this post was submitted on 25 Jul 2025
15 points (94.1% liked)

Chess

2213 readers
2 users here now

Play chess on-line

FIDE Rankings

September 2023

# Player Country Elo
1 Magnus Carlsen ๐Ÿ‡ณ๐Ÿ‡ด 2839
2 Fabiano Caruana ๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ 2786
3 Hikaru Nakamura ๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ 2780
4 Ding Liren ๐Ÿ† ๐Ÿ‡จ๐Ÿ‡ณ 2780
5 Alireza Firouzja ๐Ÿ‡ซ๐Ÿ‡ท 2777
6 Ian Nepomniachtchi ๐Ÿ‡ท๐Ÿ‡บ 2771
7 Anish Giri ๐Ÿ‡ณ๐Ÿ‡ฑ 2760
8 Gukesh D ๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡ณ 2758
9 Viswanathan Anand ๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡ณ 2754
10 Wesley So ๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ 2753

Tournaments

Speed Chess Championship 2023

September 4 - September 22

Check also

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 

This question was posed to me, and I was surprised that I could not find a solution (as I thought that all rook tours [open or closed] were possible). Starting from a8, could a rook visit every square on the board once, ending on f3?

I tried a few times, with a few different strategies, but I always ended up missing one square.

It's really easy to burn pairs of rows or columns, so the problem space could be reduced...

...but at some point (4x4), I was able to convince myself that it is impossible (at least at this size and state):

...but it might be possible that shaving off column or row pairs is also discarding a solution?

all 30 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old

Any route from white to white visiting N white squares must visit exactly N-1 black squares. Any route from white to black visiting N white squares must visit exactly N black squares. Therefore on a board with an equal amount of white and black squares, it's not possible to walk a route from a white square to a white square and visit all squares.

You can prove it through induction. Starting with a route that visits just one white square, you visit zero black squares. Then, if you want to extend your route with one white square, you must also visit exactly one black square to get to it, as no two white squares border one another. Meaning for a route of S steps (where each 'step' is actually two moves from a white square to the next white square), you visit S+1 white squares and S black squares, or equivalently N white squares and N-1 black squares.

[โ€“] hexabs@lemmy.world 3 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (1 children)

All the grids have even number of squares (equal black and white). Therefore it is impossible to start on white and end on white while covering everything else.

I don't have the formal proof for this, but can be proven with examples. In each of your grids.

I'll be following this thread to see if someone shares the formal proof for this, fingers crossed!

[โ€“] 7uWqKj@lemmy.world 3 points 2 days ago

Youโ€™re right, guess the reason is that the rook changes the colour of the square itโ€™s on with every move. After an odd number of moves itโ€™s on the opposite colour, after an even number of moves itโ€™s back on the colour it started on. So, no sequence of 63 moves starting on a light square can ever end on another light square.

[โ€“] Mozingo@lemmy.world 4 points 2 days ago (1 children)

This puzzle is definitely impossible. In fact it seems to be some sort of parity issue, although I'm having trouble with the actual proof. Basically if you always keep the start in the top left corner, then you can only complete a rook's tour if the end square has an odd manhattan distance (x distance + y distance). If you put the end square an even manhattan distance away, then you create this issue where you're always unable to hit one square.

For example, even parity, impossible:

Odd parity, possible:

[โ€“] Fleur_@aussie.zone 4 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

You start in white and you can only move to black. Then you have to move to white again then black, then white, then black and so on. For a sequence with an even number of terms you have to end on black if you start in white .Since the puzzle states you have to start and end on white it's impossible.

[โ€“] Fleur_@aussie.zone 2 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (3 children)

Uhhhh yeah?

I found this to be really easy but I don't play chess so maybe I'm misunderstanding or perhaps the question was worded wrong?

Using these rules from your post

"Starting from a8, could a rook visit every square on the board once, ending on f3?"

And standard rook movement

I came up with this solution.

Follow the numbers up or down from the start or finish. Highlighted squares show moves to squares that aren't adjacent.

I'd imagine there's lots of solutions with different patterns, this is just the one that came to me on the fly.

[โ€“] Mozingo@lemmy.world 3 points 2 days ago (1 children)

The rule is better said that you can visit each square "once and only once." Every time you move to a non-adjacent square, you're crossing a square for a second time and breaking the rule.

[โ€“] Fleur_@aussie.zone 1 points 2 days ago

If you can only move to black squares from white squares then for a sequence with an even number of terms if you start on a white square you have to end on a black square. Because the problem states you have to start and end on white it's impossible to do without crossing over squares.

[โ€“] bleistift2@sopuli.xyz 2 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Did you start from the square labeled โ€œendโ€?

[โ€“] Fleur_@aussie.zone 1 points 2 days ago

Don't think of it as the number being the order of the steps, think of it as being how many are left lol

[โ€“] Fleur_@aussie.zone 0 points 2 days ago

The other puzzles in your post are also solvable btw but I won't spoil them

[โ€“] SilverLous@hexbear.net 1 points 2 days ago

doesn't visit usually mean "ends movement in that square"? 'Cause that means skipping squares is allowed. So just fill out the board until the last row and skip ahead of the end tile while doing so. Do the last row in an order that the last col is the same col as the end square, move to end square.

[โ€“] bleistift2@sopuli.xyz 1 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (2 children)

โ€ฆย unless I donโ€™t fully understand the problem.

[โ€“] Fleur_@aussie.zone 3 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (1 children)

Diagonal move in top right corner?

Edit: wait actually along the whole right side

[โ€“] bleistift2@sopuli.xyz 2 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (2 children)

Thanks for pointing that out. That mistake was easily mendable.

I hope I havenโ€™t blundered somewhere else.

[โ€“] xia@lemmy.sdf.org 5 points 2 days ago (2 children)

In this context, you cannot cross a square without visiting it.

[โ€“] Fleur_@aussie.zone 4 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

Logical proof of why it's not possible for your given rules of not being able to pass through squares.

You start in white and you can only move to black. Then you have to move to white again, then black, then white, then black and so on. For a sequence with an even number of terms you have to end on black if you start in white .Since the puzzle states you have to start and end on white it's impossible.

[โ€“] Fleur_@aussie.zone 1 points 2 days ago

I don't think it's possible in that case

[โ€“] Fleur_@aussie.zone 3 points 2 days ago

Mmm that's a good way of showing it, very visual and easy to follow.

[โ€“] SwarmMazer@awful.systems -1 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Rooks donโ€™t move diagonal. I was able to do this exercise in my head on about the third try however. Start with big laps round the outside x2, then column by column to finish

[โ€“] xia@lemmy.sdf.org 2 points 2 days ago (1 children)

I may not be understanding you correctly. Can you elaborate? Feel free to use coordinates.

[โ€“] SwarmMazer@awful.systems 3 points 2 days ago (1 children)

I am afraid that I didnโ€™t apply any rigor here and thought I solved it. Been playing with it for a bit and see there is likely not a solution. Good fun for me.

[โ€“] SwarmMazer@awful.systems 1 points 2 days ago (2 children)

Seems this is related to Hamiltonian path problems. The issue is there is always one square that canโ€™t be picked up. Why could this be?

[โ€“] Fleur_@aussie.zone 1 points 2 days ago (1 children)

So the rook has to move from a white square to a black square or a black square to a white one. This would mean the sequence would go white, black, white, black and so on for all squares. Since there is an even number of squares if the rook starts on white it must end on black but the problem states the start and end squares are both white, thus impossible to solve. Doesn't really have anything to do with hamiltonian paths because they are loops that will fill a space. It does relate more broadly to space filling curves in general but I think a graphical approach to this problem can be a bit misleading.

Interestingly you can pick any two white squares on the chess board and you couldn't make a path between them in the way op is trying to.

[โ€“] SwarmMazer@awful.systems 1 points 2 days ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

If you take the rooks movement, and reduce each longer move to a series of single steps a1a2a3a4 for example, this becomes a Hamiltonian problem. The corners have 2 nodes, the edges three, and the core has four. Black and white indicates even or uneven distance in nodes.

[โ€“] Fleur_@aussie.zone 2 points 1 day ago

Ahh yes sorry my bad I mixed up hamiltonian and hilbert in my head

[โ€“] SwarmMazer@awful.systems 1 points 2 days ago

The 2x2 case is impossible, I suspect it is related in some way.

[โ€“] graham1@lemmy.world 1 points 2 days ago (1 children)

You're forgetting knook promotion when you reach the opposite side, combining the knight and rook tour, making it possible again