An unsolved shatranj problem

Gathering material for my recent blog about Zairab, I've found a position [mansuba] in Murray's history [without diagram] that maybe is cooked but maybe not...

Reminder:

In Shatranj:

• Farzin [Q] moves and takes only 1 square diagonally
• Win comes with checkmate but also with the bare king rule: that is to leave the opponent's army without any other piece but the king. Unless, in the next move the opponent, also, can capture your last piece. Then it's a draw.
• Repetition draw rule is applied [Murray's History, p. 229]

from Murray's History, p. 331, no 81

So Murray gives a solution that maybe is cooked, by the repetition rule, and says that there's a longer one that he doesn't present.

It's white to play and win by bare king rule, with Murray's solution. If anyone wants to try it and find if the possible cook can be cured...

wat did i just saw/read

what??

you mean the problem?? what is idiotic?

I think maybe they didn't read your whole OP and they don't realize that Shatranj is different from chess.

pity!! I thought it was "idiotic" cause the solution could be easy and my questioning could be satisfied! Anyway... but in any case shatranj is kinda fairy chess, isn't it?!?

I adapted John Tromp's retrograde solver for Al-Suli's Diamond to this endgame, and found that it is indeed won but with a different move order than given by Murray, avoiding the repetition:

1. Ke7 Ng7 2.Kf7! Nh5 (not ...Nf5 3.Ne7+ forcing the trade of knights) 3.Kg6 Ng3 4.Ne3! Kd7 5.Kg5 Na1 6.Nc4 and you are back to the theme of the published solution.

Shatranj like the Thai variant Makruk is a treasure trove of endgame studies that are entirely different than those of modern international chess!

Yes 1. Ke7 Ng7 2. Kf7! indeed.

I think we should write a list of the mansubat for which Murray gave a wrong solution.