXIncMA8 The position appears at 19:54, but for the trick puzzle to work the black queen needs to be moved to the back rank.

No because White only moved once. The Evaluation says +M1 which means Mate in 1.

I appreciate the feedback. Thanks for sharing and for watching.

I am glad you were so close! Thank you for watching! :)

Haha, that is one way to think outside the box! 😅

MANY LEGAL VARIATIONS POSSIBLE ,, LETS SUPPOSE BLACK ROOK WAS IN H5 AND WHITE KNIGHT WAS AT G5 ,, SO NOW BLACK CAN GO RH8 AND WHITE CAN MOVE NH7,, NOW ITS BLACKS TURN ,,

Thanks for watching!

Yeah, that is mate in 2 since it involves 2 white moves. The key is to question who is on move and then figure it out from there. 🙂

@@ChessforCharity You think you are being clever but you are not and it makes me angry.

The evaluation of the position is M1 for white. It can be proven that it is black's turn, so that fact didn't need to be given.

Yeah, this is not straight up lying at all. This is 1/2 move + 1/2 move. I think there is more to it than you were thinking. I am sorry you didn't enjoy it. Thank you for watching though!

Yep! Haha

Yep, that is it. Once you realize it is black to move (by studying the position), you realize it is mate in 1. It's a tough one! Thank you for watching!

“Correctly” is a tough word to define. Sufficient information was given in order to deduce who is to move. That is what I was vague. Sorry it wasn’t clearer. If I said it was black to move, it would be super easy. That is what one can just show the position and figure it out from there. Sorry you found it disrespectful. I appreciate the feedback though. I am always trying to improve. 🙂

Man Make entire paragraph

Yeah no, this is clickbait

You can't deduce that it's blacks move, because we don't know if there even was a previous move. It's only under the assumption that this was a regular game, and not just a composition with impossible requirements.

Clearly KLICKBAIT! Chess has standards - like 1. SAYING who is to move and 2. The chessboard is configured so the “to move” side is towards the player! 3. PLUS, this “answer” would literally NEVER occur in a real game!!

When you tell someone mate in 1 without indicating which player, one will logically look at both white and black and see which side has a mate in 1. Your "logic" puzzle where I have to realize mate in 1 includes finding the move for my opponent that then creates my mate in 1, makes people feel cheated. Yes you technically offered a logic puzzle, but you did not follow the logic of chess. you did not tell the chess people to stop applying their chess logic. Anyone who stumbles into your video from the chess world will deduce you make no sense.

Why make a queen when bxa=N is mate

Haha, Nice. Thanks for watching!

I get what you mean. The key insight is to realize that after black's move, it is mate in 1 no matter what. :) Thanks for watching!

yes the same thing happened with me

@@ChessforCharity You can use this same reasoning to call literally any mating tactics puzzle a mate in one lmao. “Just deduce the other moves, and then one move from the end of the sequence it’s mate in one, therefore it’s a mate in one puzzle.”

It is a logic chess puzzle, so it may challenge some of your *assumptions*. The fact that one can *deduce* that it is black to move by studying the board makes it a logic puzzle. Then, the 1/2 move for black + 1/2 for white is 1 full move. Thanks for watching!

I am glad you enjoyed it! Thank you for watching and I will do my best to keep making fun videos. :)

i forgot Kxc7, which is met with bxa8=knight

Yep! I’m glad you see where the composer was coming from on this. 🙂 Thank you for watching!

Yeah. This is the first video I’ve seen from the channel and it makes me not take him seriously and not want to watch his other videos.

Nope, the “logic” part is to question your assumptions walking in and realizing that mate in 1 doesn’t automatically mean white to move. Once you figure that out, you realize black must move to complete their turn, and then it is mate in 1. Not trying to be deceptive, just trying to enjoy a logic puzzle.

@SappinYourSentry - I am sorry you feel that way, but I would encourage you to not judge an entire channel by one video. If you see where I am coming from, you will see that I am not trying to deceive anyone.

I mean he tells you there's a mate in one. So if you couldn't figure out that there must be some possible way to make that happen, then that's on you. It seems a lot of people couldn't find it, gave up, and then blamed the puzzle, or channel, instead of accepting that they just weren't capable of solving it.

@@jacobmarshall5391 You know... i just watched another chess puzzle video and i couldn't solve it and then i watched the video to the end and got the solution. (I'm less than a beginner btw) I left the video with a pretty positive mood however, because i could see where i was wrong. So, it's not like i'm too proud to admit defeat. It's more like i'm pretty annoyed when i have the feeling that i got cheated and that is what this video gave me.

Agreed (with the possible exception of donating to the charities. Some of them he’s donating to I know are good causes and they didn’t choose to be associated with this guy). This video (and the fact that he keeps doubling and tripling down on the fact that “it’s just a cool logic puzzle and not clickbait”) makes me angry.

I very much disagree. You are able to logically conclude that it is black to move. Once you figure that out, you realize that it is mate in 1 because black hasn’t finished their move. That is the point. I am sorry you didn’t enjoy the video, but it wasn’t intended on being a trick. I would encourage you to check out other videos and not judge the entirety of my channel from one video.

I still don’t think it is clickbait. I think it is a logic puzzle that some people are upset about. 🙂

When black finishes their move there will still not be mate on the board. Saying it is mate in 1 is a lie. It's like having a board in starting position and saying it's mate in 1 because at some point in the game it's mate in 1. It's not a logic puzzle because it is nonsensical. You aren't able to deduce it's black to move because even if it is black to move it is not mate in 1. You literally just said it yourself - once black finishes their move it will be mate in 1. So it will be black's 1 move, then white's 1 move to mate. That's what you just said, so it's a blatant contradiction and therefore a lie that you are aware of. If you said something like "every move ends in mate" then it would be honest but then no-one would come here. The whole reason for the video existing is the lie. So I'm not surprised you're deciding to die on this hill because you lose the respect of the audience either way.

@@teapotexorcist I understand what you are saying, but I would ask for you to understand where I am coming from. - Each move is called a 'half move' in chess terminology. Black finishing their (half) move will allow white to make their (half) move to win. To me, that is just 1/2 +1/2 = 1 move. - You are able to deduce that it is black's move. That is where the logic part comes in. - I am sorry you don't see what I am saying. As I mentioned, I am not trying to disrespect or trick my audience. I just wanted to present a cool puzzle. If I lost your respect, I apologize. I just *love* chess and helping people and I thought this was a cool puzzle to share. It wasn't intended on being deceptive. I just ask that you don't question my intentions for the channel overall. I hope to see you around the comments section more in the future. 🤝

I am glad you were able to figure it out! :) Thank you for watching!

Haha, I suppose that is possible. :) Thanks for watching!

Yeah, I could have definitely explained it better so it wasn't so contentious. Thanks for the feedback!

I disagree. It is a logic puzzle where you have to see that it can't be white's move, so it must be black's move. I would not call it misleading since it is still checkmate in 1 after black finished their turn - which comes from a logical deduction. Thanks for watching!

Why is it misleading? Did he say it was whites move?

@@jaideepshekhar4621 ⭐

@@jaideepshekhar4621 it was misleading because the solving condition changes over the course of the video. We start with "Find the mate-in-one" and then we end with "prove that any move black makes leads to mate-in-one". Those two conditions are fundamentally different. One does not lead to the other.

@@JohnWTolbert "prove that any move black makes leads to mate-in-one" no. Rephrase that as "prove it's black's turn instead of white in this M1". You do understand that BOTH players move every turn? There is still a M1 even when its the other player's turn.

Haha, true. And many people are upset with the solution. I think it is cool! Thanks for watching!

It is unconventional counting for sure. :) Thanks for watching!

Nice work! I am glad you figured it out! Thanks for watching!

I appreciate it! :)

No, the black king could just take the rook

That is a fair point as well! Thank you for watching! :)

Haha, that works! Thanks for watching! 🙂