Answers.Body: <p>White's third move can already be a Queenless mate:</p>
  <pre><code>[Title &quot;Look, Ma, no Queen (checkmate on White's move 3)&quot;]
  [FEN &quot;rnbqkbnr/pppppppp/8/8/8/8/PPPPPPPP/RNBQKBNR w - - 0 1&quot;]
  
  1. e4 g5!? 2. Be2?! f6?? 3. Bh5#
  </code></pre>
  
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2024-06-18T16:10:31.013Z
Answers.Text: A knight takes 3 moves: 1.e4 Nc6 2.Ne2 Ne5 3.c4 Nd3#
  
  It's a fun puzzle to try R, P or even K. (It is easy
  to get 5 for R and P and 6 for K. Can you do better?)
Answers.UserDisplayName: Hauke Reddmann
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2024-06-18T16:46:45.710Z
Answers.Text: Looks like a question for François Labelle. For P there's a 4.0 move helpmate, 1 e3 e5 2 Ke2 Qh4 3 Kf3 pass 4 Q(B,N)e2 e4#.  An example of 4.5 by R is Benko's old puzzle: White opens with 1 a3 and mates on move 5 with a Rook. King 5.0: 1 f3 e5 2 Kf2 Ke7 3 Kg3 Kf6 4 Kh4 d6 5 g3 Kg6#.
Answers.UserDisplayName: Noam D. Elkies
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2024-06-19T07:56:40.487Z
Answers.Text: Ah, the old question (recently warmed up by problemist Peter Schmidt in his book on this theme): Who gives the mate? In case of a discovered check, like in your example, two pieces are involved. (I'm in the "the moving piece" cabal; writing "mate by an X move" circumsteps the whole issue.)
Answers.UserDisplayName: Hauke Reddmann
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2024-06-19T13:53:44.470Z
Answers.Text: Well you asked for a K mate, which in orthodox chess can only mean
  that the K moves to discover check -- or I suppose castling,
  but that's really a separate task.
  None of the other examples were discovered check
  so the "old question" is moot.
Answers.UserDisplayName: Noam D. Elkies
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2024-06-18T15:40:43.143Z
Answers.LastActivityDate: 2024-06-18T15:40:43.143Z
Answers.UserDisplayName: Noam D. Elkies
Body: <p>I know about the 2 move mate where the 2 side pawns move up and the Queen comes in and delivers a swift checkmate, but what if the Queen was not being used, or wasn't on the board in the first place?</p>
  
Tags: <checkmate><queens>
Title: What is the shortest possible way to checkmate your opponent without using a Queen?
ThreadText: # What is the shortest possible way to checkmate your opponent without using a Queen?
  
  (Asked by: username_0 on 2024-06-18)
  
  I know about the 2 move mate where the 2 side pawns move up and the Queen comes in and delivers a swift checkmate, but what if the Queen was not being used, or wasn't on the board in the first place?
  
  **Tags:** checkmate, queens
  
  
  ---
  
  ## 1 answers
  
  ### Answer by username_1 on 2024-06-18. Score: 3 | Accepted answer
  
  White's third move can already be a Queenless mate:
  [Title "Look, Ma, no Queen (checkmate on White's move 3)"]
  [FEN "rnbqkbnr/pppppppp/8/8/8/8/PPPPPPPP/RNBQKBNR w - - 0 1"]
  
  1. e4 g5!? 2. Be2?! f6?? 3. Bh5#
  
  > **Comments:**
  > **username_2**: A knight takes 3 moves: 1.e4 Nc6 2.Ne2 Ne5 3.c4 Nd3#  It's a fun puzzle to try R, P or even K. (It is easy to get 5 for R and P and 6 for K. Can you do better?)  
  > **username_1**: Looks like a question for François Labelle. For P there's a 4.0 move helpmate, 1 e3 e5 2 Ke2 Qh4 3 Kf3 pass 4 Q(B,N)e2 e4#.  An example of 4.5 by R is Benko's old puzzle: White opens with 1 a3 and mates on move 5 with a Rook. King 5.0: 1 f3 e5 2 Kf2 Ke7 3 Kg3 Kf6 4 Kh4 d6 5 g3 Kg6#.  
  > **username_2**: Ah, the old question (recently warmed up by problemist Peter Schmidt in his book on this theme): Who gives the mate? In case of a discovered check, like in your example, two pieces are involved. (I'm in the "the moving piece" cabal; writing "mate by an X move" circumsteps the whole issue.)  
  > **username_1**: Well you asked for a K mate, which in orthodox chess can only mean that the K moves to discover check -- or I suppose castling, but that's really a separate task. None of the other examples were discovered check so the "old question" is moot.  
  
  ---
  
  