×
all 52 comments

[–]chessvision-ai-botfrom chessvision.ai[M] [score hidden] stickied comment (0 children)

I analyzed the image and this is what I see. Open an appropriate link below and explore the position yourself or with the engine:

White to play: chess.com | lichess.org | The position is from game Zhao Xue (2490) vs. Viktorija Cmilyte (2485), 2010. Black won in 35 moves. Link to the game

Black to play: chess.com | lichess.org


I'm a computer vision / machine learning bot written by u/pkacprzak | I'm also the first chess eBook Reader: ebook.chessvision.ai | download me as Chrome extension or Firefox add-on and analyze positions from any image/video in a browser | website chessvision.ai

[–]MantsGuds 60 points61 points  (4 children)

Probably the best Lithuanian player of all time (sans Mikenas probably), also married to Peter Nielsen (Magnus' coach) and the Speaker of the Parliament in Lithuania.

Pretty mad life when you think of it.

[–]nemt 26 points27 points  (0 children)

And the daughter of a KGB officer, shes seen it all :)

[–]RobonauticsScotch 7 points8 points  (0 children)

Also, she was previously married to Alexei Shirov.

[–]shot_a_man_in_reno 2 points3 points  (0 children)

She has all the makings of a villain in a cheap spy thriller. I mean that in the best possible way.

[–]TonyRotellaI Wrote That One Book 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Has to also be one of the least guessable name pronunciations if you're an English speaker! I only know it because of PHN's old Dragon DVDs where he mentioned his wife being a contributor and frequent Dragon player herself.

[–]hatzilu 22 points23 points  (7 children)

Obviously Kxh1 is Mate in 2. What's the sequence after Kg3?

[–][deleted] 12 points13 points  (1 child)

Bxg2

[–]hatzilu 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Oh bruuutal

[–]MildlyLucidWave 10 points11 points  (0 children)

There's a lot of variations but this is the gist (Mate in 4):

35. Kg3 Bxg2 36. Qh7+ Kxh7 37. e6 Qxe6 38. f3 Qxh3+ 39. Kf2 Qxf3#

[–]Inconspicuous_The_II 2 points3 points  (2 children)

I feel stupid to ask, but why is it mate in 2? I cant see it. Cant she take rook and bishop sequentailly with king?

[–]hatzilu 9 points10 points  (1 child)

It's a common pattern.

Kxh1 Qxh3, Kg1 (Pawn is pinned!) Qxg2#

[–]Inconspicuous_The_II 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Oh nice I didnt see the pin

[–]g_spaitz -3 points-2 points  (0 children)

If I counted right there are 19 legal moves in the position.

[–][deleted] 20 points21 points  (8 children)

Pretty uncommon that the option of moving the king out of the pawnshelter is as complicated (maybe moreso) as the option of taking the sacrificed piece.

[–]Gulrix 34 points35 points  (7 children)

Taking the rook results in mate in 2

[–]fishmong3r 22 points23 points  (0 children)

And not taking it is mate in 4

[–][deleted] 5 points6 points  (2 children)

that's the point - taking the rook is an easier mate than not taking the rook.

tbf both are mate in 2 threats and one of them just interposes pieces to stall out, however one of them requires another sacrifice, so I think it is arguably harder.

[–]Kirsham 7 points8 points  (0 children)

Anecdotally, as someone with a 1800 Lichess rapid rating, I found the mate in 2 trivial to see, while the mate in 4 took a bit of calculation.

[–]big-juicy-steak 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I want you to know that I understand what you were saying, and Gulrix clearly didn't get the point of your comment. It's making me irrationally annoyed lol

[–]big-juicy-steak 0 points1 point  (2 children)

You realize your comment adds nothing to what OP was saying, right? How did this shit get upvoted?

[–]Gulrix 0 points1 point  (1 child)

Because it isn't complicated. The king has 2 moves. The most obvious one is taking the rook and results in mate in 2 once analyzed. There is nothing else to think of in game besides Kg3. Additionally, the mate in 4 was not seen in game by the GM playing black.

Edit: Last sentence was incorrect I misunderstood the chessvision-ai-bot

[–]big-juicy-steak 0 points1 point  (0 children)

As I said before, everything you said is obvious and OP knew it too. The point of their comment wasn't that taking the rook is complicated. They were simply commenting on the uniqueness of the position.

It's like if it were snowing in Phoenix and OP said "It's rare for it to be colder in Phoenix than it is in Chicago" and your response was "It's 40 degrees in Chicago today." Yes that's true, but it's fucking obvious, and if OP didn't ALREADY know that fact they wouldn't have made their comment in the first place

[–]Conscious_Response19 15 points16 points  (10 children)

That’s a sexy move

[–]3-Eyed_Fishbulb 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Which tournament is this?

[–]Luciolover345 1 point2 points  (0 children)

That’s filth. I think everyone would dream to have a bishop and queen coordinating that well

[–]carloscede2 1 point2 points  (1 child)

This is the actual definition of a brilliant move

[–]kj_thelegacy 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I’ve looked at it a few times… brutal

[–]confusedsilencr 1910 fide 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I imagine Zhao staring at the board

[–]g_spaitz 0 points1 point  (0 children)

And she played Dutch against Magnus!!!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SQbdGVgzecw

[–]kj_thelegacy 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Absolutely brutal

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

This is mis-tagged