Sie sind auf Seite 1von 12

THE PROBLEMIST

SUPPLEMENT
ISSUE 133
NOVEMBER 2014
EDITOR: Geoff Foster
20 Allchin Circuit, Kambah ACT 2902, Australia
(prob.supp@gmail.com)
Send solutions and comments to the Editor at
the above address
ORIGINALS EDITOR: John Rice
9 Manor Crescent, Surbiton KT5 8LG
(jmr.64@tiscali.co.uk).
All originals printed in the Supplement take part in the
normal Problemist tourneys, so that publication here is
equivalent to publication in the main magazine.

CONTENTS
Thoroughly Modern Mansfield, by Barry Barnes
Original problems PS2903-2914 .
.
Solutions to May originals
.
.
On Reconstructions and Rotations,
by David Shire .
.
.
More Masters Own Favourites, by Barry Barnes
Pawn Retros in Growing Men, by R.Turnbull
Incomplete Blocks with Changed Mates .
Fairy solutions (May) .
.
.
Fairy originals PS2915-2920F .
.

. 385
. 386
. 388
.
.
.
.
.
.

390
391
392
393
395
396

THOROUGHLY MODERN MANSFIELD, by Barry Barnes


The problem that Comins Mansfield chose in 1972 as his favourite (half-pinner) from his own output is so
well-known now (1 Pr, El Ajedrez Argentino 1926/7 1.Qe7!) that Geoff Foster rightly suggested that I might
presume on my long friendship with CM to choose another two on the great mans behalf. It was a daunting
choice. With his 1,192 problems, he had proved repeatedly that he was the absolute Grandmaster of the
traditional two-move problem. Just what to choose from so many masterpieces? In
A Comins Mansfield
the end, I chose problems you might not guess were by him. The great
Suomen Shakki 1967
traditionalist could hold his own with those who championed more modern
ideas. I think that A and B still have the power to surprise and impress.
bdwhwdwd
A 1.Sdf4! (2.Re4,Se5,Qd5,Qc5,Qb5,Qe4,Qd3,Qc2) Sxb7 2.Re4; 1Sxf5
2.Se5; 1Qxe3 2.Qd5; 1Bxb7 2.Qc5; 1Qxf4 2.Qb5; 1Bxf4 2.Qe4; 1Bf6
2.Qd3; 1axb4 2.Qc2. 8 different threats are separated by 8 best moves by
Black with breath-taking skill. For Probleemblad 1967, CM made a quite
different setting to match A. I wrote These problems will be seen in years to
come as important and innovative a milestone in much the same way that taking
the straightjacket off Complete Blocks opened the way to general acceptance of
free change. CM was then an inventive 71.

dRdwdwhw
wdwdRdNd
0wdNdQgr
wGkdwdw4
dwdw)w1w
Kdwdw0wd
dwdwdwdw

CM was President of the then FIDE Problem Commission when he dedicated


this unusual problem to the organisers of the Tampere Congress 1967. It was there
I persuaded CM that it was time for more of his unfailing output to be published
in book form. At the time the last books were his Adventures in Composition
(1944) and Brian Harleys The Modern Two-Move Chess Problem (1958). The
result was Comins Mansfield MBE: Chess Problems of a Grandmaster (1976) and
the three volumes of Complete Mansfield completed in 1999.

#2

B As inventive as ever at 76, CM pre-empted in Meredith a theme in vogue


in later years. 1.Bd4? (2.Qe5,Kc3) Kxd4 2.Qf4; 1Bxd4 2.Kd2; 1Kf5 2.Qe5;
but 1Rxh2! 1.Be3! (2.Qf4,Kd2) Kxe3 2.Qe5; 1Bxe3 2.Kc3; 1Kf5 2.Qf4
(changed). Just a trifle aided by a give-and-take key (CM) but the cognoscenti
went into raptures over its Odessa theme pattern: 1.Try? (2.A,B) a/b 2.C/D. Key!
(2.C,D) c/d 2.A/B. The mates of the try are the threats of the actual play, and
vice versa. A tour-de-force! (Europe Echecs).

B Comins Mansfield

4 HM, Europe Echecs


1972

w!wdwdwd
dwdw0wdw
wdwdwdp4
$wGPdwdw
wdwdkdwd
dwdwdwdw
wdKdwgwH
dBdwdwdw
#2

THE PROBLEMIST SUPPLEMENT

386

NOVEMBER 2014

ORIGINAL PROBLEMS PS2903-2914


Plenty of tries in this months 2-movers, and PS2905 has set play as well. The current fashion for white
moves that recur at different points in the various phases of a problem is also well represented. We greet a new
composer from Indonesia, and mention that his #3 follows that same fashion. The bK in PS2908 looks well
enough protected, but bit by bit White dismantles the barrier. Most of the helpmates will prove straightforward,
though PS2914 could well hold you up longer than the rest. The composers talent in this genre is amply
demonstrated.
As mentioned in the September issue, there is a marked shortage of original direct-mates and helpmates in
the file at present. So I repeat the appeal to composers: do send your unpublished compositions for inclusion in
this magazine! Just at present I can offer quick publication.
JMR
White plays up the board in all positions.

DEFINITIONS

In Directmates (those problems with a #n notation below the diagram, where the n denotes the number
of moves) White plays first (the key) and forces mate at latest on his nth move, whatever Black plays. Set Play
is what would happen if Black were to play first in the diagram position. For instance, in a #2 there is often set
play where black moves are followed by white mates and this can form part of the theme of a problem. Tries
are white moves that would solve but for a single black refutation. The black defences and white mates
following tries can form part of the theme of a problem.
In Helpmates (those problems with a H#n notation below the diagram, where the n denotes the number
of moves) Black plays first and co-operates with White to enable White to mate Black on Whites nth move.
These have a single solution unless otherwise indicated below the diagram. Sometimes, the number of moves
asked for in helpmates includes a half-move, such as H#2. In these helpmates the normal sequence of moves
is preceded by a white move. So H#2 indicates the following sequence: 1...W 2.B W 3.B W#. An asterisk
following the stipulation indicates the presence of set play, so H#2* means 1W 2.B W# plus 1.B W 2.B W#.
Twins, indicated by a notation such as (b) wPe2>d3 under the diagram, are problems with more than one
position for solving. Unless otherwise stated, each twin position is formed from the diagram position.
Duplex problems are those where White fulfils the stipulation and then Black does. So a H#2 duplex has two
solutions, the first as in a normal helpmate and the second with White playing first and being mated by Black.

All the originals published in every issue of the Supplement are computer-tested. If the computer has
been unable to verify soundness, the symbol C? is shown. Otherwise solvers can assume that soundness has
been confirmed.
Send solutions and comments to the Editor by 1st April 2015.

PS2903 Robert Lincoln


(USA)

PS2904 Rainer Paslack


(Germany)

PS2905 ivko Janevski


(Macedonia)

Kdkdwdwd
dw0pGwdw
w0wdwdwd
dwdwdwdw
w!wdwdwd
dwdwdwdw
wdwdwdwd
dwdwdwdw

wdwdwdwd
dwdw)wdp
wdn$wIwd
dwdw0wdR
wdwgk0wd
!wdpdwdw
wdw0wGPd
dwdwdwdw

wdwdwdw4
dp)Pdpdw
w!wdN0pG
dwdwip4w
wdwdw0wd
dKHwdwdw
wdwdw)Ph
dwdwdwdw

#2

#2

#2

NOVEMBER 2014

THE PROBLEMIST SUPPLEMENT

387

PS2906 David Shire

PS2907 Efan T.S.


(Indonesia)

PS2908 Lee Poissant


(USA)

wdwdwdwd
0wdrdwdw
wdwdNdpd
IN$wdwdw
wdpdwGw0
dwdk0whR
bdw0wdwd
dwdQdwdB

wdwdwdwd
dpdpdbdw
wdwGwgwd
dRdpdwdw
w)wiPHwd
dwdPdwdw
w)wdKdwd
dwdwdwdR

wdwdwdwd
dwdwdw0n
wdwdwHpi
dQdwdw0w
wdwdpdw0
dwdwIwdw
wdwdwdwd
dwdwdwdw

#2

#3

#7

PS2909 Jean Carf


(France)

PS2910 Michael McDowell

PS2911
A.Ivunin & A.Pankratiev
(Russia)

wdRdwdwd
dwdwdwdw
wdpdwdwd
dwdNdwdw
wdwibdwd
dwdwdwdw
wHwdwdwG
dwdKdwdw

wdwdwdwd
dwdwdwhp
wdwdw4wi
dwdwdwdp
wdwdwdwd
dwdwdw0w
p0wgwdwd
4wdwGRdK

wdwdwdwd
dwdwdKdw
pdwdwdwd
dBdpdwdw
Rdqgwdwd
dwdkdwdw
wdwdwdwd
dwdwdwdw

H#2 3 solutions

H#2 2 solutions

H#3 (b) Bb5>e8

PS2912 Christer Jonsson


(Sweden)

PS2913 John Rice

PS2914 Christopher Jones

Kdwdwdwd
dwdwdwdw
wdw0w0wG
dwdN$pdw
wdwdq)pd
dwhk)wdw
wdwdwdwd
dwdwdwdw

wdwdwdwd
dwdwhndw
wdwdwdrd
dwdwdk0w
wdwgr0wd
Hwdwdwdw
Kdwdwdwd
dwdwdwdw

ndkdwdwd
db4wdwdp
w0w0w0wd
dwdwdwdw
w0w1wdpd
dPdwdwdw
wdwdwdP0
dwdwIwdw

H#3 2 solutions

H#4 2 solutions

H#5 2 solutions

THE PROBLEMIST SUPPLEMENT

388
PS2835

BdwIwdNd
)R$pdwdw
rdw4wdnd
dpgkdPdw
wdwdwdwd
dwdPdwdw
wGwdwdwd
dwdwdwdw
#2
PS2836

wHwdQdwd
4wdb0wdw
w)wiwdwd
dwdwdwHw
w)rdPIwd
hwdw)Pdw
BdwdwdwG
dwdwdwdw

NOVEMBER 2014

SOLUTIONS (May)
PS2835 (Robert) 1.Rxd7 (>2.Rb6) Rxd7+ 2.Rxd7; 1B~ 2.Rxb5; 1Bb6+
2.Rbc7; 1Rxa7 2.Rxa7; 1Kc6 2.Rb8; 1Rc6 2.Sf6; 1Se5,Se7 2.S(x)e7.
What a lovely Rookery! Please let it not be anticipated (B.P.Barnes). A delicious
variation after 1Bb6+ (C.J.Morse). Fairly obvious key but lots of play
(C.C.Frankiss). Rooks cross (R.Lazowski). Plenty of play (L.Lyons).
PS2836 (Shire & Rice) Set 1e5+ 2.Qxe5. 1.Qh8? (>2.Qe5) Rxe4+ 2.Sxe4;
1Rc5 2.Sf7; 1e6 2.Qf8; 1Ra5! 1.Se6! (>2.Kf5) Bxe6 2.Kg5; 1Rxe4+
2.Kxe4; 1Rc5 2.bxc5; 1Rc2 2.e5; 1Kxe6 2.Qg6; 1Ra5 2.Qxd7. A
Nowotny involving black Bishop and Pawn is an
impossibility, as everyone knows. This is an attempt
PS2837
to get close to the idea (JMR). Convincing try,
wdwdwdwd
1e5+ still provided for, mates (to be changed)
dNdBdw0w
after 1Rc5 and 1Rxe4+, excellent refutation,
wdwdPdwd
sacrificial key, thought-provoking wK battery play,
ample play from the black Rooks, and exemplary
0P0k)wdr
construction everything except the Bishop/Pawn
rdb0w!w0
Nowotny! But quality will out (BPB). Good key to
)pdwdNdw
allow B/K battery to fire. Good play as well (CCF).
wdwdpdwd

PS2837 (Paslack) 1.Sd2? (>2.Qe4) Bd3 2.Rxc5;


1Rxe5!
1.Sd6? (>2.Qe4) Rxe5 2.Qxe5; 1Bd3!
#2
#2
1.Qg4? (>2.Bc6) Bxb5 2.Rxc5; 1Rf5! 1.Sd8?
(>2.Bc6) Rxe5 2.Qxe5; 1Bxb5! 1.Sxc5! (>2.Qxd4) Bxb5 2.Qe4; 1Bd3 2. Bc6; 1Kxc5 2.Qxd4. 9th
WCCT theme: two pairs of tries each with the same threat, and recurrence of these threats as variation-mates
after the key (JMR). Clever combination of Banny theme with the WCCT theme. I liked the use of the wSb7 for
three thematic first moves. Overall, the problem lacks the attention-grabbing clarity of the WCCT9 winners
(BPB). wPa3 signals the flight-giving key (CJM).

dw$wIwdw

PS2838

PS2839

wGwdwdwd
dwdwdwIw
whwdpdwd
dwdkdwdw
wdwdwdwd
dwdBdwdw
wdwdwdwd
dw!wdwdw

wdwdNdwd
dwdwdwdw
wdwdwdwI
dwdwiwdw
wdwdwdwd
dw)P)Pdw
Bdwdwdwd
dwdwdwdw

#3

#6 Black to play
(b) bK>f5 (c) wSe8>g6 in (b)

PS2838 (Lambrinakos) 1.Be2 (-) e5 2.Qc7 S~


3.Q(x)c4; 2Ke6 3.Qf7; 2Ke4,Kd4 3.Qxe5;
2e4 3.Qd6; 1Ke4 2.Qc3 (>3.Qd3,Qe5) Kf5/Kd5
3.Qe5/Bf3; 1Kd4 2.Qd2+ Ke4/Kc5 3.Qd3/Qd6.
Its wonderful the way in which Petros spins so
many mates and a good key from material we
thought thoroughly mined! I found it difficult to
work out why not 1.Bf1, for example (BPB). A
beauty! Had plenty of false analysis here. Knew it
was all about zugzwang, but took a while to
correctly put together the ideas (S.Pantos).

PS2839 (Marks) (a) 1Kf5 2.Bg8 Ke5 3.d4+


Kf5 4.Sc7 Kf6 5.Sd5+ Kf5 6.e4. (b) 1Ke5 2.d4+
Kf5 3.d5 Ke5 4.c4 Kf5 5.Bb1+ Ke5 6.f4. (c) 1Kf6 2.Bb3 Kf5 3.Kg7 Kg5 4.e4 Kh5 5.Bd1 Kg5 6.f4. It looked
a simple Pawn up hounding of Black, but the unexpected variety of good white moves and the scope given the
lone bK made this extremely difficult. I am spell-bound by the quality of this novel problem! (BPB). Attractive
play with mate given by wPs (CCF).
PS2840 (Dikusarov) (a) 1.Bc6 Bf7 2.Kd5 Se3;
PS2840
PS2841
(b) 1.Bc2 Ba5 2.Kd3 Sb2; (c) 1.Kd5 Be8 2.Bc4 Sc3.
wdwdwdwd
wdw$whwd
So nearly three model mates, but not quite in (c).
Convoluted twinning process? (BPB). Pleasantly
dwdwdwdB
dwdwdwdw
varied lines of play (C.Tylor). All available mates to
wHwdwdwd
wdw0rdwd
wS used in the 3 parts (CCF).
dwdwdwdw
dwdwdwdB

wdk)bdRd
dwdwdwdw
wdwdwIwd
dwdNdwdw

Rdw)Ndwd
dwdkdwdw
wdwdwdKd
dwdwdwdw

H#2 (b) Bh5>d8 (c) Be4>f1

H#2 2 solutions

PS2841 (Medintsev) 1.Sg6 Sd5 2.Kxe4 Bxg6;


1.Sd7 Sc4 2.Kxd4 Rxd7. Constructed to ensure
precision by Blacks paired first moves. Unexpected
2nd move captures of the Knight complete a very
nice problem (BPB). The bS allows bK to capture
wP and wS only to get captured itself; amusing!
(CT). Attractive model mates (RL).

NOVEMBER 2014

THE PROBLEMIST SUPPLEMENT

PS2842 (Loek) 1.Bd4 Se3+ 2.Kd3 Sf4; 1.b5+ d4


2.exd3 ep Sxe3. Two fine model mates undoubtedly,
but the checking fireworks of one solution are not
matched by the other (BPB). Spectacular e.p.
solution easier to see than a more straightforward
one (CT). Nice e.p. play in the second line (CCF).
PS2843 (Barsukov) (a) 1fxe3 2.Rg7 e4 3.Sf7
Sd5; (b) 1fxg3 2.Sf5 g4 3.Se7 Se8. With the wS
pinned and the wP at must move distance, the
solution is not demanding. Without bQ, bPs e3 and
g3, bBh1 and with wPf2 to e3, it is a modest 2
solution h#2, but with Whites first moves the same.
The cure is not worth padding the problem (BPB).
Twinning and play neatly arranged, though fP
moves are obvious (CT). Unpinning of wS
combined with self blocks (CCF). David Shire
comments: A helpmate of excessive force and
unnecessary length. The first and second moves of
White are decidedly unfortunate. He offers the H#2
version alongside, in which the tempo moves by the
wK actually pin the wS (but avoiding 1Kb8)!
1.Rg7 Ka7 2.Sf7 Sd5; 1.Sc8 Kb7 2.Se7 Se8.

389

PS2842

PS2843

wdwdwdwd
Iwdwdwdw
w0wdNdwd
dwdwdwdw
wdkdpdNd
dpdwgwdw
wdw)wdwd
dwdwGwdw

wdqdwdwd
IwHwdrdw
wdwhnipd
dwdw0w0w
wdwdwdwd
dwdw0w0w
wdwdw)wd
dwdwdwdb

H#2 2 solutions

H#2 (b) Qc8>g1

PS2843 (version by D.Shire)

PS2844

Kdwdwdwd
dwHwdrdw
wdwhwiwd
dwdwgP0w
wdwdPdwd
dwdwdwdw
wdwdwdwd
dwdwdwdw

bdwdwdqd
)wdw0wdw
wdwdw0wd
dwdwdKdw
wdwdwdw0
dwdw0pGr
wdwdndk0
dwdwdR4w

PS2844 (Wiehagen & Jonsson) 1Bb8 2.Qxb8


H#2 2 solutions
H#2 2 solutions
axb8R 3.Kg3 Rg8; 1Rxf3 2.Bxf3 a8Q 3.Kf1
Qxf3. Too much smash and grab in second solution for (my) complete enjoyment (BPB). Curious play
including wP promotion; bK moves to squares originally occupied by white pieces which have already
sacrificed themselves elsewhere! bQ moves only as R but functions fully in cook-stopping (CT).
PS2845 (Fenton) 1Kc2 2.c3 dxc3 3.Kd6 Sf7+ 4.Kc5 Sb3+ 5.Kc4 Sd6; 1d4 2.cxd3 ep+ Kd2 3.Kd6 Sf7+
4.Kc5 Sd6 5.Kd4 Sb3. wK at c2 initially is a sound h#4, but I can appreciate the difficulty of getting the second
(excellent) mate with the bK on different colour square. The ingenious means is White playing first with
unifying out of check moves. Its a fine idea worth
PS2845
PS2846
revisiting (BPB). Knights from opposite corners
make same moves but take turns mating. bB
wdwdwdwH
qdwdwdwd
stationary cook-stopper (CT). Clever idea to have
dwdwiwgw
0wIpdwdw
the 2 wSs starting on a1 and h8 (CCF).
PS2846 (Shifrin) (a) 1.Qg8 Sxd6 2.Qa2 Kxd7
3.Sb3 Kxc6 4.Kb2 Kb5 5.Ka3 Sc4; (b) 1.a5 Sxa5
2.Kb4 Sb3 3.Qa4 Sxd4 4.Sb5+ Kb7 5.Ka5 Sxc6.
Wonderful construction with cooks avoided, magical
move order, and superfluous black force in each
solution mown down (BPB). wS minimal with
echoed mates (CT). Good twinning and play (CCF).

wdwdwdwd
dwdpdpdw
wdpdw)wd
dwIwdpdw
wdw)wdwd
Hwdwdwdw

wdphwdwd
dwdwdwdw
wdNhwdwd
dwiwdwdw
wdwdwdwd
dwdwdwdw

H#4 2 solutions

H#5 (b) Pd7>f7

The problem alongside is the one mentioned on page 391 as being the first to
show 5th degree black correction in a #2. The key 1.Qd7 threatens 2.Qf5. The
defence 1Sce7 pins the bSd5, allowing mate by 2.Qxe7. The bSc6 can correct
this error with 1Sd4, but it self-blocks d4 for 2.Sxg5. A random move by the
bSd5 (e.g. 1Sb6) pins the bSc6 as well as opening the wQs line to d4, so would
seem to allow both 2.Qe7 and 2.Sxg5. However it also opens the bRa5s line
along the 5th rank, thus preventing those mates, but instead there is 1Sd~
2.Qd3. The correction move 1Se3 prevents 2.Qd3? by granting the bK a flight
square on f3, but closes the bBs line to d2 for 2.Sd2. The further correction move
1Sf4 still closes the line g5-d2, but it also closes the wBh2s line to e5. This
prevents 2.Sd2? (2Ke5!), but now 2.Re3 is mate. This is 5th degree correction,
because 2.Qe7?/Sxg5?/Qd3?/Sd2? are all avoided. There is another variation, this
time showing 4th degree correction: 1Sdb4 2.Qd4.

Alex Casa

3 Pr, LEchiquier de Paris


1953

Bdwdwdwd
dwdwdpdw
wdn!w)wd
4wdndwgw
rdwdkdPd
$wdwdNdw
wdPdw)wG
dwdwdwdK
#2

THE PROBLEMIST SUPPLEMENT

390

NOVEMBER 2014

On Reconstructions and Rotations, by David Shire


One of the earliest chess problem books that I acquired was the retrospective FIDE Album covering the
years 1914-44. I gradually solved my way through the twomovers and recently I discovered that I had annotated
No.172 with an asterisk. Clearly I had been impressed and I still am. The #2 in question was A1.
First, a word about the credits is in order. William Bayard Rice was a Good Companion of distinction, but he
was actively composing well into the 1920s and a memorial tourney in 1916 would have been decidedly
premature. The Rice in this instance was Isaac Leopold, a rather self-important American industrialist who used
some of his wealth to sponsor chess tournaments for which his eponymous gambit was prescribed (1.e4 e5
2.f4 exf4 3.Sf3 g5 4.h4 g4 5.Se5 Sf6 6.Bc4 d5 7.exd5 Bd6 8.0-0? Bxe5 9.Re1 Qe7! etc). Frank Marshall had
some success with this crazy variation (8.d4! is to be preferred) but eventually it
slipped into deserved obscurity.
A1 Arthur Sparke
1 Pr Rice Memorial
Tourney 1916

wdwdwdwd
dwdwdpIw
qdw0w)wd
db4PdwGQ
wgwdwdBd
0wdwdRdw
wdwdk)Nd
4ndwdwdR
#2

Sparkes prizewinner solves by 1.Qh7 (>2.Qe4) when the following play


unfolds. 1Bd3 2.Rf5; 1Bd2 2.Rf4(Sf4?); 1Sd2 2.Sf4(Rf4?); 1Rc4
2.Qd3; 1Rc3 2.Re1; 1Sc3 2.Qc2. Three self-blocks and three interference
variations give excellent value, the dual avoidance effects being particularly
noteworthy. There is also the simple unguard, 1Be1 2.Rxe1, and it is a matter of
small regret that this gives rise to a repeated mate (or black dual). Of greater
concern are the three white pawns; wPd5 is clearly used to restrict the influence of
bRc5 whilst wPf2 and wPf6 are used to prevent awkward discoveries by wRf3 to
the lower and upper reaches of the file. Another worry is that wPf2 adds an
unnecessary guard to e3. Let us look at the principal pair of variations a second
time. In the absence of wPf2, the e3 square is uniquely held by wSg2 after
1Bd2 2.Rf4. Likewise, after 1Sd2 2.Sf4 the e3 square is uniquely held by
wRf3. If this could be engineered it would constitute an admirable feature.

Before going any further, it is important to consider what Sparke chose to avoid. For instance, the addition of
bSg8 makes possible 1Sxf6 2.Rxf6. More variations do not necessarily make for a better problem. If the
second bS were to be deployed it might be better to opt for A2. Now we have 1.Qh7! Sxf6 2.Rxf6; 1exd5
2.Qe7; and the solver must reject 1.Qg6? exd5!
A2
A3
Nonetheless the use of the extra bS has served only
to generate mates of marginal interest.

wdwdndwI
dwdwdwdw
qdw0p)wd
db4PdwGQ
wgwdwdBd
0wdwdRdw
wdwdk)Nd
4ndwdwdR

#2
A4

wdwGBdNd
dwIwdRdw
Qdw0wdk0
dwdwdwdw
wdp4wdp$
dwdbgpdn
wdqdwdwd
dwdwdwdr

wdwdwdwd
$wdwdwhr
wdPiwdwd
dw$wdwdp
wdwdwdbd
GBdwHrgw
wdP)wdp1
dK!whwdw

Another thought emerges; if wSg2 is transferred


to d5 we eliminate one of the unwanted wPs.
Furthermore wPf2 could now take on guard duty of
e1 and relinquish its undesirable control of e3 if the
board were turned through 180 degrees. Inevitably
this leads to a reconstruction such as A3. 1.Qb2
Sxc2 2.Rxc2 is now the extra variation achieved
with the same number of units as Sparke employed.
Unpleasant cooks with the wQ checking on the d
#2
line have been avoided by the addition of wPd2. It is
fortunate that 1.d4? (>2.Rc3) gives extra work for bSe1(1Sd3!). However, the
real benefit is that the guards of d5 are more economically arranged but the
three wPs still remain!
Returning to A1; perhaps it would be better to give the board a quarter turn
anti-clockwise? A further rearrangement readily yields A4. After 1.Qc8 (>2.Qe6)
only 1Rf4 prompts 2.Rxh6. The bPh6 and the board edge conspire to prevent
eastward travel by wRf7 and extended westward movement of this unit is blocked
by the wKc7. With no wPs I believe that this is a position of which Sparke might
have approved.

In the main magazine of July 2014, Michael Lipton had much to say about this
business
of reconstruction. My motive here has not been especially to improve
#2
on A1 but to show how the direction in which pawns move can be a determining
factor in construction. Necessarily this involves the rotation of the board in order to achieve these various
settings. The modern composer can test these with the mere touch of the computer key-board. When Sparke
found a sound setting for his complex scheme I am confident that he looked no further than A1. I imagine he
wanted to maximise the time spent creatively time used on the tedious checking of alternative versions would

NOVEMBER 2014

THE PROBLEMIST SUPPLEMENT

have held limited appeal. A number of Michaels reconstructions have expanded


both the interest and the content of old #2s and in this case shared credit does
seem appropriate. This is absolutely not the case with A4; on the other hand I do
wish that this was the diagram I had discovered as No.172 in the retrospective
album some 40 years ago.
RETRO ORIGINAL
Yoav Ben-Zvi of Israel has contributed the original retro alongside. For part (b)
the bRb1 is placed on a1, with the task being to add a black unit on b1 so that the
position is legal, specifying the move that White has just played to reach this
position. The logic is fairly simple for a retro, so readers might like to solve it.
Note that for any capture the type of captured piece must also be specified.
Solution on page 395.

More Master Composers Own Favourites,


by Barry Barnes
A 1.Sf5! (>2.Sxe3+ Sxe3 3.dxe4) Rcxd3 2.Bc3 (2c3?) 3.Sf6; 1Sxd3 2.Bd4
(provides for 2Sxb4!) 3.Sf6; 1exd3 2.Be5 3.Sf6; 1Rexd3 2.Bg5
(2Qd2+?) 3.Sf6; 1Bxd3 2.Bh4 (2Qh2+?) 3.Sf6; 1cxd3 2.Sexd6 3.Re5;
1Qd2 2.Sc7+ Kxc6 3.a8Q. Five captures at d3 result in the bPc4 being
immobilized, the vacation of c4 would stop 3.Sf6. The ensuing mates are all
differentiated by five moves of the wB. Alex was a strong player, with some
famous victories against international opposition. He was the first problemist to
show 5th degree black correction in a #2 (see problem at bottom of page 389).
B 1.Ka8! (>2.Sxc4+ Rxc4 3.Sd5; 2...Bxc4 3.Bd4) Sc3 2.Sg6! (>3.Bd4) Sxe2
2.Qxe2; 2Sd5 3.Sxd5; 2cxd3 3.Rxd3. 1Bc3 2.Sc6! (>3.Sd5) Sxf4 3.Qg1
This powerful problem is by the Finnish President of
the FIDE Commission for 8 years. How fitting it is
B Jan Hannelius
that its a Finnish Nowotny (1.Se~? (2.Bd4,Sd5) c3!
1 Pr, E.Wirtanen-60 JT
1.Sxc4+!? bxc4+) to give reason for the fine key1972
move! Difficult for the solver are Whites second
wIwdwdwG
moves 2.Sg6! and 2.Sc6! to anticipate potentially
0wHRdwdw
spoiling black second moves 2Sxe2 and 2Bxh8.
C 1.Rh5! (>2.Rhxg5 3.Rd2,Re2,Rf2 4.Rg1#) g4
2.Kxg4 (>3.Rxe5 4.Re1#) e4 3.Bxe4 (zugzwang) c4
4.Sxc4 (zugzwang) bxc4 5.Ra5. This is in the style
that captures players imaginations. Who would
guess immediately that the wRh3 mates on a5 after a
complete clearance of the 5th rank?
D (a) 1.d1R Sh5 2.Sf4 Bxc3 3.Rd3 Sf6; (b) 1.d1S
Se2 2.Qf4 b4 3.Se3 Sxc3; (c) 1.d1B Sh5 2.Rf4 Bg7
3.Bf3 Sg3. Three different wS mating moves require
three different black arrivals at f4, the square
vacated by the wS. In similar follow-the-leader style,
the three under-promotions fill the squares vacated
by Black at d3, e3 and f3.
E (a) 1.h1B Bd3 2.Bc6 Bg6 3.Bd7 Sc7; (b) 1.h1Q
Bg2 2.Qh5 Be4 3.Qf7 Sc5; (c) 1.h1S Bb5 2.Sg3 Bc6
3.Sf5 Sg5 (d) 1.h1R Bb5 2.Rhd1 Be8 3.R1d5 Sg7.
Dr Pros constructed even better problems(!), but
this was one of his favourites: Gyrgy Bakcsi. This
is a miracle of construction by a supreme
Grandmaster to show all the promotions
Allumwandlung with four distinct solutions.

391
Yoav Ben-Zvi

Original (after Dawson &


Onitiu 1924)

wdwdwdwd
dwdwdwdw
wdwdwdwd
dwdwdwdw
wdwdwdwd
)wdwdwdw
k)P)wdwd
drIwdwdw
(a) Last 2 single moves?
(b) see text

A Alex Casa

1 Pr, Europe Echecs


1968

wdRdNdwd
)wdw$wHw
w0P0wGwI
dwdkdwdw
w)pdpdPd
dw4P4pdw
qdwdbdwd
dwhndwdw
#3
C Gerhard Latzel

8 HM, So Paulo Chess


Club 1956

wdwdPdwd
dpdwHw0w
r4pdw)Pd
dwdBiPdn
bdRgPdw!
dndwdwdw

wdwdwdwd
0wdwdwdw
Pdwdwdwd
Hp0B0K0w
w0w)w0wd
dPdwdPdR
wdwdwdR)
iwdwdwdw

#3

#5

D Toma Garai

E Gyrgy Pros

1 HM, Die Schwalbe 1984

1 Pr, FIDE Ty 1958

wdwdwdrd
dw0wdwdw
K0wdwGw0
gw0Pdwdw
w0wdkHPd
dw0n1rdw
w)w0wdwd
dwdwdwdw

wdwdwdwd
dwdw0wdp
wdw4k4wd
dNdw0wdw
wdwdwdwd
dwdwdwdw
Kdwdwdw0
dwdwdBdw

H#3
(b) Pb4>g7 (c) Pg4>c4

H#3 (a) Sb5>d3


(c) Sb5>f3 (d) Sb5>h5

392
A Ronald Turnbull

(after Paul Bissicks)


Original

wdwdwdwd
dwdwdw0w
wdwdw0pd
dwdwdwdw
wdwdwdwd
dwdQdwdp
wdwdwdwI
dwdwiwdw
#3 Growing Men
B Ronald Turnbull
& Paul Bissicks

Original

wdwdRdwd
dwdwdwdw
pdwdwdKd
dwdwdwdw
wdwdwdwi
dw$wdwdw
pdwdwdwd
dwdwdwdw
#2 Growing Men PRA

THE PROBLEMIST SUPPLEMENT

NOVEMBER 2014

Pawn Retros in Growing Men, by Ronald Turnbull


He who controls the past, controls the future George Orwell Nineteen EightyFour
The Growing Men condition (no unit moves less far than it did last time) does
limit the forward play: for example a R or B usually has only one checking move.
But it has richness in play before the diagram Thanks again to Paul Bissicks for
suggestions, comments and his scrupulous proofreading.
A combines the two mates from problem F from p.296 of the July 2013 issue.
In the set-play 1Kf2 (bK expands) 2.Qd2# will be familiar to those whove
followed earlier Growing Men examples. But we must deal with 1f5. We see
that Pg6 has come from either f7 or h7. So not only has Pg6 captured and thus lost
its forward move; so too has either Pf6 or Ph3. 1.Kg3! does take bKs flight, but
also destroys the set-play and expands wK. After 1h2 2.Kxh2, Pf6 has been
shown to be immobile, so 2Kf2 3.Qd2; while if 1f5 then Ph3 is shown as
immobile, and we have the other K-retreat mate: 2.Kf4 Kf2 3.Qe3.
In B, 1.Re4 isnt mate because it isnt check. 1.R8c8? Kg4 2.R8c4+ Kf4!
However, we note that one or other of Blacks a-pawns has captured and is
immobile. PRA under the diagram means we may use the Partial Retro
Analysis ploy: if Pa6 immobile 1.Rb8 (a5??) 2.Rb4; while if a2 immobile 1.Re4
(a1Q??) 2.Ra4.
C is a matrix Paul Bisssicks and I considered when looking for the longest
mate by bare wK. (The scheme gave us a bare-K mate in 7.) After retracting wKg5(+bP), Blacks previous move was g7xh6+. Now, if bK had visited b7 to let the
h-rook past, he would have had to move b7-c8 and thus could not have made the
shorter moves to arrive now on g8. Accordingly, bK has castled, and has lost all
power of movement. Thus wK mates by 1.Kh5 2.Kxh6 3.Kxh7.

C Ronald Turnbull

D Ronald Turnbull

Original

Original

rdw4wdkd
0w0p0pdp
w0wdwdwI
dwdwdwdw
wdwdwdwd
dwdwdwdw
wdwdwdwd
dwdwdwdw

wdwdwdwd
dwdwdwdw
Pdwdwdpd
0wdwdwdw
wdwdwdPd
dwdwdPGw
wdwdwIw)
dwdwdwdk

D shows both sides (like politicians after a war)


struggling to rewrite history in their own favour. The
preliminary part (a) solves by 1.a7! g5 2.f4 gxf4
3.a8Q. Why not 1.f4? Because of the back-to-back
a-pawns. At least one of them has captured; so that
whichever of them first moves forward will show
the other one to be expanded. After 1.f4? a4! the
wPa6 is immobilised.

In part (b), 1.a7? g6 would work as before, but


1g5! 2.f4 stalemates Black: after its 2sq-move Pg5
cannot capture on f4, while Pa5 is also immobile.
We must play 1.f4! g5 2.Kf1 a4. The move of Pa5
White retracts for #3
#3 Growing Men
immobilises Whites a-pawn, yes. But it also shows
Growing Men
(b) Pg6>g7
that this has always been Blacks a-pawn, and so it
did not move to the diagram by Pb6xa5. Blacks K
did not just move from g1 improper check to wK. Accordingly, Blacks move to the diagram was Kg2-h1
(already expanded at that point and escaping a check from wK). Hence, bK is expanded and White has 3.Kg1
mate. 1a4 has the same play, while 1g6 allows 2.a7 g5 3.a8Q.
E Ronald Turnbull

Original

wdwdwdwd
dwdwHwdk
wdP)wdwd
0Kdwdw)w
wHwdwdPd
0wdwdwdw
wdwdwdwd
Gwdwdwdw
#3 Growing Men

Finally in E, White will advance one of the pawns on the 6-rank: but which
one? 1.c7 threatens 2.c8Q 3.Qc2 but 1a4! immobilises both black Ps so that
2.c8Q would be stalemate. Moves releasing bK dont help. With no apparent way
forward for White, its time to look backwards!
Given 1a4! this pawn didnt previously move from a7 or b6, and not from a6
because of improper check to White. Furthermore, Pa3 now has to have arrived by
capture. So the final move to the diagram was by bK.
2.Bb2! We already knew that wB had been guarding h8 (because a1-a8 is the
longest possible move), but this demonstrates that wB is unexpanded and has also
been guarding g7. If bK just moved from either of those squares, it was a move
out of check: a check not administered by any move of wB, but perhaps a

NOVEMBER 2014

THE PROBLEMIST SUPPLEMENT

393

discovered check after e5xd6. This suggests that 1.c7? was wrong, and we need 1.d7! threat 2.d8Q 3.Qd3.
After 1a4!, 2.Bb2! shows that bK did not just move from g7 or h8: by moving forward, the d-pawn has
shown that it did not previously discover check by capture.
After 2...axb2, 3.g6! Again, by moving forward this pawn shows that it has not previously captured.
Accordingly, bKs move to the diagram wasnt from a check on h6. So bK is expanded, and is now
checkmated. Some would reject 2.Bb2 as being utterly pointless in any coherent chessplay. But the author of
Nineteen Eighty-Four would well understand its work of manipulating the back-story of the chessboard.

Incomplete Blocks with Changed Mates


A has set play 1Sd~ 2.Sf3; 1Sf~ 2.Shg4. At first sight it might seem that a
waiting move, such as 1.Rb6 or 1.Bb7, would solve the problem, but the fact that
there are two possibilities should warn the solver. On closer inspection it can be
seen that 1Sd5! provides the bK with a flight on e4, so that 2.Shg4 is not mate.
The key 1.Be4! (-) grants a flight and so negates the set play, but by providing a
second guard of f5 it enables the wSe3 to take over mating duties: 1Sd~ 2.Sc4;
1Sf~ 2.Seg4. The black knights can make correction moves by capturing the
wB, but this blocks e4 and allows the set mates to return: 1Sdxe4 2.Sf3;
1Sfxe4 2.Shg4. There is also a pleasing added mate: 1Kxe4 2.Re6.

A Viktor Chepizhny

1-2 HM, Leninsky Put


1966-67

BdwdwdwI
dwdwdwdw
Rdwdwhwd
dwdwiwdw
wdwdwdwd
dw)pHw)w
wdwhwdwH
dwdw$wdw

A position in which Black is in zugzwang is known as a block, and this


example is an incomplete block, because the block did not exist initially and had
#2
to be completed by the key. This form allows better economy than the traditional
complete block form of changed-play waiter (the mutate), in which every black move has a set mate, because
the composer does not have to add units to prevent waiting move cooks (e.g. there is no need to add a bPa7 to
prevent 1.Rb6). In the words of Barry Barnes (p.385), the straightjacket has been removed.
The following incomplete blocks each have a single defence with no set mate, but in providing for this
defence some or all of the set mates are changed. Solutions are given over the page. Two other fine Chepizhny
examples were quoted as A2 and A3 on p.120 of the May 2011 issue of the main magazine.
B Viktor Chepizhny &
Alfreds Dombrovskis

C Milan Velimirovi

D Ottavio Stocchi

E Henry DOyly Bernard

Comm, E.Heinonen-50 JT
1972-73

2 HM, Mat 1977

=1 Pr, Die Schwalbe


1931-II

Western Morning News


and Mercury 1928

wdwdwdwd
!wdwHw0w
w0wGPiwd
dRdwdwdw
Pdwdw0Bd
dwdwgKdw
wdwdwdwd
dwdw$wdw

wdwdBdwd
GwdwdQdw
pdwdpdpd
dwdwdwIP
w0wdpdwd
dw0wdwdw
wdwdkdnd
dNdRdRdn

wdwdwdwd
dwdwhKdB
wdwdwdwd
Hwdpdwdw
w)wirdRd
dwdPdwdR
wdpdwdwG
dwhw!Ndw

ndwdwdwd
1wdwdwdw
PdN$N0wG
dwdwdkdP
Pdwdwdwd
dwdwdwdP
K)wdwdBd
dwdwdwdw

#2

#2

#2

#2

F Johannes Albarda

G Barry Barnes

I Touw Hian Bwee

3 Pl, Netherlands-Greece
1975-76

The Problemist 1978

H Nikola Veliky, Valentin


Rudenko & Efim Rukhlis

wdwdwdwd
Gwdwdwdw
wdp0w$wd
dw0k1Rhw
wdw0wdpd
dPdwdw)w
wdwdQdwd
dwIwdwdw
#2

5 Pr, Groeneveld-75 JT
1997-98

5 Comm, The Problemist


1963

wdwdwdwd
IpdNdwdw
w0wdwdpd
0wdw)q)w
Pdwiphwd
GQdwdwdw
wdP)wdBd
gwdw$wHw

wdwdwdwd
dpdwdwdQ
wGwdpdwd
IRdw)w0w
wdwdNiPd
dwdRdwdw
wdwdwdwH
dwdb4wdw

wdndwdwd
dwdwdwdw
pdwdRIw)
$bdkdpdw
NdpGw0Nd
dwdw)Pdw
wdwdwdw!
dndwdwdw

#2

#2

#2

394

THE PROBLEMIST SUPPLEMENT

NOVEMBER 2014

B Set: 1g6 2.Sg8; 1g5 2.Be5; 1B~ 2.Rf5; 1Bc5! The key grants 3 flights and results in 3 changed
mates, including changed self-blocks on g6 and g5: 1.Sf5! (-) g6 2.Qe7; 1g5 2.Qf7; 1B~ 2.Qxg7; 1Kxe6
2.Qe7; 1Kg6,Kg5 2.Qxg7.
C Set: 1Sg~ 2.Rfe1; 1Sh~ 2.Qf2; 1a5 2.Bb5; 1e5 2.Qc4; 1gxh5 2.Qxh5; 1e3 2.Qf3; 1c2
2.Rd2; 1b3 2.Sxc3; 1Sf4! Key: 1.Qd7! (-) Sg~ 2.Rde1; 1Sh~ 2.Rf2; 1a5 2.Qb5; 1e5 2.Qg4;
1gxh5 2.Bxh5; 1e3 2.Qd3; 1c2 2.Qd2. The key is of the pendulum type and there is symmetry, but 7
changed mates is quite an achievement.
D Set: 1Sc~ 2.Sb3; 1Se~ 2.Sc6; 1Rxg4 2.Qe5,Be5; 1Rf4+ 2.Rxf4; 1Sxd3! The key gives 2
flights, leading to 3 excellent changed mates. 1.Sg3! (-) Sc~ 2.Se2; 1Se~ 2.Sf5; 1Rxg4 2.Bg1. However
the real interest lies in the mates after the flights, where White must avoid unpinning the bR: 1Ke5 2.Sf5
(Se2?); 1Kxd3 2.Se2 (Sf5?). An all-time classic!
E In the set play, moves by the bQ are met by either 2.Sed4 or 2.Sg7 (these mates also occur after
interferences by the bS). However there is no mate for the pinning defence 1Qf7! The try 1.Bd5? closes the
line a2-f7, thus preventing the pin, but now 1Qg1! retains guard of both d4 and g7! After the key the other
wS takes over the mates. 1.Bf4! (-) Q~ 2.Scd4,Se7. The wPs on a4/a6 could be replaced by a bPa3, with the
wPb2 moved to c2, but the composer must have liked the waiting try 1.a5? Qf7!
F Set: 1c4 2.bxc4; 1d3 2.Qxd3; 1Qxf5 2.Rxf5; 1S~ 2.Qg2; 1Se4 2.Qc4; 1Sf3! The key
changes all 5 mates. 1.Qxg4! (-) c4 2.Qxd4; 1d3 2.Qc4; 1Qxf5 2.Qxf5; 1S~ 2.Qf3; 1Se4 2.Qg8.
G Set: 1Bb2 2.Bxb2; 1Bc3 2.dxc3; 1S~ 2.Se2; 1e3 2.dxe3; 1b5 2.Bc5; 1Q~ 2.Rxe4;
1Qxe5! The flight-giving key puts a second guard on c4 and d5, thus freeing the wQ to give 4 changed
mates. 1.Sxb6! (-) Bb2 2.Qxb2; 1Bc3 2.Qxc3; 1S~ 2.Qd5; 1e3 2.Qxe3; 1Qxe5 2.Qc4,Qe3; 1Kxe5
2.Sf3. The dual after 1Qxe5 (the only unprovided defence) is unfortunate. A dual is a more serious fault in a
block position than in a threat problem, where black moves that do not defeat the threat are usually ignored.
H The set play includes a Grimshaw (mutual interference) on e2 and a selfWilliam B. Trumper
block on e4. 1Be2 2.Be3; 1Re2 2.Rf3; 1Rxe4 2.Qf7; 1Bxg4! The try
1 HM, The Problemist
1.Rg3? (-) provides 1Bxg4 2.Rxg4, but 1Rxe4! The flight-giving key
1967-68
changes all 3 mates and also gives 2 added mates. 1.Qh3! (-) Be2 2.Qe3; 1Re2
2.Qf3; 1Rxe4 2.Qg3; 1Bxg4 2.Qxg4; 1Kxe4 2.Rd4.
wdBdwdwd
I Set: 1fxg4 2.Qh5; 1fxe3 2.Qe5; 1Sb~ 2.Sc3; 1Sc~ 2.Sb6; 1c3
dwdwdwdw
2.Qa2;
1Sd6! The key beautifully changes 4 mates. 1.Be5! (-) fxg4 2.e4;
w0wdrdwh
1fxe3 2.Sxe3; 1Sb~ 2.Qd2; 1Sc~ 2.Rd6.

gwdwGkdw
n$wdwdwd
dwdwdwdw
pdwdwdw1
4wdNIwdw

H#3

The problem at left shows the same idea as PS2848F (on facing page), but in
helpmate form. 1.Sc3 Rg4 2.Se2+ Bc3 3.Sc1+ Se3. Here the first move is not a
check, but that is not important.

Fairy definitions (continued from p.396)


Series-helpmate (Ser-H#n): Black plays a sequence of n consecutive moves (White not moving at all) until
at the end of that sequence White can mate in one. Check may be given only on Blacks last move.
Mirror Circe: a captured unit is immediately reborn on the game-array square of the same unit of the
opposite colour, the colour of the square being the determining factor for B, S and R, and the file of the capture
for pawns. If the rebirth square is occupied, the captured unit disappears.
Take&Make: Having captured, a unit must immediately, as part of its move, make a non-capturing step in
imitation of the captured unit from the capture-square. If no such step is available, the capture is illegal.
Promotion by capture occurs only when a pawn arrives on the promotion rank as the result of a take&make
move. Checks are as in normal chess: after the notional capture of the checked K, the checking unit does not
move away from the Ks square.
Reflexmate (R#n): A selfmate with the added stipulation that either side must give mate on the move if this
becomes possible.
Pao (r), Vao (b) move like R/B respectively but capture by playing over another unit of either colour to
any square beyond it, provided the line is clear.
Mao (n): moves like a Knight but via the square orthogonally adjacent to it, which must be vacant for the
move to be legal. Interference can occur on the intermediate square.
Series-stalemate (S-=n): White plays a series of n moves and gives stalemate at the end of it.

NOVEMBER 2014

THE PROBLEMIST SUPPLEMENT

FAIRY SOLUTIONS (May)


PS2847F (Maleika) (a) 1.c8Q (-) Sb3 2.Qb7; 1Sc2 2.Sxc2. (b) 1.d8Q (-) Sb3
2.Qb6; 1Sc2 2.Qdd3. (c) 1.e8Q (-) Sb3 2.Qb5; 1Sc2 2.Qe4. (d) 1.f8Q (-) Sb3
2.Qfb4; 1Sc2 2.Qf5. (e) 1.g8B! (-) Sb3 2.Bxb3; 1Sc2 2.Bh7. The final
promotion to B is a lovely touch. A sixth phase has been suggested: (f) &wK>h7,
1.g8Q (-) Sb3 2.Qb8; 1Sc2 2.Qg6, but the composer is surely right to prefer his
original setting, since the extra phase would be outside the striptease sequence. As
it stands, the problem deserves to become a classic (JMR). Elementary solving,
but 5x2 Zagoruiko generated by removal of each P in turn opening a line for the
next on promotion (C.C.Lytton). After four Q promotions, the bishop promotion
in (e) is delightful. While deceptively simple, the construction is superb (LL).
PS2848F (Foster) 1.Sd4+ f3 2.Se6+ Sd4 3.Sg7+
Sge6. Attractive Umnov sequence with battery
creation and unpinning (CCF). Spectacular unpin,
cross-check and Umnov sequence, lightly set (CCL).
Each white move fires a battery check and unpins a
black piece which is not only re-pinned on Whites
departure square but also opens up a line for Whites
next battery check. Is it worth removing the bBa5
and shifting everything else two files to the left?
(LL). Good idea Linden! The bR could actually stay
at h5. The idea can be extended to 4 unpins [diagram
far right], with solution 1.Sc2 Sxe5 2.Sb4+ d3
3.Sc6+ Sb4 4.Se7+ Sec6 (Composer).
PS2849F (Lyons) 1.Gf5 (-) Kc6 2.Be5; 1Kxe6
2.Sde5; 1Ke4 2.Sce5; 1Kxc4 2.Ge5. Excellent
ditheme of star-flight met by moves to same square.
Delightful construction and conception (CCL). Starflight by bK with 4 different units moving to e5 to
stalemate (CCF).
PS2850F (Tura) Set 1RHd4 2.Gd5; 1BHe4
2.Gf5; 1g6 2.Gh7. 1.Ge3! (-) RHd4 2.Gc5;
1BHe4 2.Ge5; 1g6 2.Ge8; 1RHb~ 2.Gb5.
Neat mutate with dark-square G taking over mating
duties from its fellow which has been pinned by the
key (CCL). Exchange of checkmate (RL). Neat. I
particularly like the pin of the Gd3 by the key (LL).
PS2851F (Ganapathi) (a) 1.Exe2=wE Bf6+
2.Kc4 Sd3; (b) 1.Ke4 Bg5 2.Exg2=wE Sf3; (c)
1.Kc4 Bf6 2.Exc2=wE Bc3. Transformed EQ mates
from 3 squares by hurdle-provision, with matching
effects in (b) and (c). Repetition of white move
1Bf6 inherent in the matrix, as also two mates on
c4 (CCL).

395
PS2847F

wIwdwdwd
dw)P)P)w
wdwdwdwd
dwdwdwdw
wdwdwdwd
!wdwdwdw
wdwdwdwd
hkdwHwdw
=2 (b/c/d/e) Pc7/
& -Pd7/& Pe7/& Pf7

PS2848F

PS2848F (version)

wdBdwdRd
dwdwdwdw
wdwGwdwd
gwIwdnhr
wdRdw0k0
dwdwdNdw
wdwdwdwd
dwdQdwdw

BdwdRdwd
dwdwdwdw
wGwdwdwd
Iwdn)wdr
Rdw0k0wd
dwdndwdw
wdwdwdwd
dQdwHwdw

HS#3

HS#4

PS2849F

PS2850F

wdQdwdwG
!wdw0wdw
KdwdPdwd
dw!kdwdw
wdN)wdwd
dwdNdwdw
wdPdwdwd
!wdwdwdw

wdwdwdwd
dwdwGw0w
wdwdwdw0
dwdwdw0k
w0PdwdRd
drdQdK!w
wdwdwdbd
dwdrdwdw

=2 Grasshoppers

#2 Grasshoppers,
Rookhoppers & Bishoppers

PS2851F

PS2852F

wdwGwdwd
dwHwdwdw
wdqdwdwd
dwdwdpdw
wdwiwdwd
dwdwdwdw
KdPdPdwd
dwdwHwdw

wdwdwdwd
dwdwdwdw
rdrdwdwd
iwdNdwdw
Q$pdwdwd
0wdwdwdw
wdwdwdwd
dwdqgwdK

PS2852F (Kerhuel) 1.Rb6 (>2.Rxa6+ Kb5 3.Ra5


[2.Nc3? Gf1!]) c3 2.Nxc3 RLxc3-c2 3.Rxa6,
H#2 (b) Pc2>g2 (c) Se1>a4
#3 Gd1, Nightrider d5,
2Kxb6 3.LOxa6-a7; 1Kxa4 2.Nc3+ Ka5 3.Rb5.
Andernach Chess
Vao e1, Locust a4,
The composer writes that this problem represents an
Equihopper c6
R-Locust a6,c6
attempt to apply Bohemian rules to direct-mate
problems with fairy pieces, an area not much investigated, in his view (JMR). 3.LOxa6-a7 the star variation
needing wN rather than wS. So good to see Maryan again. Welcome back (CCL).
Solution to Ben-Zvi retro (p.391)
(a) Try: 1...Ra1xSb1? 2.Kd1xSc1 but SW-cage cant be released. Solution: 1Ra1xRb1 2.Kd1xSc1. (b) Try:
+bBb1? 1.Kd1xSc1 SW-cage cant be released. Try: +bSb1 1.Kd1-c1? Sc3xRb1? retro-stalemate. Solution:
+bSb1 1.Kd1xSc1.

THE PROBLEMIST SUPPLEMENT

396

NOVEMBER 2014

FAIRY ORIGINALS PS2915-2920F


PS2915F Franz Pachl
(Germany)

PS2916F Vito Rallo


(Italy)

PS2917F Rainer Kuhn


(Germany)

wdwdbhwg
dwdwdwdB
wdwdw4Pd
dNdpdndw
w0wdk)w0
dwdwdwdw
wdK$wdNd
dwdwdwdw

wdwdwdwd
dwdbdwdw
wdwdwiwd
dwdwdwdw
NdwIwdwd
dwdwdwdw
wdwdwGwd
dwdwdwdw

kdwdwdwd
dwdw0wdw
wdwdwdw0
dwdpdBdw
wdwdp0w0
0wdwdwdb
wdrdwdwd
Iwdwdwdw

Ser-H#3 3 solutions

H#3 2 solutions
AntiKoeko

H#4 (b) Bf5>h1


Mirror-Circe Take&Make

PS2918F Linden Lyons


(Australia)

PS2919F Brian Stephenson

PS2920F Newman Guttman


(USA)

wdwdwdwd
Iwdwdwdw
wdwdNdwd
dwdqdw$w
wdwGwdwd
dwdwdpdw
Qdwdw)w0
dwdwdwdk

wdwdwdwd
dwdw0wdR
wdndwdwd
dwdwdB$w
wdwdK)wd
dwdwdwdb
bdwdPdw1
dwdwdwgk

wdwdwdwd
dwdNdwdp
pdwdpdwd
dw)kdpdw
wdpdwdwd
dpdwIwdp
pdwdQdwd
dndwdwdw

=2 Grasshoppers
Dedicated to Geoff Foster

R#2
Paos g5,h7, Vao a2, Mao c6

Ser-=8 E90 e2

Dont be put off by the genre AntiKoeko: its


probably easier to cope with than some of the other
genres I have asked you to tackle. Less easy is the
combination of two quite different genres, as in
PS2917F good luck with this one! Linden, Brian
and Newman all send typical contributions that will
surely give pleasure. Enjoy the fun!
JMR
AntiKoeko (Anti-Klner Kontaktschach): the
arrival square of any moving unit must not be
adjacent to a square occupied by another unit of
either colour.
Grasshopper (q): moves and captures on Qlines by hopping over another unit of either colour
(the hurdle) to the square immediately beyond it. A
capture may be made on arrival, but the hurdle is
not affected.
Equihopper: moves along any line over another
unit of either colour such that this hurdle stands at
the mid-point between the Es departure and arrival
squares. The E90 makes a 90 turn one way or the
other as it passes over the hurdle. In PS2920F the
E90 cannot be interfered with on any line.
Other fairy definitions on page 394

The Problemist Supplement is one of the two


magazines produced for its members by the
British Chess Problem Society, which exists to
promote the knowledge and enjoyment of chess
compositions. Membership is by calendar year
and is open to chess enthusiasts in all countries.
Membership subscriptions (due 1st January)
are 32.50 for Fellows and 25 for members
(12.50 for under-21s). New members joining
during the year pay a proportion of the
subscription (exact amount to be negotiated with
the Membership Secretary). Enquiries and/or
payments (in sterling to BCPS), should be
sent to the Membership Secretary, Jim Grevatt,
Lazybed, Headley Fields, Headley, Hants GU35
8PS (jim.grevatt@btinternet.com).
British Chess Problem Society 2014
ISSN 2055-6713
Printed by be- Aix-la-chapelle