Chess Master plays RAREST CHESS MOVE to defeat computer

[@paralogical-dev]

Nicely done, thanks for sharing my video! It really takes some maneuvering, doesn't it? And I must say, I really like your mouse cursor!

[@rebuznardo]

Dear Paralogical, I saw your video & subscribe to your channel. I've been around Jerry's garden like 15 years now. In a few and rare occasions he has shared videos from other people, I guess he has never take a bait. Kudos for you.

[@AndreaArzensek]

You have also captured me with your beautiful video. Jerry seemed also enchanted by it. Now you need to find the rarer move 😂

[@ZacharyBlue]

went and watched the video and i am already subbed!!

[@longslongmcdong]

What if the opponents bishops were arranged in a similar order. Would you need to included the extended notation for the specific locations of the bishops in the capture?

[@Asdayasman]

@@longslongmcdong No because the move order is deterministic, white goes first, then black, then it repeats forever. If the move is an odd number, it's white's bishop. Otherwise, it's black's.

[@zaszz]

Statistics nerds hate this one weird move

[@sage5296]

the video is skewing the data already indeed

[@FredPlanatia]

nah. games against computer don't count.

[@Ishsa]

This video was made by DDBCC Georg, who is an outlier and should not be counted

[@paulrobbins5393]

Jerry, you truly are one in 342 billion. Well done!

[@moose4010]

Amazing. I just watched the Paralogical video yesterday and now this. Been watching for many years. Appreciate all you do Mr. Network :)

[@willmunoz1638]

Not only was it a doubly disambiguated bishop capture checkmate, it was a doubly disambiguated bishop capture *discover* checkmate.

[@barmanitan]

As Paralogical discussed in their video, this move necessitates a discovery as no new squares are ever attacked by the bishop. So it's one of the (if not the only?) moves that entails a discovery

[@vitorfurtado3311]

⁠@@barmanitanthe one without a capture is the one requiring a discover checkmate

[@SJNaka101]

Discovery doesn't add to the notation though, so by the original video's parameters that doesn't make it any more rare :(

[@matteopriotto5131]

​​​@@barmanitanthis isn't true, you're thinking about the non-capture version of this move. Here's a position I made up where a double disambiguated bishop capture checkmate isn't a discovery B3B3/8/2p5/8/B5N1/8/8/5K1k w - - 0 1 Edit: and here's a silly pgn to prove that the aforementioned position is legally reachable 1. e4 d5 2. exd5 c6 3. dxc6 bxc6 4. a4 Na6 5. Bxa6 Qxd2+ 6. Qxd2 Nf6 7. Qg5 h5 8. Qxf6 Rb8 9. Qxg7 Rb7 10. Bxb7 a5 11. Qxh8 Bf5 12. Qxh5 Bh6 13. Qxf5 Bg5 14. Qxa5 f6 15. Qxg5 Kf7 16. Qxf6+ exf6 17. Bg5 fxg5 18. h4 gxh4 19. Rxh4 Kg6 20. a5 Kg5 21. a6 Kxh4 22. a7 Kg4 23. a8=B Kf4 24. Ra4+ Ke5 25. Re4+ Kxe4 26. b4 Kd4 27. g4 Kc4 28. g5 Kxb4 29. Nc3 Kxc3 30. g6 Kxc2 31. f4 Kd3 32. g7 Ke4 33. g8=B Kxf4 34. Bb3 Kg4 35. Ba4 Kh4 36. Bc8 Kg3 37. Bd7 Kh2 38. Be8 Kh1 39. Nf3 Kg2 40. Ne5 Kh1 41. Ng4 Kg1 42. Ke2 Kg2 43. Ke1 Kh1 44. Nf6 Kg2 45. Ke2 Kg1 46. Ke1 Kh2 47. Kf2 Kh1 48. Kf1 Kh2 49. Ng4+ Kh1 50. Ba8xc6# 1-0 Edit 2: btw, non-castle king checkmates also entail a discovery.

[@sjoerdglaser2794]

In the original video, the creator actually discusses whether a doubly disambiguated bishop NON capture check mate would be rarer because that would be forced to be a discovered attack.

[@JSYantiss1]

Could you still have written "Bxc5#", since the e3 Bishop is the only one that could deliver the mate?

[@drumetul_dacic]

I guess the rules use a greedy notation approach, rather than a lazy one.

[@dpayO2]

That's an interesting question!

[@remaaviation7179]

good question...

[@Jivvi]

The notation for what moves where always comes first. The notation for check and checkmate are just additional information; they're never used for disambiguation.

[@JJ-kl7eq]

Batman: Robin, old chum, Chester the Chester is threatening to capture the queen! Run the Batfish analyzer. Robin: Holy double disambiguation Batman! Three bishops of the same color!

[@michaelf8221]

Now play a doubly disambiguated knight capture checkmate for good measure!

[@AgentSmith911]

or make it a stalemate instead of a checkmate lol

[@homerp.hendelbergenheinzel6649]

@@AgentSmith911 i wonder how this checkmate would be "more common" than the one in this video xD

[@no_genius]

@@homerp.hendelbergenheinzel6649 for one thing, because all knights can reach every square on the board, the 2x disambiguated knight checkmate only needs one underpromotion, when the bishop one needs at least two.

[@SadRanga6]

@@homerp.hendelbergenheinzel6649 Stalemate doesn't effect the notation. Checkmate does.

[@tolkienfan1972]

Ok, I accept that's a very rare move indeed

[@Ralyx0]

Congratulations, now that you accomplished it, it is no longer the rarest move! Task failed successfully!

[@connorbrooks7501]

The introduction did an incredible job explaining the video and got me excited to watch all the way to the end. Nice job!

[@flippert0]

Haha, my silly level 1 brain thought "ok, rarest move must be bishop underpromotion", but that is actually just the prerequisite for the actual rarest move.

[@jono5744]

I had just seen the paralogical video as well, and I was so excited to see you address the challenge and then do it. Nice job Jerry!

[@ChessNetwork]

👍

[@mwhale8092]

Can you still say it was an ambiguous bishop move requiring that extra notation since only 1 of the 3 bishop captures would result in checkmate? I feel like the true challenge is that any 3 bishop capture would result in checkmate justifying the notation

[@barmanitan]

I would assume it's impossible? Bc the king can be in a straight line with two of the bishops (for either to reveal a discovery), but never the third (I think)

[@SJNaka101]

It works by chess notation rules! Even the computer labeled it with the double disambiguation. It's legit.

[@SJNaka101]

​@barmanitan I think there's an arrangement where the capturing bishop itself delivers the checkmate, meaning any of the bishops could have made the move. But, imo this is still fair game.

[@barmanitan]

@@SJNaka101 Oh right I think I was getting mixed up with the non-capture double disambiguated bishop checkmate (where it indeed has to be a discovery). With the capture yes I agree it's possible, but finicky

[@nonamenoname246]

I agree that all three bishop moves must result in checkmate (three different discovered checks for example) to justify that rare notation. If only one bishop move is mate, then the # in the notation removes any ambiguity, and rank and file notation is not required. This means that both this game and the Paralogical video sample of the doubly disambiguated bishop mate were not in fact such a move. Compare many common moves: If one rook can move to a square but the other rook cannot only because another piece is in the way, we don't add disambiguating characters to the rook move notation

[@cptnoremac]

Just watched that video yesterday. Awesome to see how it's done, and you didn't even break a sweat under time pressure. Well done.

[@MJR_ATX]

Challenge: stalemate with as many pieces still on the board as possible

[@thedrumify]

There is a fastest theoretical stalemate as far as I know

[@cptnoremac]

@@thedrumify Yeah, but that one requires cooperation from both sides. I'm assuming the opponent means with an opponent trying to win the game.

[@simohayha6031]

​@thedrumify how do they know it's the optimal fastest stalemate? No way they've explored or calculated every possible variation or line

[@anthoras]

The visuals are great. The cartoonish style is not only appropriate for the silliness of the video, but I also find it similar to Paralogical's style (cursor especially)

[@blackeyefly]

I'm pretty sure emulating paralogical's style was the whole point

[@anthoras]

@@blackeyefly Yep

[@jerkasmo]

Jerry there was an easier way I think. For example at say around 12:00 you're having trouble finding 3 pawns to promote to dark square bishops with a dark square pawn. Instead you could put the black king "close" to stalemate/zugzwang in the corner with only 2 squares to shuffle back and forth, and then place any piece on the d2 square before playing pawn d4 to offer it up to the black pawn. If the black pawn doesn't take and shuffles the king, then put the king in stalemate until the pawn takes and moves to moves to d3 and becomes a light square black pawn. You then get to promote 3 light square bishops which is much easier to do b/c you already have 2 pawns on the left side of the board promoting to light.

[@erinphilippe5993]

I saw the other video by Paralogical but I never expected *you* to make a video on it! Nice mate!

[@looinrims]

Normies: “Hm, what can I do to calculate another move deep?” Jerry: “Hm, what can I do to make chess history?”

[@fizzman12]

solid editing. keep it up.

[@Philip8888888]

I saw the video you referred to and totally stoked that you came and did this! :)

[@ChrisConnett]

I love the topical content too! Thanks for the entertaining post, Jerry!

[@MarkARebuck]

Forgive me if this is a silly question, but: Because the bishop on e3 was the only one of the three bishops where a capture on c5 is mate... the move was not doubly disambiguated was it? I mean, "Bexc5" must be the e7 bishop, because it isn't "...#". So there are three moves here, each one unambiguous: "Baxc5", "Bexc5" (unambiguously "Be7xc5" because not mate), and "Bexc5#" (unambiguously "Be3xc5#" because mate). I think the solution needs to be something like the black King on A8, black Knight on B8, black pawns on A7 and B7 (last move was black Knight to B8). White Bishops sitting on A6, C6, and C8. At that point, any of the white bishops can take the pawn on B7 for mate... but you wouldn't know unless you specified exactly which one with both rank and file.

[@jimwinchester339]

I originally thought it'd be a situation where two bishops of opposite color are on the same file, and one can give check directly, and the other via discovery. In such a scenario, specifying the file alone of the bishop would be insufficient to identify it: you'd have to specify both its file and rank. But then I realized that the destination square of the bishop would provide disambiguation. I also was of the opinion that the basic move itsef would be a pawn promotion to something other than a queen. Promotions to a knight are not that rare (because it can do moves that even a queen can't): but promotions to bishop or rook are done only so that the promotion itself does not induce a statelemate. That's why I thought promotion to bishop would be the rarest move.

[@justinc0336]

Okay, hear me out, same challenge, but it’s a double discovered checkmate from the bishop. It would have to be a capture on the ending square. Say if the mating bishop started on a2, the black king is on a8…The bishop takes on d5 with a rook ( or queen) on a1 to mate.

[@fifiwoof1969]

The thing about that video that called it rare - heaps of people will try doing it, thus making it less rare. Double disambiguated knight capture checkmate was next i think.

[@qbzone2060]

now it's time for Doubly Disambiguated Knight Capture Checkmate ;)

[@preparedsurvivalist2245]

Next challenge: create a position where "!" is a same color bishop promotion for the SECOND time.

[@guillaumeleguludec8454]

Hi Jerry thanks for the video, very fun to watch you stratch your head and get creative solving this trick! I'm just nitpicking but, since only one of the bishop moves could lead to the discoved checkmate I'm wondering why the notation has to specify which one actually moved. Like Bxe3# could have been enough right? Lichess annotated it in the desired form anyway, but I was hoping to see a position were any of the bishop capture would have administered the mate!

[@xean316]

Your editing skills are on display here! Nice Jerry

[@fifiwoof1969]

What is the shortest proof game for double disambiguated bishop capture checkmate?

[@Javidfarali1980]

Well done. I was wondering why that other video and this video kept getting recommended together lol

[@truehiddenb]

Wait this video's production is top tier, I wasn't expecting this from your channel of all places but I have to say I'm really impressed lol

[@LukeLongboneOfficial]

Lol is right. Are you drunk?

[@acidic.sydney]

this as a speedrun category would go crazy

[@graemeweir1948]

This video was so much fun! Thank you

[@Dead_Anteater]

Is this just a programming error in lichess though? There is no need for the double disambiguation because the bishop on e3 is the only one that leads to checkmate, so clarifying which bishop moved it redundant

[@fburton8]

Nice followup to Paralogical's video! Well done!

[@TymexComputing]

Haha - have seen that video yesterday :) - he also analyzed bullet games which state the most of games at lichess - the checkmate in his examples usually spoils the ambiguation - there is only one bishop that could make a discovery checkmate not three of them.

[@chaldeanguy8356]

Jerry, I love what you've done with the chess community, and you're, by far, my favourite chess streamer, if not chess player, but...In my opinion, you took SF1 waaaaay too seriously, lol.

[@sckerz]

im confused, why does the notation need to be doubly disambiguated as a bishop capture if only one of the bishops is mate when moved to that square??? for example, if 2 Knights can move to the same square but one of them is pinned, then you dont need to disambiguate the notation for that reason. so why would you need to doubly disambiguate the notation if only one of the bishop moves moving/capturing on that square is #?

[@sckerz]

here is what i came up was able to come up with 8/8/4Q3/4B3/3p4/3P3R/QB2kBQ1/2K4R w - - 0 1

[@andyolol]

But only one bishop could move to give check mate in this position, so there is no need for the disambiguation, or?

[@SJNaka101]

Technically yes, but chess notation is just a system with rules for disambiguation. As you can see, the computer itself gave the double disambiguated notation simply because that's how notation rules work. If there's two pieces that could make the move, you disambiguate with preference to file, if there's 2 pieces on the same file that could make the same move then you display rank, and if there's a piece on the same rank and a piece on the same file then you get the double disambiguation. Check and checkmate are just sort of added at the end and not part of the equation

[@andyolol]

Thanks for clarifying :)

[@michaeletkin4111]

The secret chess move that grand masters don't want you to know

[@Lembo101]

Well played, been a while since I've really enjoyed a chess video from start to finish.

[@ric8248]

Why does the notation need rank and file disambiguation when only one of the bishops can deliver checkmate? Wouldn't Bxc5# suffice?

[@fifiwoof1969]

Double disambiguated bishop capture checkmate? A recent video i saw found it hasn't happened in entire Lichess (i think) database.

[@fifiwoof1969]

Edit: I commented before watching!

[@edelachtbare100]

Great idea Jerry!

[@Matthew-bu7fg]

Jerry's Immortal Forget Shirov against Topalov, this will go down in the annals of time as move of the century! In all seriousness this was a really cool video. I enjoyed it and it was funny seeing how challenging it actually was!

[@markmortimer3009]

That's awesome. I just watched the rarest move video yesterday and great to see it in the history books now.

[@Dwinner9000]

ChessNetwork is ChessSimp confirmed

[@colemanhoyt5437]

It all makes sense now

[@PushyPawn]

Obviously the next challenge is the "Doubly Disambiguated Knight Capture Checkmate"

[@rickdynes]

Jerry, I don't know I don't know you ..don't know you anymore.

[@linkeshifttaste1455]

Well I waited for this kind of video since the reference video, amazing!

[@bencheevers6693]

I saw the video mentioned in this video, it's really good and I'm really happy it prompted a new video from Jerry

[@neel8631]

What about a double disambiguated bishop capture by white followed by a doubly disambiguated bishop capture mate by black? Would be almost impossible to do without careful premeditation though, and only really counts as rarer if you consider the turn as a whole…

[@salovamrani2084]

Bro these moving letters gave me a shrooms flashback

[@slMagnvox]

i once got to play 0-0-0# in a blitz game ;P

[@matthiasmuhleder1710]

How many different move are there (with different notation)

[@danielhanafin9885]

The magic of chess is back. Thank you Jerry

[@thomasdequincey5811]

This was fun. Silly, but enjoyable.

[@VocalMabiMaple]

Can you do the double disambiguation knight version?

[@violetasuklevska9074]

Suggestion: Play bxa8=N#, sounds impossible, but there is a trick if you keep a certain piece alive, and try to not make it a discovered attack :) and for a real challenge Ba1xb2# as white. Also, you could have sacrificed a knight on d4 in the game, you can always stalemate the king to force the move.

[@iwersonsch5131]

I'd like to see an underpromotion to a rook with doublecheck

[@zmancan5290]

This is diabolical, Jerry. You simultaneously honored and completely negated Paralogical's video. You made his math wrong within one day! Your only redemption is showing why a doubly disambiguated bishop capture checkmate has and would never appear in regular play: you have to play so contrary to good chess principles and avoid winning lines to even get to the point where it is possible!

[@MrBrain4]

I would like to see an en passant capture checkmate via discovered double check by two queens simultaneously. Good luck achieving that!

[@zacharyjricker7228]

You're an absolute mad scientist, Jerry!

[@twown]

But in this case, only that one particular bishop move yields mate. So disambiguation is redundant. It would be more impressive if all three bishop captures yielded mate, thus necessitating disambiguation. :)

[@RobertRodriguez-ic2mm]

Checkmate with no pieces captured

[@sebastian_meier]

try to get a mate by promoting to knight on a8 or h8 - extra challenge: promoting with capture

[@qbzone2060]

nice vid! I still remember the en passant checkmate 😊

[@sCraNDoMxD]

This is the comic sans of chess pieces

[@KingoftheJuice18]

I thought you did it more easily than I imagined it would be!

[@danielhanafin9885]

Poor stockfish

[@donj2222]

I think this is a rare notation for a move, but that is different from the rarest move, which is something different. A move is one piece from one square to a legal square, except in the case of a castle which is the move of 2 pieces. So at least the wording of the challenge is not correct.

[@matiasg1234]

OMG I can´t believe I saw the video yesterday and today Jerry make a game about it! :)

[@fifiwoof1969]

Why trade off dark squared bishop when trying to promote to dark squared bishops?

[@venisontron]

why were you so intent on making three dark square bishops when you could have just promoted two light square bishops?

[@blackeyefly]

He has to capture something with the bishop and black's only remaining capturable things were pawns on dark squares. Though it was possible to force black to move a pawn, he must have decided it easier to just promote 3 dark square bishops

[@ignorance112]

I just recently got done watching that video

[@illustriouschin]

I bet it ties for rarest with at least 16 thousand other moves.

[@8ealer]

Using Comic Sans style of pieces for this video was a nice touch. :)

[@rmoss42]

I knew someone would respond to that rare move video with "Hold my B...ishop!"😂 That was fabulous, but it did seem like there were a couple straightforward tricks to brute force your way there eventually. I wonder if a more "common" rare move like o-o# is actually harder to setup/have the computer walk into?

[@upsidewalks]

Challenge: Cause a self-mate by promoting your pawn to a knight. I think it's impossible to get paying against the pc. Even just a self-mate would require a lot of games and a lot of luck

[@RehcamretsneF]

And it is now not the rarest move!

[@gbu32]

Wow! Unbelievable! That was great! Well Done!

[@neuxell]

watch at 1.5s for normal conversation pace talking lmao

[@constantinekhvalin6038]

how about a checkmate with a king and three knights? (if it’s theoretically possible)

[@KA54the]

Checkmate with all 32 pieces still on the board

[@Eulers_Identity]

How about a bishop underpromotion discovered checkmate?

[@KF1]

Chess-Network points : 7

[@LthiagoR]

Fun, entertaining and educational as always!!

[@stevebutler2738]

So is it the rarest move still? And does play to computer games count in the? I need answers

[@Entheos84]

What an epic intro Jerry! :D

[@puzzleman9086]

0:26 I thought I have retinopathy😢

[@Neodynium.the_permanent_magnet]

Stockfish level *one* ?

[@rammsteinfen1]

Yesterday i have watched the video of paralogical that you have mention in this video. Will be interesting to watch what will happen here

[@mubishop69]

I kind of figured he would do this after I watched the other video.

[@cezklimczuk8207]

I knew it was only a matter of time before Jerry would hop on it! Love it ❤❤

[@Danceofmasks]

But ... what about the disambiguated en passant discover checkmate?

[@CatSurfer]

All pawn captures are disambiguated

[@Danceofmasks]

@@CatSurfer Think about it a little more. The enemy pawn ends up inbetween two of yours. How are you going to denote which pawn captures?

[@Danceofmasks]

@@CatSurfer hmm. you're right. my mistake

[@matiasg1234]

Challenge: try to beat Jerry and win in the less amount of moves possible. Other Challenge: try to do it against stockfish 1 with 1+ 1 or less good luck