Вы находитесь на странице: 1из 205

The Two-Move Chess Problem:

Tradition and Development

JOHN M. RICE

MICHAEL LIPTON

BARRY P. BARNES

The reader needs no previous knowledge of


chess problems to enjoy this collection of
twelve essays on various aspects of the two­
move problem. All the rules and conven­
tions are explained in the text, with copious
examples analysed in great detail. The book
in fact fulfils three purposes. First, it can
be read as a general introduction to chess
problems by anyone who knows no more
than the moves and the rules of the game.
Second, it presents a survey of the principal
themes of the two-mover, with notes on
the history of each and an analysis of their
treatment over the last few years. And
third, it is a collection of some of the best
problems of foreign composers, together
with the work of the three authors and other
British problemists. The discussion of each
theme is followed by a selection of prob­
lems which the reader is invited to solve,
and the solutions to these problems and a
commentary on them are given in a separate
section at the end of the book.
The three authors are among the coun­
try's leading composers of problems, and
have all gained distinctions in composing
tourneys, both at home and abroad.
Michael Lipton is a Fellow of All Souls
College, Oxford, and a lecturer in Eco­
nomics at the University of Sussex. John
Rice teaches at Tiffin School, Kingston,
and edits the problem section of the British
Chess Magazine. Barry Barnes is an adver­
tising executive for the British Transport
Commission, and edits the two-move
section of The Problemist, the journal of the
British Chess Problem Society and one of
the world's leading problem magazines.
TH E TW O-MOVE CHESS P ROBL EM
CHESS PROBLEMS: INTRODUCTION TO AN ART

by

Michael Lipton, R. C. 0. Matthews and John M. Rice


The Two-Move Chess Problem
T RADITION A ND D EVEL O PMENT

Some essays on selected two-move themes


by

John M. Rice, Michael Lipton


Barry P. Barnes

FABER AND FABER


24 Russell Square, London
First published in mcmlxvi
by Faber and Faber Limited
24 Russe/1 Square, London W.C.l.
Printed in Great Britain
at the Pitman Press, Bath
All rights reserved

© 1966 by John M. Rice, Michael Lipton


and Barry P. Barnes
Contents
Preface page 9
Notation 11
Introduction 13
1. Flights 22
2. Half-pin 31
3. Cross-check 40
4. Unpin of White by Black 48
5. Grimshaw and Nowotny 57
6. Focal effects 67
7. Separation:
Dual Avoidance-Black Correction-Fleck Theme 75
8. Half-battery 99
9. Tasks 1 08
10. Mate Transference and Ruk:hlis 1 16
11. White Correction and Threat Correction 1 26
12. Patterns:
Reciprocal and Cyclic Correction-Reciprocal
Change-Cyclic Shift-Permutation effects-Re-
duced Zagoruyko-Cyclic Change 1 34
Solutions to Problems for Solving 1 58
General Index 201
Index of Names 204

7
Preface
In this book we have used the algebraic notation for recording
the moves, partly because it is briefer and simpler than the
English (descriptive) notation, and partly because it is used
exclusively in all problem periodicals and most problem sections
of chess magazines. For those who are not yet familiar with
algebraic it is explained in a note below.
The reader will find a number of references to a previous
Faber chess problem book, Chess Problems: Introduction to an
Art, by Michael Lipton, R. C. 0. Matthews and John M. Rice,
published in 1 963. This work is entirely separate from the
present volume, and contains an almost completely different
selection of problems..
We have received help and suggestions from a great many
people in preparing this book, and we should like to express our
thanks to all of them, but especially to Messrs. Hermann
Albrecht, Bob Burger, Edgar Holladay, Jeremy Morse and
Chris Reeves.

9
Notation
Two notations are used in this country for writing down chess
pieces, squares and moves. Many chess players use the des­
criptive notation, but the algebraic notation, which we use in
this book, has been universally adopted among problemists,
and is rapidly gaining currency with players of the game.
Unlike descriptive, algebraic notation sees all squares and
moves from White's point of view. As will be seen from the
accompanying diagram, the ranks (horizontal rows of squares)
are numbered 1 to 8, starting with the rank where White's
pieces begin the game. The files (vertical rows of squares) are
lettered a to h, from left to right. The pieces are given letters:
K = King, Q = Queen, R = Rook, B = Bishop, S = Knight
and P = Pawn. The 'S' used for the Knight is derived from
the German "Springer". If White has Ss on cl and e l (QB l
and K l in descriptive notation), and moves the latter two
squares up and one to the left, we write the move eSd3. When
a capture is made, algebraic notation shows on which square
the capture takes place, rather than what piece is taken. Thus
if Black has Rs on al and a8 which can capture a white B on
a5, the capture by the R a8 is written 8 R x a5. The symbol....,
indicates that a piece moves "at random" (i.e. to no square
in particular), while + is used for check. Castling is written
0-0 (King's Rook) or 0-0-0 (Queen's Rook).

11
Introduction
"So you've had another chess problem published, eh ? Well,
well-you'll be playing against the Russians next!" That's the
sort of remark made by people who have no idea what a chess
problem really is. It is like saying, "You paint beautiful
pictures, so why don't you come and decorate my house for
me ?" Certainly a chess problemist and a chess player have
something in common : just as an artist and a decorator both
use paint, so a problemist and a player both use the same board
and pieces. But they have little else in common. And if you
are one of those people who have been playing chess for years
without ever giving a minute's thought to what a problem is all
about, we invite you to read this book, and we hope that what
we have to say will introduce you-and convert you !-to a
different side of chess.
There are some things you have to know before you can start.
We assume that you know the moves of the pieces and the aims
and rules of the game of chess. If the algebraic notation we are
using in this book is unfamiliar to you, do not let that put you
off. It is all explained on page 1 1, and once you are used to it
(which does not take long), we think you will agree that it is
much simpler and more practical than the descriptive notation
which it is fast replacing in this country.
The expression "two-move chess problem" refers to a com­
posed position in which White, to move, can mate Black with
his second move against any black defence. We have called it
a "composed" position because a chess problem does not have
to be-and nearly always isn't-the sort of position you would
come across in a game. Just take a look at some of the diagrams
in this book, and try to imagine the game that led up to them !
But a problem must be a possible position, one which could
conceivably have arisen in a game-even if the players had
played absurd moves ! So both Ks must be on the board, and
neither side may have more than eight pawns, and so on.
Such requirements form the basic rules of the chess problem.
13
Introduction
But as well as the rules, there are a few conventions. One of
these concerns the use of promoted pieces, which most problem­
ists agree should be avoided. And it is also a convention that
every piece in the diagram should have some function in the
problem-but more about that later.
White's first move-the move that solves the problem-is
called the key. Composers do their best to avoid a strong key,
e.g. a capture of a black piece. A problem usually has only
one key, unless more are deliberately intended (as, for example,
in No. 354). It sometimes happens-far too often, alas !-that
a problem is published containing an additional white move
which also solves the problem, in that it, too, leads to mate by
White on his second move, whatever Black does. A key not
intended by the composer of the problem is called a cook. All
the problems in this book have been solved and tested by
eagle-eyed cook-hunters, but that doesn't mean we guarantee
that every single one is absolutely sound.
We must distinguish between threat-problems and block­
problems. In a threat-problem, White's key threatens a mate
which he can deliver on his second move if Black makes no
effort to stop him. Any move by Black which defeats the
threat (i.e. prevents it from mating ) is called a defence. Every
time Black plays a move to defeat the threat, he weakens his
own position in some way, thereby allowing White to make a
different mating move. A black defence, taken together with
the new mate that it introduces, forms a variation.
In a block-problem White threatens nothing, but whatever
move Black makes, White is able to mate straight away. A
complete block is a problem in which, if it were Black's turn to
play, White could mate on the move. Such mates are called
set mates, and the variations are known as the set play. In an
incomplete block only some of Black's moves have set mates,
and White's key arranges mates for the rest of them. A com­
plete block is often solved by a simple waiting move, preserving
all the set play. But there is a special kind of complete block,
called a mutate, in which White has no mere waiting move at
his disposal, and so is forced to make a move which disrupts
some-or even all--of the set mates, but which introduces new
mates instead. New mates replacing set mates are known as
14
Introduction
changed mates or changes. Such strategy is not confined to
block problems, as you will discover later.
There are lots of different ways in which Black may defeat a
threat, and in the same way there are lots of ways in which he
may allow a new mate. The variations form part of the prob­
lem's tactics. And if the problem is to have any value at all,
the principal variations should be related in such a way as to
produce a theme or idea. For a chess problem is more than
just a puzzle. You, as the solver, have not finished your work
until you have not only solved the puzzle, but also discovered
the problem's theme, the composer's main idea. We do not
propose to give you a great list of the different types of tactics
a problem may show-that is something you can make for
yourself after you have read this book and studied the problems
in it. But what we shall do is to acquaint you with the most
important themes and thematic devices, so that you will know
what we are talking about when you embark on chapter 1 .
Interference: 1 . Black self-interference: A black line-piece
(Q, R or B) may guard a square on which White could otherwise
mate. If any differently-moving black piece (or any pinned
black piece) plays on to the line of guard between the line-piece
and the prospective mating square, an interference takes place.
See chapter 5. 2. White self-interference: White is permitted
by some error on Black's part to close one of his own lines of
guard when mating. The black error may be
Self-block: Black plays a piece on to a square next to his K,
so that White need not guard that square when mating. Or
it may be
Line-opening: Black opens a white line by removing a piece
from that line.
A self-block may take place on a flight, a square to which the
black K may move (see chapter 1 ).
Pin: A piece is pinned if its removal would leave its K in
check. Unpin, as the name suggests, involves the release of a
pinned piece (see chapters 2 and 4).
Check: In a number of problems, Black is allowed a check,
which White parries as he mates. If Black's check is inflicted
by or from a line-piece, White may reply with a cross-check, in
which he plays a piece on to the check-line. Very often
15
Introduction
cross-check problems contain a battery, an arrangement in which
a white line-piece is separated from the black K by another white
piece, which mates simply by moving away; or the two battery
pieces may be black, and may check the white K when the
battery opens. Cross-checks are the subject of chapter 3, and
batteries, though used in conjunction with many themes, are
dealt with particularly in chapter 8 .
You may think from all this that the only interesting things
in a two-move chess problem are White's key, Black's defences
and White's mates. But this is far from being the case. The
majority of two-movers composed nowadays-and indeed
many of those in this book-depend for part of their effect on
thematic tries. These are moves which very nearly solve the
problem, but which are defeated (or refuted) by a single black
defence. Tries have a number of different functions. For
instance, a try may serve to emphasise the set play of a problem
by introducing replies by Black leading to the set mates.
Alternatively, a series of tries, often by the same white piece,
may be of interest because of the way in which each is refuted.
Such tries may be related to each other by having a common
error-that is, each try makes a similar mistake which Black
can take advantage of; or by having a common aim, as in the
White Correction problems of chapter 1 1 . Thirdly, a try may
introduce some completely new play, i.e. new white mates or
new black defences or both. This new play will differ from
the set play, if any, and from the post-key play as well.
All this no doubt sounds rather complicated! But perhaps it
will help a little if we look at a problem at this stage, and see
how all this business of set play, tries and so on, really works.
The accompanying diagram shows a two-move problem by
Valentin Rudenko, one of the most successful Russian com­
posers of the present day. It gained first prize in a Dutch
composing tourney. By the way, tourney is the name given to
a competition in which specially contributed new problems take
part. The judge or judges of a tourney will normally award a
certain number of prizes, honourable mentions and commenda­
tions. Rudenko's problem illustrates the theme of two self­
blocks on a flight-square, an idea which really would not be
very interesting if all there was to the problem were a key, with
16
Introduction
a threat, two black defences and two new mates. But there is
much more to this problem than that. Let us look first at the
set play, i.e. the interesting moves which Black might play if it
were his turn to move (e.g. capture of prominent white pieces,
move of his K, checks, etc.), and see whether any white mates
are set for them. Well, in the first place there is a black K-move
which has no mate set for it, viz. 1 . .. Kxd5. So whatever

1 SELF-BLOCKS IN FOUR PHASES

V. F. RUDENKO
First Prize,
Dutch Ring Tourney, 1962

For solution, see text.

White plays he has to take care of this move. Secondly, the


observant solver will notice that that white R on d5 may also
be captured by the black R and Sf6, and that these moves are
self-blocks. Any set mates? Yes- I . . . Rxd5; 2 Qc2, and
1 . . . Sxd5; 2 Bxf5. Both these mates take advantage of the
fact that Black's K cannot now move to his flight-square. This
set play is said to constitute one phase of the solution of the
problem-and because it is part of the solution it is part of the
solver's job to find it.
In casting around for the key, the solver must first of all
decide whether this is likely to be a block- or a threat-problem.
It is fairly clear that White must threaten something, because
a dull black move like 1 . .. Be7, for example, does not look
as if it can introduce a special mate. And he must also bear in
mind that that flight-square d5 must be guarded in the threat­
ened mate, and that mate must also be possible after the black
K has moved to d5. A move by the white Sd4looks promising;
after all, any of its moves vacates the square d4 and introduces
the threat of 2 Rd4. And furthermore White can then play
17
Introduction
2 Qd3 after l . . . Kxd5. So far so good. But where is the
S to go?
Let's try 1 Se6. That looks reasonable enough. And when
you see that this move brings in two new mates after the
captures on d5 (1 . . . R x d5; 2 eSg5; and 1 .. . S x d5;
2 Sxc5), you might very well think that this is the key. Mter
all, these changes are quite interesting, and many problems have
been published showing less in the way of strategic play. But
it's hardly enough for a first prizewinner. And then you notice
that because White has played his S to e6, the Bc8 no longer
guards f5, so that Black has the defence 1 . . . Pf4! Now if
2 Rd4, Black can play 2 . . . Kf5!-and it isn't mate in two.
So 1 Se6? is only a try which fails through white self-interfer­
ence, and we must look further. The name given to the new
play which occurs after a try is virtual play, and it is here the
second phase of the solution. In a problem without set play, of
course, the virtual play is the first phase of the solution. By the
way, we usually put a question-mark after a try, just to show
that it isn't quite as good a move as the key, which has an
exclamation-mark. And an exclamation-mark is also placed
after any move by Black that defeats a try.
Since 1 Se6? is defeated by a move of the Pf5, let us see what
happens if White captures that pawn as his first move: 1 S X f5.
As mentioned on p. 14, it is one of the conventions of the chess
problem, broken only very occasionally, that White should not
capture a black piece on his first move, because such an opening
would be much too strong. But it is usually all right to take
a P. The question now is: does 1 Sxf5 solve the problem?
It has the same threat as 1 Se6, and there are now two more
new mates after the captures on d5: 1 .. . R X d5; 2 Q X e3;
and 1 . . . S x d5; 2 Sd6. But these mates are simply more
virtual play (the third phase), because Black can play 1 .. . Sd7!
-shutting-off the white B from f5-and now 2 Rd4 isn't mate.
You may be wondering by now how long this is going to
go on. Well, there is just one more phase-and that is the
actual play! The key to this fine problem is 1 Sc6!, which, by
putting an extra guard on e5, introduces a fourth pair of mates
(the actual play) for the captures on d5: 1 . . . R x d5; 2 f Sg5;
and 1 . . . Sxd5; 2 Sd2. And Black has only two other
18
Introduction
non-thematic defences (known as by-play): 1 . Kxd5, which
. .

allows 2 Qd3, as we have seen ; and 1 . . . Rc4, a simple


unguard, from behind the white R, of e5, allowing 2 ReS.
This problem, therefore, shows self-blocks on a flight-square in
four separate phases, with different mates throughout after the
thematic defences. And consequently the problem illustr�tes
the Zagoruyko theme, in which at least two black defences are
followed by different white mates in at least three phases of
play. This theme is named after the Russian composer Leonid
Zagoruyko, who made a number of examples of it when it first
became popular after the Second World War. In fact, it is
thought that the very first example of the theme was composed
by the Englishman G. F. H. Packer as long ago as 1916! We
do not approve, on the whole, of the practice of naming themes
after composers or places, but in the case of the Zagoruyko
theme the name has been adopted more or less throughout the
problem world, and is a lot simpler to use than some compli­
cated phrase describing the idea more exactly (such as "multi­
phase changed-play two-mover with at least two black defences
leading to changed mates in at least three phases of the play").
Not every multi-phase problem is necessarily an example of
the Zagoruyko theme. As you read through this book, you
will come across various different kinds of changed play,
thematic tries,· virtual play and so forth, and you would not
find it very helpful if we discussed any other examples just now.
But one or two further points must be made before you can
pass on to chapter 1.
Many themes of recent development, of which the Zagoruyko
is one, have given rise to a certain amount of controversy
among problemists, mainly because of uncertainty as to how
the merits of problems showing these themes should be judged.
We have already mentioned that all the pieces on the board in
the diagram position should have a function in the problem.
It is preferable that every piece should be useful at least in the
post-key play ; but as this play represents only the final phase
of the full solution, it may happen that the composer includes
in his problem some piece which has a function only in one
of the other phases of the solution, e.g. the set play, or the
virtual play. There is no such piece in No. 1 (Rudenko),
19
Introduction
and this is one of the things which makes the problem so
attractive.
Another, and perhaps an even more important, virtue of this
composition is the economy with which the composer shows
his idea. By economy we mean that the theme of the problem
is expressed without wastage of force, space, time, or play.
Every piece has at least one purpose; the pieces should fully
utilise the resources of the 8 X 8 board; no composer makes a
three-move problem to show an idea that can be expressed just
as well in two moves; and no pieces are added to a position
for the sole purpose of creating additional, non-thematic play.
Good by-play is inherent in a position; it is there because it
arises naturally from the arrangement of the pieces-it is never
simply "added". We are not going to try in this book to teach
you how to compose chess problems, for that is something that
can hardly be taught at all. But if you are tempted, when you
get to the end of chapter 12, to have a go at it yourself, your
first aim, once you have decided on a theme, should be economy.
Needless to say, there are other considerations. Clarity is
one-a muddled position, with no clear-cut idea and nothing
but unrelated variations, does not make for a successful
problem. And your composition should have unity as well.
Rudenko's No. 1 has great unity, in that the thematic variations
contain the same bla.ck error (self-block) in every phase.*
Economy, clarity and unity are three basic constituents of a
good chess problem. There is, however, a fourth constituent,
originality. It is no use if your problem simply restates an idea
that has been expressed over and over again. The composer
must aim at something new. If someone else has been there
before you, your problem is anticipated. We fear that some of
the problems in this book may be anticipated, but it is almost
impossible to find these things out, because there is no collection
of two-move chess problems in the whole world that can boast
a copy of every single two-mover ever published. The best
advice we can give to the beginner is this: if you think your
problem is worthwhile, consult an expert about its originality,
• Note, however, that identical black errors throughout the problem's solution are
not the only means of achieving unity. The errors may be different in every variation
in every phase, but the problem may still have great unity on account of some other
element.

20
Introduction
someQne who has had years of experience of composing, solving
and reading problem magazines. If he has kept up to date
with modern trends, he will be able to tell you whether or not
your composition stands any chance of being original.
In preparing this book, we have not made any attempt to
cover exhaustively every two-move theme ever thought of.
Instead, we have selected from this huge field a small number
of themes which have interested the three of us as composers
at one time or another. This may perhaps help to explain the
large preponderance of problems by Barnes, Lipton and Rice!
But we have also thought of this book in terms of a collection
of our own problems-indeed, at one time it was going to
contain nothing but problems by us, to the exclusion of all
others. We abandoned this idea when we realised we should
thereby miss an opportunity of showing you some of the finest
work of other composers. As you will see, each chapter contains
a number of problems-mostly by foreign composers-with a
full commentary in the· text, to explain the theme in its tradi­
tional form, if it has ever had one, and to introduce you to its
various developments. There follow problems by each of us
and by some other British problemists as well. We have
deliberately not given these a commentary in the text, in the
hope that you will try to solve them, having read the text and
studied the preceding examples. The solutions, with explana­
tions, may be found in the appendix-but be fair! They are
there for you to look at after you have solved the problems
yourself, not before!

21
CHAPTER ONE

Flights
Any square the black K may move to is called a flight. If
White's key lets the K move to a flight, it gives the flight, while
if such a move is prevented, the key takes the flight. It is always
a good thing if White increases Black's mobility, so that a
flight-giving key is usually regarded as a constructional advan­
tage. By contrast, a flight-taking key is a defect. Sometimes
White's key is of the give-and-take variety: this deprives Black
of a flight or flights, but gives another or others in exchange. If
White has a mate set for the K-flight, the flight is provided. An
unprovided flight (one with no set mate) is usually a drawback,
since it restricts White's choice of key. It is decidedly bad if
White takes an unprovided flight.
Few good problems are composed nowadays in which the
interest is centred on Black's escape to flight-squares in the
post-key play only. Flights in themselves offer only limited
scope, and the relatively few possibilities they afford were
exhausted long ago. In the second half of the last century Sam
Loyd and many other composers produced great numbers of
problems with flights as a theme, often with keys giving as
many flights as possible. But frequently these problems lacked
variety, for many of the mates were often identical moves. One
of the finest flight-problems of recent times, No. 2, avoids this
weakness with great ingenuity. The key, shutting off both the
Q and the R a5, gives no fewer than four flights, and there is a
different reply to every one of Black's K-moves! Notice how
the Q and the R come into their own on White's second move
as the firing pieces of the indirect batteries which the key sets up.
In the best flight-problems of the post-Loyd era (Loyd died
in 1911), flights are generally combined with some other theme,
as in No. 3, and indeed in a great many of the problems in
other sections of this book, where they occur rather as an
incidental feature than as the central idea. No. 3 shows
22
Flights
self-blocks by the two black Rs on the flight-squares, with mates
by whichever white R Black has not captured. Self-blocks are
found again in No. 4, but this time in the set play only: the
black Ss block the three squares d4, f4 and f6, two of the
resulting mates showing white interference (see page 15). The
2 FLIGHTS
A. G. KUZNETSOV
First Place,
Holland v. U.S.S.R., 1956
Key 1 ScS, threat 2 S x e6
KeS ; 2 S x d3
KfS ; 2 Sg4
K x gS ; 2 Sg8
(Ke3 ; 2 S x e6)
BeS ; 2 SdS
Ba2; 2 S x d3

3 FLIGHTS+ SELF-BLOCKS
C. MANSFIELD
American Chess Bulletin, 1953
Key 1 Sc6, threat 2 SgS
K x f7; 2 Pg8 = Q
K x dS ; 2 Qa2
dR x dS ; 2 Re7
fR x dS ; 2 Rf6
dR x f7 ; 2 Rd6
fR x f7 ; 2 ReS

key gives these three squares as flights, and Black's principal


defences to the threat are moves by the black K. lbis problem
is an example of radical change: the defences, the mates and
the theme are all changed between the set play and the actual
play.
Perhaps the most popular form of flight-square problem is
that in which the flights appear in a strict pattern. When the
black K may move to all four diagonal flights, we have the
star-flight theme. A problem in which the K can go to the
four orthogonal flights illustrates the plus-flight theme. No. 5
23
Flights
shows star-flights, with all the mates after the K-moves given
by the promoting pawn. The B on a2 is necessary to give a
mate (2 Sd6) after the self-block capture of the R g6 by either S.
One of the conventions of chess problems is that no thematic
defence shall lead to more than one mate, unless, as in some

4 RADICAL CHANGE :
SELF-BLOCKS TO FLIGHTS

F. FLECK
First Place,
A. C. White Memorial Tourney,
1952-3
Set Sd4; 2 Sg4
Sf4; 2 Qh8
Sf6; 2 Rg5
Key 1 Qf2, threat 2 Sg4
Kd4; 2 Sf5
Kf4; 2 Sd5
Kf6 ; 2 Sd5

s STAR-FLIGHTS + PROMOTIONS

J. HARTONG
Probleemblad, 1957
Key I Sd7, zugzwang
Ke8 ; 2 Pxf8 Q
=

Kg8; 2 Pxh8 Q
=

Kxg6 ; 2 Pg8= Q
Ke6 ; 2 Pxf8 S
=

Sxg6 ; 2 Sd6
S else; 2 Pg8= Q

of the problems in chapter 7, the composer deliberately intends


that there shall be duals (the name given to a choice of mating
moves). As the only useful choice for a promoting pawn is
between Q and S (the Q combining the powers of R and B),
a choice between Q and B or between Q and R is not held to
constitute a dual mate.
With the development of the multi-phase problem (see page
17), and the consequent enlargement of the scope of the two­
mover, composers renewed their interest in :flight-squares as a
24
Flights
theme. Problems showing changed mates following K-flights
(either from set to actual play or from virtual to actual play)
are now comparatively common. Sometimes the problem will
contain additional features of interest, as in No. 6, where each
K-move, in both phases, leads to a pin-mate. This is the name

6 CHANGED FUGHTS (+ PIN-


.
MATES)

F. MICHEL

First Prize, Themes 64, 1958


Set: K x d4; 2 Rc4
Kf3 ; 2 Bd5
Key 1 Sd5, zugzwang
K x d4; 2 Ra4
Kf3 ; 2 Q x g2
gS-; 2 Qf4
eS-; 2 Q x g2
S x d5; 2 Bf5

7 CHANGED FLIGHTS

V. I. TCHEPIZHNI

First Prize,
Dnepropetrovsk Sports Club, 1958
Set: Kg7 ; 2 Sf5
Ke5; 2 Sf3
R x a8; 2 Sc2
Key 1 Qh1 , threat 2 Qh8
Kg7; 2 dSe6
Ke5 ; 2 Sc6
Rxh1 ; 2 Sb3

given to a mate which would not work if one or more black


pieces were not pinned. Here the pin-mates are made possible
by the self-pin (by K-move) of the black S e3.
In No. 7 the interest is centred on the way in which White
guards the squares in the black K's field, and how these guards
must be altered after the key. Notice Black's third defence
( 1 . .. Rxa8 in the set play, 1 ... Rxh 1 after the key), which
leads to a third opening of the B+S battery. The key of this
problem is of a type known as pendulum: the key-piece swings
25
Flights
over to the other side of the black K, to occupy a square
diametrically opposite its starting square.
No. 8 has four pairs of mates after the K-flights. The first
pair is found in the set play; White then has three plausible­
looking first moves, and the key is the least likely of the three.

8 ZAGORUYKO : CHANGED FLIGHTS


] BESZCZYNSKI

First Prize, ex aequo,


Start, 1955-6
Set: Kd6 ; 2 Ke4
Kf5; 2 Qh5
Try 1 Qa4 ? threat 2 Qf4
Kd6 ; 2 Qd4
Kf5 ; 2 Qf4
Pc6 !
Try 1 Qb3 ? threat 2 Qd5
Kd6; 2 Qd5
Kf5 ; 2 Rg5
Pc6!
Key 1 Qc2 ! threat 2 Qc5
Kd6; 2 Qc6
Kf5 ; 2 Kd4

9 CHANGED STAR-FLIGHTS
V. F. RUDENKO

Third Prize ex aequo,


British Chess Federation, 1959
Try 1 Sc8 ? Kc6; 2 Se7
Ke6; 2 Qg8
Kc4 ; 2 Sb6
Ke4 !
Try 1 Se8 ? Kc6 ; 2 Qa8
Ke6 ; 2 Sc7
Ke4 ; 2 Sf6
Kc4 !
Try 1 S x f5 ? Kc6; 2 Se7
Ke4; 2 R x d4
Kc4; 2 Se3
Ke6 !
Key 1 Sb5 ! Kc6 ; 2 Qa8
Ke6; 2 Sc7
Ke4; 2 Sc3
Kc4; 2 R x d4
26
Flights
Unfortunately this fine problem has a defect: the two tries are
defeated by the same black move-a decided drawback, since
the careless though sensible solver, having found that 1 Qa4?
fails to 1 . . . Pc6!, will hardly consider a move like 1 Qb3?,
which also clearly does not provide a mate for that defence.
He will thus miss the third phase altogether, and thereby
deprive himself of much of the pleasure to be gained from
solving a problem such as this one. All this is not to condone
constructional weaknesses, which it is the composer's duty to
avoid if he possibly can.
No. 9 shows the star-flight theme with changes-a popular
idea, but one which is rarely found in four phases, as in this
example. This problem does not illustrate the Zagoruyko
theme (see page 19), as not all the mates are changes in every
phase and not all the K-moves have replies in the virtual play.
Nonetheless it is a magnificent achievement, displaying great
ingenuity of construction.
In the last few years a number of composers, with a penchant
for the bizarre, have experimented with checking keys in flight­
square problems, with some interesting and occasionally
amusing results. A checking key is bad only in so far as it
restricts Black's mqbility; very often however, the element of
surprise produced by such a key elevates it positively into the
"good" class, for the average solver, brought up on the tradi­
tional problems and keys of the past, will be loth to try an
opening which so obviously contravenes his idea of the accepted
conventions of the chess problem. But do not think from all
this that there is anything wrong with a checking key, or indeed
that it is something new. Such an opening was even found in
the Good Companion Folders* of fifty years ago, a fact which
present-day critics are inclined to forget. And some of the
finest problems by the great 19th-century American composer
Sam Loyd start with a check.

• The Good Companion Chess Problem Club was an international society of


problemists which was founded by James Magee, with the support of Alain White, in
America in 1913. It continued its many activities until 1924, organising tourneys and
publishing classified collections of problems and its famous "Folders" of original
work.

27
Flights
10 CHANGED STAR-FLIGHTS
A. ZARUR
Second Prize,
Probleemblad 1 1 4th Theme Tourney,
1964
Set: Kc8 ; 2 Sb6
Ke8; 2 Pd7
Ke6 ; 2 Qf5
Kc6; 2 P x b8 = S
Key 1 P x e7 + , Kc8; 2 eP x d8 = Q
Ke8 ; 2 P x f8 = Q
Ke6 ; 2 P x f8 = S
Kc6 ; 2 PeS= Q
K x c7 ; 2 Sb5

The set play of No. 10 has mates arranged for the star-flights
of the black K. The discovered check 1 P X e7 + upsets them
all, and incidentally gives a fifth flight. Notice that the new
mates for the star-flights are all promotions of the pawn which
makes the key.
Most of the most interesting flight-square problems contain
changes of one sort or another. The problems that follow are
therefore of this kind.

J. M. RICE
5th hon. mention, Skakbladet, 1961
Probleemblad, 1957
28
Flights

M. Ln>ToN 13 J. E. DRIVER 14
Version, 2nd hon. mention, British Chess Magazine, 1962
Die Schwa/be, 1959

R. C. 0. MATIHEWS 15 J. M. RICE 16
2nd prize, British Chess Magazine, 11 Due Mosse, 1961
1951

J. M. RICE 17 C. J. MORSE 18
1st prize, Problemisten, 1961 1st place, Great Britain v. Israel,
1960-1

29
Flights

A. C. REEvEs 19 J. M. RICE 20
Correspondence Chess, 1963 Themes 64, 1963

J. M. RicE . 21 J. M. RICE
4th prize, B.C.F. Tourney 100, Correspondence Chess, 1963
1961-2

30
CHAPTER TWO

The Half-pin
When a composer tries to explain to a beginner what "themes"
are all about-what chess problems are for-he often finds
himself setting up a simple half-pin problem, like Anderson's
lovely No. 23. The key, 1 Ra3, waits for Black to go wrong
-as he must, by virtue of his obligation to go somewhere. A
typical pair of elementary half-pin variations now appears :
1 . . . Sd1 ; 2 Bb1 (mate thanks only to the opening of h8-a1
to pin the R), and 1 . . . Rxb3 ; 2 Bxb3 (mate only because
the R has, in withdrawing from h8-a 1 , pinned the S).
Notice the reciprocal,nature of the half-pin theme. As in the
Grimshaw (see chapter 5), each of two black men permits mate,
in turn, by limiting the power of the other. The popularity of
both themes stems from this inherent unity, which enables a
good example to echo the same idea in several variations and
thus to attain economy without restricted variety. Thus
Anderson here get� a lot more play out of his nine men.
1 . . . Sx a2+; 2 Kd2 is a self-pin by capture and Royal check
as well as half-pin ; 1 . . . Rxc2+ ; 2 Kxc2 makes analogous
use of the half-pin line to complete the second thematic pair
of battery mates. If 1 . . . Rxa2 ; 2 Bxc3 exploits the capture

23 HALF-PIN

G. F. ANDERSON
Good Companions, 1919
Key 1 Ra3, zugzwang
Rb1+; 2 B x b1
R x b3; 2 B x b3
S x a2+; 2 Kd2
R x c2+; 2 K x c2
R x a2; 2 B x c3
Sd1; 2 Bbl

31
The Half-pin
self-pin instead of half-pin ; notice how naturally this arises
from the half-pin mechanism.
Gerald Anderson in many ways embodies the best aspects
of the English problem tradition. He has been producing fine
two-movers, as well as three-movers and self-mates, for around
fifty years, during his long and successful career as an account­
ant with the Foreign Service. His work has always combined
restraint and economy with a rare sense of the possibilities of
a position, so that one marvels how much he does with a few
pieces.
Simple half-pins date back at least to 1 855, when the British
composer A. Kempe published the first recorded example in
"Cassell's Family Magazine". American and British composers
experimented with Doublings from around 1 880, and ultimately
even Triplings of the simple theme were achieved (see No. 232
in the Task section). In the early years of this century, an
"Anglo-American" complex two-move style began to take shape

24 HALF-PIN
C. MANSFIELD

First Prize, Hampshire Post, 1915


Key 1 Bc7, threat 2 Ra5
Bc3/c5 ; 2 Rb3
Bd2; 2 Q x c2
Ba3; 2 Pb3
Ba5; 2 Rb6
S x b5 ; 2 P x a8 = Q

in the hands of A. F. Mackenzie, a blind Jamaican composer


of astonishing talent, and the Sussex composer P. F. Blake,
famous for early, intensive yet polished interference tasks. That
style, and its burgeoning in the publications of Alain White's
"Good Companion Chess Problem Club of Philadelphia" in
the period 1 9 1 5-25, was essentially the exploitation of inter­
acting black line-themes, above all the half-pin ; and Arnoldo
Ellerman of Buenos Aires and our own Comins Mansfield have
been its greatest exponents. Early Mansfield-vintage 1 9 1 4- 1 6
32
The Half-pin
-even when making some of the greatest two-move master­
pieces of all time, is afflicted with a certain diffuseness totally
absent from his mature style. Thus in No. 24 any move by b4
defeats the threat by square-vacation, but the "star" variation,
1 . .Bc3 or c5; 2 Rb3! is not, to be honest, balanced by others
.

of quite equal merit. In this line, the B cuts the line of the
pinned R, c2-c6, allowing White to unpin him on b3 witli
impunity (the so-called "Goethart theme"). Of course the mate
also exploits the opening of h4--a4 to pin e4 (half-pin). There
is another half-pin-interference 1 .. Bd2; 2 Qxc2, and a pair
.

of half-pin self-blocks by the black B on a3 and a5, the latter


with White interference. The black S completes the half-pin in
its self-pinning capture 1 .. Sxb5; 2 bxa8=Q. As we have
.

suggested, the problem, great though it is, resembles a string


of lovely but ill-matched pearls, not fully utilising the unity,
balance and reciprocity of the "necklace" provided by the
half-pin theme.
By 1919, Mansfield centres his best half-pin work on more
precisely paired variations. In No. 25, after a surprising key
abandoning a battery, the defences 1 .. Sb5; 2 Sc5 and
.

1 ... Qd3; 2 Sd4 each show half-pin, self-block allowing


White Interference by the battery-firer, defence of the threat
by guard, and abandonment of the battery by unguard. Again
there is that "unrepetitive repetition" typical of the best half-pin
problems. There is enough similarity between the lines for
perfect unity and balance, but not enough for the slightest
tedium. Notice that even such a stellar sub-variation as

HALF-PIN + WlllTE INTERFERENCE


25
C. MANSFIELD

First Prize, Hampshire Post, 1919


Key 1 QfS, threat 2 Rd4
SbS; 2 ScS
Qd3 ; 2 Sd4
Se2 ; 2 Pd3
S x dS ; 2 Q x fl

33
The Half-pin
1 ... Se2; 2 Pd3, with interference and unpin-interference as
well as half-pin, is clearly subsidiary to the paired mainplays.
The varied ways of combining half-pin with other themes are
well illustrated by Ellerman's trio of unpinning masterpieces.
In No. 26, the key thematically pins d7, and each black B
unpins it in turn by interference along g7-a7, allowing a
promotion by the unpinned P to exploit the pin of the unmoved
black B. In No. 27, both thematic unpins are executed by the
black Q, giving checks crossed by the white S to exploit the pin
of the black B. (This combination, half-pin+ unpin+ cross­
check, is sometimes called the Tuxen theme.) Although the
main thematic interest is centred on the play of the black Q,
there is no impression of incoherence, because the black B
gives a similar semi-symmetric pair of echoed variations,
combining half-pin this time with simple self-block. There is
a useful extra interference unpin I . . Se5, and an astonishingly
.

good key.
26 HALF-PIN + UNPIN OF WHITE
A. ELLERMAN
Tijdschrift van der K.N.S.B., 1919
Key 1 Ka7, threat 2 P x b6
Bf7; 2 Pd8 = S
Be7 ; 2 P x e8 =Q

The last two problems have shown unity achieved, in turn,


by variations of parallel thematic content, and by variation­
pairs analogous in the near-symmetry of their pairing. A third
way at once to exploit and to emphasise the unifying bond
among the four half-pin participants is to add, to the half-pin
mates, a pair in which the white rear-piece does some mating
work. This is well shown in No. 28, one of the many forgotten
Good Companion masterpieces published too late for inclusion
i n Alain White's famous and standard collection.* There is,
• The Good Companion Two-Mover, 1922. One of the books that should be in
every problemist's library.

34
The Half-pin
first, the simple half-pin pair, 1 ... Bg4 and 1 .. . Sf3; in each
case the white Sa2 takes the moving piece, allowing h1 to
discover mate because of the pin of its partner. Second, there
is the pair of unpin defences, 1 ... Be4; 2 Qxg5 (not 2 Qh8 ?)
and 1 ... Se4; 2 Qh8. Unity is here achieved by the physical
identity of the pieces involved in the two variation pairs.
_

27 HALF-PIN COMBINATION
A. ELLERMAN
Fourth Prize, Observer, 1920
Key 1 Sf3, threat 2 Qg4
Qa7+; 2 Sd7
Q x gl + ; 2 Sg4
BfS ; 2 Qe3
B x f3 ; 2 Be3
SeS; 2 Sh5
Q x f6 + ; 2 R x f6

28 HALF-PIN BLEND
A. ELLERMAN
Second Prize ex aequo,
Good Companions, 1922
Key 1 Rd4, threat 2 Rh4
Sf3; 2 S x f3
Bg4 ; 2 S x g4
Se4; 2 Qh8
Be4; 2 Q x gS

Yet another half-pin-unpin combination-much more un­


usual this time-is shown in No. 29, by Alberto Mari, one of
the greatest (and most underrated) two-move composers of all
time, who pioneered a large number of popular modern ideas.
The existence of two half-pin arrays makes the problem of
unity more challenging; the associated unpin theme turns the
trick nicely, in 1 ... Bc4; 2 S x d6 and 1 ... Sc4; 2 Sg3. The
half-pins are completed by a pair of defences- I . eB away
. .

35
The Half-pin
and 1 . . . Q X g5-both of which stop the threat by square­
vacation of lateral flights. The systems a5-f5 and fl-f5 are
bound together with hoops of steel. Notice how, in alternate
lines of play, e4 and e7 do mating and guarding duty in turn
-a sure sign of expert construction.

29 DOUBLE HALF-PIN

A. MARI
Second Prize,
Good Companions, I924
Key I Bc6, threat 2 Q x d7
Bc4 ; 2 S x d6
Sd4; 2 SgJ
eB-; 2 B x d7
Q x g5 ; 2 Q x g5

30 CHANGED HALF-PIN
K. HASENZAHL
The Problemist, 1957
Set: S x e6+; 2 R x e6
Rf7+; 2 P x f7
Key I Rd5, threat 2 Rd7
S x e6+; 2 Q x e6
Rf7+ ; 2 Q x f7
Pb6; 2 Qd8
Pb5 ; 2 S x c6

Our "historical introduction" closes with a pair of half-pin


problems illustrating modern developments. In No. 30, the set
checks on e6 and f7-with complete half-pin replies ready­
leap to the eye, yet the key abandons those replies for a new
half-pin pair. The two defences by b7 each open one black line,
in defence, and close another, in (interference) error-a theme
aptly christened by T. R. Dawson the "Pawn Switch". In
general, a black defence that opens a line for one of his pieces,
but interferes with a line of another of them, is called a Bivalve.
36
The Half-pin
If the, piece is the same, we have a Valve. The bivalve byplay
here aris�s naturally from e6 and b8, essential to the setplay.
In No; 3 1 , the Italian composer-distinguished mainly for a
series of extraordinary, fortress-like positions where the
"problem" is to demonstrate legality-turns his hand to the
31 HALF-PIN: TOTAL CHANGE
L. CERlANI
Die Schwa/be, 1939
Set: Pg3 ; 2 S x g3
Pf3 ; 2 P x f3
Key 1 Qe7, threat 2 Qb4
Rd6 ; 2 Sc4
Rd5 ; 2 Sf6

orthodox two-mover. Not that No. 3 1 is all that orthodox: in


1 939 it was a pioneer indeed. The set-up h4-e4 exploits the
solver's familiarity with half-pin problems, for there is a pair
of thematic mates all ready for the P moves. Yet the surprising
key abandons them for a new Q-line with total change of the
half-pin defences and mates.
Further Half-pins may be found in the Task section (Nos.
232-234), linked to Cross-checks (Nos. 4�8) and in Dual
Avoidance (No. 1 48}.

J. M. RICE 33
Observer, 1963 The Tablet, 1963
37
The Half-pin

J. M. RICE 34 M. LIPTON
1st hon. mention, Sun Herald, 1st hon. mention, Israel
1961 Tourney, 1955

M. LIPTON 37
The Problemist, 1952

J. F. LING 38 C. MANSFIEID
4th prize, B.C.P.S. Ring Tour­ 1st prize, The Observer, 1965
ney, 1962
38
The Half-pin

M. LIPTON & J. M. RICE 40 B. P. BARNES 41


3rd prize, Die Schwalbe, 1957 6th hon. mention, Die Schwalbe,
1957

M. LIPToN 42
Die Schwa/be, 1964

39
C H A P TER THREE

Cross-check
Whatever his level of experience or sophistication, the solver
always finds special pleasure in cross-check problems (see p.
1 5). Beginners are amazed that White, with only two moves
to force mate, can allow Black to cramp his style by checking­
especially if the aggressor can be neither captured nor punished
with a K-battery. Even seasoned solvers, who look for keys
allowing interesting-looking black checks, are often surprised
at the wide variety of original effects still obtainable from the
theme. There are many gaps in the classical achievement,
waiting for ambitious composers to fill them,* and the theme
can also lend itself to clear expression in modern form.
The British tradition has always emphasised clear ideas with
solver-appeal-never at the cost of experiment, though some­
times, perhaps, too much at the expense of rigorous economy
of force. Thus it is not surprising that, since Blake, Heathcote
and Mackenzie, cross-checkers have been central in this tradi­
tion. Mansfield's No. 44 is one of the most famous two-movers
of all time. After a perfect thematic key, the unpinned black S
forces four distinct interpositions on the checking line-though
only three can be called cross-check variations, since 1 . . . Sd2+
is followed by the threat. The flight-giving element of the key
is meritorious, despite the dual after the flight. There are duals
after loose, yet thematic, black S checks, and there is no byplay.
Of course this is carping criticism, for the problem is amazingly
rich for its 16 men, perfectly keyed, and light and open in
construction.
Jan Hartong was the great Dutch "Good Companion" . Like
his Danish counterpart, K. A. K. Larsen, but unlike Mansfield

• For example, nobody has yet shown more than four forced cross-checking
replies, other than the threat, to moves of a single black man. (Four have been shown
for discoveries by black R, black B, black S and black K.) Nor has anyone shown
more than three cross-check mates following black interferences, and the same applies
both to self-pins and to self-blocks.

40
Cross-check
and Ellerman, he is also an active and first-class three-move
composer (does his two-move style show traces of this talent ?).
In No. 45, he shows three self-blocking cross-checks allowed by
the key. There are actually two more cross-checks, one in the
post-key play, and one a set self-block ; if, in the initial position,

CROSS-CHECK
C. MANSFIELD
First Prize,
Good Companions, 1917
Key 1 Be4, threat 2 S x c4
S x d6 + ; 2 Bd3
S x e3 + ; 2 SbS
SeS + ; 2 Rd3
(Sd2+ ; 2 Sc4)

45 CROSS-CHECK
J. liARTONG
First Prize,
The Problemist, 1927
Key 1 K X a6, threat 2 SbS
aS x c3 + ; 2 RaS
eS-+ ; 2 Rc4
eS x c3 + ; 2 RbS
P x eS + ; 2 Rc6

Black played 1 . P x c3 + ; 2 Rb5 would mate. This abandon­


. .

ment of a provided check increases the surprise of the excellent


key.
The "composer's theme" par excellence, half-pin, makes a
happy combination with the solver's beloved cross-check. In
No. 46, the key opens b4-h4 to allow two half-pin cross-checks,
with cleverly-separated mates by S interposals. The key also
permits a third check on c5, which stops both S mates by
unpinning the black R, but self-blocks c5 to allow 2 Re4. The
41
Cross-check
half-pinfcro!ls-check combination is completed by 1 . . . Qh7 + ;
2 Rh5 (unfortunately not provided before the key). To add to
this wealth, there is byplay by 1 . . . Pc5 and 1 . . Qf5, and a
.

changed reply to 1 . . B X e5. Notice b6, added solely (and


.

rightly) to stop thematic duals after distant black B checks.


46 CROSS-CHECK + HALF-PIN
F. NOVEIARQUE
11 Problema, 1931
Key 1 Se3, threat 2 Rd5
B x c3 + ; 2 Sc4
B x e3/e5 + ; 2 Se4
Bc5+ ; 2 Re4
Qh7 + ; 2 Rb5

47 CROSS-CHECK + HALF-PIN
G. GUIDELLI
Second Prize,
L'Eco degli Scacchi, 1916--7
Key 1 Kf7, threat 2 Qb8
PeS + ; 2 Sd5
fB-+ ; 2 3Sf5
Be5 + ; 2 7Sf5
B x e7 + ; 2 B x f4
Ke5 ; 2 Sc4

No. 47 is one of the few half-pin/cross-check combinations


where both half-pinned pieces discover check. The key is
perfect, with the white K walking into all kinds of trouble.
The thematic variations are 1 . . . Pe5 + ; 2 7Sd5 (half-pin,
cross-check, self-block) and I . .. B away +; 2 3Sf5 (half-pin,
cross-check). Note also the half-pin/return-capture check,
I . . . B X e7 +, and the self-block with cross-check after
I . . . Be5 + , unpinning the black R to stop 2 3Sf5 but allowing
and forcing 2 7Sf5. Guidelli died tragically young, of First
War wounds, but not before enriching the two-mover with
42
Cross-check
numerous classical masterpieces like this one, and pointing the
way forward with such inspired pioneers as No. 150.
Frederick Gamage was a composer for whom chess problems
were the major means of happy expression in an otherwise
somewhat rootless life. The entire, immense creativeness of the
48 CROSS-CHECK + HALF-PIN
F. GAMAGI!
First Prize,
Los Angeles Chess Club, Tourney, 1938
Key 1 Bb4, threat 2 Se1
B x f3 + ; 2 Qf5
B x b3 + ; 2 Sg5
Be4+ ; 2 Se5
Bc6 + ; 2 Sc5

man seems to have burst out into a handful of unforgettable


problems. In No. 48, there is a complete half-pin, but the
emphasis is firmly on the cross-checks by d5-four of them, all
allowed by the key ! If the Bd5 were removed, White could
choose between two cross-check mates, 2 Qf5 and 2 Sg5.
1 . . . Bxf3 + forces the Q cross-check, with self-pin ; 1 . . .
B xb3 + stops it by potentially unguarding c4, and 1 . . . Bc4+
by unpinning b5, both forcing the half-pin/cross-check 2 Sg5.
(Compare this last defence with its analogues 1 . . . Be5+ in
No. 47 and 1 . . . Bc5 + in No. 46: there they stopped the
half-pin mate, here it is allowed by the unpin.) 1 . . . Be4+
does not allow either mate, but blocks e4 to allow the White
Interference cross-check, 2 Se6 ; and 1 . . . Bc6 + leads to
2 Sc5.
Modern developments of themes generally go via mutates
and free change (in which some moves are not provided with
mates in the initial position) to many-phase renderings. This
account is not quite appropriate for cross-checkers, for two
reasons. First, even "anti-modern" critics, who dislike free
change, accept it for this theme, because the set play is clear
to the solver owing to the strength of the checking defences.
Second, there are not many good "modem" cross-checkers.
43
Cross-check
49 CHANGED CROSS-CHECKS
M. SEGERS
First Prize, Schackspelaren, 1933
Set: QbS + ; 2 dSc6
Qh3 + ; 2 Se6
Key 1 Qf8, threat 2 Qc8
QbS + ; 2 eSc6
Qh3 + ; 2 eSfS
Q x d4 + ; 2 SdS
Q x e4 ; 2 Sb3
Qg3 ; 2 Se6

The attractiveness of the theme has led composers to expect


(and solvers, and judges, to tolerate) some looseness of both
definitions and standards. In most alleged "multi-phase cross­
checkers", try-play (and/or key-play) is spoiled by the "varia­
tions" that merely force one of several battery threats ; or some
of the mates are simply recfl,ptures and not cross-checks at all ;
or there is only one variation in each phase. Many of the two­
phase examples have similar defects. Not so, however, Segers'
remarkable Meredith No. 49. The set checks on b5 and h3
unpin d4 to interpose ; the key changes the battery, and now
it is White's other S that exploits the opening of fl-c4 to give
cross-check mates. The.dual set for 1 . . . Qxd4 disappears, to
be replaced by yet another cross-check. Nor is the solver
cheated of the unpins, two of which are forced by other defences
from the black Q.

J. M. RICE
2nd prize, B.C.P.S. Ring Tourney, 2nd hon. mention,
1962 British Chess Magazine, 1962
44
Cross-check

M. LIPTON B. P. BARNES 53
British Chess Magazine, 1964 Correspondence Chess, 1961

A. R. GOODERSON 54 J. M. RICE 55
1st commend., B.C.P.S. Tourney, 1st hon. mention, Observer, 1962
194S

J. M. RICE B. P. BARNES 57
1st prize, McWilliam Tourney, Die Schwa/be, 1964
19S6

45
Cross-check

N. A. MACLEOD 58 B. P. BARNES
Sth prize, (after G. HEATHCOTE)
Yugoslav Chess Federation, 1950 Correspondence Chess,
1964

G. F. ANDERSON 60 M. LIPTON 61
lst prize, The Observer, 1961 Correspondence Chess, 1962

American Chess Bulletin, 1959 5th prize, Die Schwa/be Theme


Tourney, 1962

46
Cross-check

M. LIPTON 64
4th place, Great Britain 11. Israel,
1960-1

47
C H APTER F O U R

Unpin of White by Black


A pinned white unit may be unpinned by Black in one of two
ways : (1) by interference: another black unit plays on to the
pin-line, thereby releasing the white unit ; (2) by withdrawal:
the pinning unit itself moves off the pin-line. The former method
is illustrated in No. 65. The key, thematic in that it pins the
ReS which is to be subsequently unpinned, provides a second
guard for e5, and so threatens 2 Qh6. Black has three defences
in which a piece plays on to the long diagonal al-h8 : 1 . . .
Rd4, which forces 2 Re4, because White must prevent the black
R from playing to f4 ; 1 . . . Rc3, leading to 2 Re3, so that
2 . . . Rg3 ! is made impossible ; and 1 . . . Sd4, which interferes
with the Rc4 but opens the line a2-h2, so that only 2 Re2 is
mate, with the R shutting the line that Black has just opened.
Few unpin problems with such rich strategy have so few white
men. Certainly this example of the theme can hardly be
criticised for lack of economy.
Withdrawal unpins are illustrated by No. 66. It is commonly
felt that unpin by withdrawal is less interesting from the
strategic point of view than unpin by interference, but there is
no doubt that there are some really attractive withdrawal-unpin

65 UNPIN OF WlllTE
(BY INTERFERENCE)
F. GAMAGE
First Prize,
Tidskriftfor Schack, 1 9 1 4
Key 1 gRg5, threat 2 Qh6
Rc3 ; 2 Re3
Rd4 ; 2 Re4
Sd4; 2 Re2

48
Unpin of White by Black
problems to be found, and this is one of them. 1bree times the
black Q unpins the white S, and on each occasion White is
able to shut off her control of the B + S battery : 1 Qa2 ; . . .

2 Sc2 ; 1 . .Qh2 ; 2 Sg2; and 1


. . Qf6 ; 2 Sf5. The key
. .

here is not thematic, for the Se3 is already pinned in the diagram
position, but it has the considerable merit of giving the black.
K a flight, f4, leading to an unusual interference.
66 UNPIN OF WIUTE
(BY WITHDRAWAL)

A. S. BILNER
Fifth Prize, 64, 1930-1
Key 1 Sf8, threat 2 Qh6
Qa2; 2 Sc2
Qh2; 2 Sg2
Qf6; 2 SfS
Pf6; 2 Se6
Kf4; 2 Qf6

67 PIN-UNPIN RESTORATION

F. GAMAGE

First Prize,
British Chess Magazine, Theme Tourney,
1944
Key I ReS, threat 2 RdS
Q x c5 ; 2 Sc4
Q x f4; 2 Se4
Q x b5 ; 2 Se4
K x cS ; 2 Sd3

No. 67 exemplifies a pinning and unpinning combination


very popular in America and termed "pin-unpin restoration".
The key pins the white Sd2, but unpins the black Q. In the
main variations 1 . . Qxc5 and 1 . . Qxf4 the white S is
. .

unpinned, by withdrawal, but the black Q becomes pinned


again ! A complex unpin-arrangement is found in No. 68, in
which the white Q unpins the black Se5 but pins herself on c5.
This S defeats both threats by its moves : after 1 . eS away, . .

2 Rf6 is impossible because the R is pinned, and 2 Bd5 will not


49
Unpin of White by Black
work on account of white interference. But all the S's moves
unpin white pieces ! The thematic variations are 1 . Sc6 and . .

1 . . Sc4, leading to mates by the Q, while the S's other two


.

moves unpin the Pe7 and form by-play of exceptional interest.


These two problems are both fine examples of a complex theme
in which the poor composer, with so many pieces to deal with,
has a much less happy time than the solver, who only has to
sit back and enjoy the richness of the variations !
68 UNPIN OF WHITE
J. BuCHWALD
British Chess Magazine, 1943
Key 1 Q x cS, threats 2 Rf6 & 2 BdS
Sc4; 2 QdS
Sc6; 2 Qd6
Sd7 ; 2 P x d8 = S
Sf7; 2 PeS = Q

69 MUTATE : UNPIN OF WHITE


BY WITHDRAWAL
V. OVCHINNIKOV
First Prize, 64, 1929/11
Set : BaS; 2 5Rc4
B x cJ ; 2 5R x d5
Key 1 S x dS, zugzwang
Ba5 ; 2 R x aS
B x cJ ; 2 R x cJ

A great deal of work has been done in the field of changed


play after unpin of White by Black. Nos. 69 to 73 illustrate
five methods of achieving such changed play. In No. 69 the
key makes impossible the two set mates after the withdrawal
unpins by the black B, but substitutes two new ones. This
problem is of a kind known as a mutate, a term invented by
Brian Harley : in the diagram position every black move has a
set mate, but White has no waiting move and is thus forced to
50
Unpin of White by Black
destroy some of these mates and replace them with others.
New post-key variations in mutates are called added mates.
A favourite method of producing changes after unpins of the
white Q is by making the Q move along the line of pin so that
she has access to different squares. A slight but original

70 WIDTE SELF-PIN + UNPIN


E. HOLLADAY
Correspondence Chess, 1960
Try 1 Q x d6 ?, threat 2 R x cs
BdS; 2 Qb6
SdS ; 2 Qc6
Pg1 = Q!
Key 1 K x d6 ! , threat 2 R x cs
BdS ; 2 Q x cS
Sd5 ; 2 Q x a4

71 WIDTE SELF-PIN + UNPIN


E. PAALANEN
Fifth Hon. Mention,
Problem Theme Tourney, 1959
Try 1 Q x cS ?, threat 2 Kc6
Pb4; 2 Q x f2
Sb4 ; 2 Qe3
Sd4; 2 K x dS
B x cS + ; 2 K x cS
Sd3 !
Key 1 Q x dS !, threat 2 Kc6
Sd4; 2 QeS
Sd3 ; 2 Q x e4
Pb4/Sb4; 2 K x cS
R x dS + ; 2 K x dS

variant of this scheme is found in No. 70, where the Q is not


in fact pinned in the diagram position but becomes pinned on
the same line in each phase.
No. 71 illustrates the self-pin in try and key of one white
piece on two different lines. The Q in unpinned twice in each
phase. Notice that the mate following the capture of the Q in
51
Unpin of White by Black
the virtual play (2 K x c5) reappears after the thematic virtual­
play defences (1 . . Pb4 and 1 . . . Sb4) in the post-key play.
.

Similarly 2 Kxd5 follows 1 . . Sd4 in the virtual play, and


.

1 . . R x d5 + after the key. This thematic effect, known as


.

mate-transference, is discussed in detail in chapter 10.


In No. 72 two white pieces, the Sd5 and the Bd7, stand
initially in a half-pin position. Each moves away in turn, in
try and key, leaving the other pinned, and allowing it to be
unpinned twice, once by interference and once by withdrawal.
Problems such as this are not easy to get sound, as it is difficult
to avoid cooks by the half-pinned units.

72 WIDTE SELF-PIN + UNPIN


(WillTE HALF-PIN)
B. ZAPPAS
Third Prize,
British Chess Magazine, 1962
Try 1 Sc7 ?, R x e4 ; 2 B x b5
Sd6; 2 Be6
Pc2 !
Key 1 Be6 !, zugzwang
R x e4 ; 2 S x f4
Sd6; 2 Sc7
Pc2 ; 2 Sd2

No. 7 1 showed changes brought about by the self-pin of one


white piece on two different lines. In No. 73, however, two
different white pieces pin themselves on the same line. Con­
sequently, in contrast to the mechanism of Paalanen's problem,
the same two black defences lead to the unpin mates in each
phase. Notice how the Re8, which makes the try, is skilfully
brought into play in the post-key variations, to guard the new
flight e3 after 1 . . . Sf6.
No. 74 illustrates precisely the same idea as No. 73, but, by
using a battery, the composer has incorporated no fewer than
4 separate unpins of the white R following the try, and 5 of the
white S following the key. The theme of the problem stares
you in the face, but it may be some time before you discover
why the try does not work and the key does.
52
Unpin of White by Black
A great deal more could be written about unpin of White
by Black, and indeed the reader will find more in the chapters
on Separation and Patterns. There is very little scope left in

73 WHITE SELF-PIN + UNPIN


A. SAVALLE
First Prize,
Le Probleme Theme Tourney, 1960-1
Try 1 R x e5 ?, threat 2 Q x f4
Rf6 ; 2 Rd5
Sf6; 2 Re2
ReS !
Key 1 S x e5 ! , threat 2 Q x f4
Rf6 ; 2 Sc4
Sf6 ; 2 Sf3

74 WIDTE SELF-PIN + UNPIN


H. L. MusANTE
First Prize,
American Chess Bulletin, 1961
Try 1 R x f3 ?, threat 2 R x e3
Q x h6; 2 Rf6
Q x e5 ; 2 Rf5
Qd2 ; 2 Rf2
Qf4 ; 2 R x f4
Q x d4 ; 2 R x d3
Qe4; 2 Bg8
Qe2 !
Key 1 S x f3 !, threat 2 Sb4
Q x h6 ; 2 Sg5
Qe6 ; 2 Se5
Q x d4 ; 2 S x d4
Qd2; 2 S x d2
Qe1 ; 2 S x e1
(K x c6 ; 2 Pa8 = Q)

unpin themes in post-key play only ; the composer searching


for originality must today concentrate on changed play,
though even here he will find that much has already been
achieved.
53
Unpin of White by Black

M. LIPTON 76
Problemist, 1952 (version) 1st prize, Deutsc/re Schachzeitung,
1957

J. M. RicE 77 ]. M. RICE
3rd commend., Die Schwa/be, Die Schwa/be, 1960
1960

J. M. RICE 80
Problemist, 1960 Problemist, 1 965

54
Unpin of White by Black

A. c. REEVES 81 C. MANSFJELD 82
Version, Problem, 1963 Commended, Die Schwa/be, 1955

A. R. GOODERSON 83 J. M. RICE 84
Correspondence Chess, 1960 American Chess Bulletin, 1960

85 M. LIProN 86
J. M. RICE (after M. WROBEL) 11 Due Mosse, 1959
British Chess Magazine, 1962

55
Unpin of White by Black

M. l.IPTON 88
8th commend., Die Schwa/be, British Clu!ss Magazine, 1966
1962

M. L!PTON 89 J. M. RICE 90
The Prob/emist, 1965 6th prize, B.C.P.S. 40th Anni­
versary Tourney, 1959-60

4th hon. mention, Die Schwa/be, Probleemblad, 1962


1960
56
CHAPTER FIVE

Grimshaw and Nowotny


Black Interference, the closure of a black guard-line by another
black unit, is found in a great many chess problems, sometimes
as the principal theme, sometimes in the by-play. The Grimshaw
theme, named after an English composer of the last century, is
a special kind of interference theme, involving mutual interfer­
ence between two black pieces. For example, in one variation
a black R cuts the line of guard of a black B, and in another
the B cuts the line of guard of the R. Such an arrangement is
known as the R-Grimshaw, and is the most common method
93 GRIMSHAWS
J. A. ScmFFMANN
Brisbane Courier, 1929
Key 1 Rd5, threat 2 Bc4
Rd6; 2 Sc4
Bd6; 2 Rd3
ReS ; 2 Sc8
Be5 ; 2 Rb5
(B x d5 ; 2 Qf3)

of setting the theme. A P-Grimshaw involves the interference


in one variation of a black P with a black B, and in another of
the B with P. Of course, the P must be on its starting-square
originally for a P-Grimshaw to be possible.
No. 93 is a doubling of the R-Grimshaw theme. The key is
strong : the Rd7 is very much out of play to begin with, and it
moves to a very advantageous position, simultaneously cutting
the lines of the black Rh5 and Bf7 (see also page 63). Any black
move to the square d6 or e5 defeats the threat, by closing
white lines of guard bearing on a3 and b2. 1 . . Rd6 interferes
.

with the Bh2, and leads to an opening of the R + S battery,


2 Sc4 (to regain control of a3). The matching variation 1
57
Grimshaw and Nowotny
Bd6 interferes with the Rc8 to allow 2 Rd3, a "pole-of-line"
mate, so called because White's piece is already on the line
and mates at the end of it. 1 . . . Be5, an interference with
the Rh5, leads to a second pole-of-line mate, 2 Rb5. The
companion variation, 1 . . . ReS, allows a further battery­
opening, 2 Sc8, which, incidentally, is also a "shut-off" of the
Rd8. In this problem the four thematic Grimshaw defences are
carried out by two black Rs and one black B. A problem in
which only one R and one B produce two pairs of Grimshaws
(by interfering with each other on each of two squares) illus­
trates the theme of "Four-Hands-Round". No. 292 is an
example.
94 GRIMSHAWS
A. J. FINK
Version, Chess Review, 1933
Key 1 Q x c7, threat 2 Rg6
Be4 ; 2 Rf4
Qe4 ; 2 Pf3
Bd4; 2 Qf4
Qd4 ; 2 Se3

No. 94 is a very curious kind of double Grimshaw, in which


the protagonists are not one B and one R, but two Bs and the
pinned Q. Only when she is pinned can the Q interfere with
other units, and this fine and unusual problem shows just how
interesting such interferences can be. Notice how White is
restricted to only one mate after each of the defences 1 . . Be4 .

and 1 . Bd4 : the former defence leaves the white Q pinned,


. .

so that 2 Qf4 will not work, while the latter is a direct pin of
the Rf6, preventing 2 Rf4.
At one time it was thought that it would be impossible to
achieve three Grimshaw-interference pairs in a single problem
without some serious constructional weakness, such as an over­
powerful key. Brian Harley, in his Mate in Two Mot'es (193 1),
quotes an example from 1930 by W. and S. Pimenov, where
the weakness is a P=Q key. In the previous year, however,
58
Grimshaw and Nowotny
Loshinski had produced his now famous 1 3-piece 3-fold
Grimshaw, with a fine waiting key (No. 4 in CPIA) ; and two
years earlier F. L. Simkhovich had composed No. 95, admittedly
a heavy setting but nonetheless a superb achievement. Observe
how skilfully the mates are differentiated after interference on
the same line, e.g. : 1 . . Bd7 ; 2 Sf7-not 2 Qg7 ?, because of
.

95 TRIPLE GRIMSHAW
F. L. SlMKHOVICH

Trud, 1928
Key 1 Qg5, threat 2 Pf6
Re3 ; 2 Pd4
Be3 ; 2 Sd3
Rf7; 2 Sg6
Bf7 ; 2 Qg7
Rd7 ; 2 S x c6
Bd7 ; 2 Sf7
Sd7; 2 Qe7

96 CHANGED GRIMSHAW
L. S. !'ENROSE
Third Prize,
Good Companions Complete Block
Tourney, 1920
Set : Bg4 ; 2 Qf4
Rg4 ; 2 R x e2
(Bf3 ; 2 Qa7)
Key 1 Sg5, zugzwang
Bg4 ; 2 R x e4
Rg4 ; 2 Qf3
(Rf4 ; 2 Qa7)

2 . Kd6 ! And observe, too, that there is a third interference


. .

on one of the thematic squares by 1 . . . Sd7, which leads to a


seventh mate. All Black's defences close white lines.
No. 96 is thought to be the first published example of changed
mates following Grimshaw interferences. Its composer, now
professor of Eugenics at London University, has produced very
few problems in recent years, but maintains an active interest
in the chess problem and its development.
59
Grimshaw and Nowotny
The task of changed mates following two pairs of Grimshaw
interferences is a rare and difficult one, and has so far been
achieved only with some blemish of construction. The pioneer

97 CHANGED DOUBLE GRIMSHAW

S. SUllRAHMANYAM and
M. PARTHASARATHY
First Hon. Mention,
B.C.F. Tourney, 1963-4

Try 1 Qh5 ?
Bf2; 2 Qf3
Rf2; 2 Qh4
Bd7; 2 B x d6
Rd7 ; 2 Se6
ReS !
Bg3 !
Key 1 Qe6 !, zugzwang
Bf2 ; 2 Rf3
Rf2; 2 Rh4
Bd7 ; 2 Q x d6
Rd7 ; 2 Q x f5

98 GRIMSHAWS : TOTAL CHANGE


H. SELB
First Prize,
Die Schwa/be, 1953/1
Try 1 Qh3 ?, threat 2 Qd3
Bg3 ; 2 Q x h1
Rg3 ; 2 Qe6
Rd5 ; 2 Qe3
Kd5 ; 2 Sf6
Rf5 !
Key 1 Qg7 !, threat 2 Qd4
Be5 ; 2 Qb7
ReS ; 2 cSd6
Rd5 ; 2 Re3
Kd5; 2 cSd6

by J. Kiss (No. 59 in CPIA) has an unprovided check, but


also three additional changes to compensate. No. 97 has the
weakness of two black defences to the try, apparently quite
unavoidable in this setting. Mr. Parthasarathy has produced
another version of the task, but with the capture of a black S
60
Grimshaw and Nowotny
as the .key. Both of his examples show virtual/actual changes,
whereas Kiss's pioneer has set/actual changes.
No. 98 has the interesting arrangement of Grimshaw inter­
ferences between R and B on two different squares in the two
phases of play. The try 1 Qh3 ? introduces a Grimshaw on g3,
with mates by the Q on e6 and h i , while the key 1 Qg7 shifts
the Grimshaw to e5, with mates by the Sc4 on d6 and by the
Q on b7. When the key changes not only the mates but also
Black's defences, we speak of Total Change.

99 CYCLIC INTERFERENCES
H. WEENINK
Good Companions, 1 924
Key 1 Be6, threat 2 Qe3
Qd4; 2 Qcl
Rd4 ; 2 Qf8
Bd4; 2 Re4
(Sd4 ; 2 Sd3)

The composer of this problem, Dr. Hans Selb, has made a


special study of cyclic themes, and in 1963 the publishers of
the German problem magazine Die Schwa/be produced a
booklet by Dr. Selb written nine years earlier and entitled
Tlzemen in Zyklusform (Themes in Cyclic Form). Among other
things Dr. Selb discusses interference cycles, in which not
two but three black pieces interfere with each other. In the
first variation piece A interferes with piece B, in the second
piece B interferes with piece C, and in the third piece C com­
pletes the cycle by interfering with piece A. This arrangement
is illustrated by No. 99. It is likely that Weenink in fact
composed this problem to show four interesting interferences
on one square. The moves by the B and the Q to d4 prevent
by pinning the mate 2 Sd3, which occurs after 1 . . . Sd4.
A near-relation of the Grimshaw is the Nowotny. This, in
addition to the Grimshaw, is exemplified by Schiffmann's No.
93. A Nowotny-key cuts simultaneously the guards of a black
R and a black B, usually in such a way that two mates are
61
Grimshaw and Nowotny
threatened, one resulting from the cut of the B's line and one
from the cut of the R's line. In Schiffmann's example, however,
there is only one threat, but the companion mate appears in the
variation 1 .. Bd6 ; 2 Rd3.
.

100 NOWOTNYS
W. JI/JRGENSEN
Fifth Prize,
Tchigorin Memorial Tourney, 1950
Try I Pc6 ?, threats 2 Sg6/Sd5
Bf8 !
Try 1 Bc6?, threats 2 Qd6/Qd4
Bg7!
Key I Sc6 !, threats 2 Qf6/eRf3

101 NOWOTNYS
Touw lirAN BWEE
Version, Fourth Prize,
1 5th Olympic Tourney, 1962
Try 1 Rf7?, threats 2 Se6/Sf5
B x f4 !
Try I dSf7 ?, threats 2 R x d5/Qf6
Qb3 !
Try 1 Bg3?, threats 2 3Rf4/Rd3
Qbl !
Key I Rg3 !, threats 2 Be5/Sf3

No. 1 00 was one of the first problems to appear showing


more than a single Nowotny. There are two Nowotny-tries,
each introducing a different pair of threats, and each defeated
by a move of the Bh6, and a Nowotny key, leading to a third
pair of threats. The actual play is very slight. No fewer than
four Nowotnys are found in No. 1 0 1 , two on each of two
squares. There are altogether eight different threats, and the
defences to the three tries are far from obvious. Touw's first
version of this fine problem had a double refutation to one of
62
Grimshaw and Nowotny
the. tries, and also, as it turned out, two cooks. This setting
might have gained a higher prize.
Readers already familiar with the Grimshaw theme will
recognise in No. 102 an arrangement of black pieces known as
102 NOWOTNYS
E. RUKHLIS
Shakhmati, 1963
Try 1 Pb4 ?, threats 2 Bd6/Re4
PfS ; 2 Qd6
Qe6 !/Qd5 !
Try 1 Pc4 ?, threats 2 Sd3/Re4
Qbl !
Try 1 BbS ?, threats 2 Sd3/Qd5
Bd6 !
Try 1 Bb4 ?, threats 2 Re8/Re4
SgS !
Try 1 Rc4 ?, threats 2 Sd3/Sg4
Q x b2!
Try 1 DeS ?, threats 2 ReS/QdS
Q x b3 !
Key 1 Rb4 !, threats 2 Bd6/Sg4

103 NOWOTNYS + GRIMSHAW


W. TURA
First Prize, Probleemb/ad, 1963
Try 1 Re4 ?, threats 2 Qe8/Q X dS
Rc3 ; 2 Rb4
Bc3 ! (2 Bd3 ?)
Try 1 Be4 ?, threats 2 Qe8/Q X dS
Bc3 ; 2 Bd3
Rc3 ! (2 Rb4 ?)
Key 1 Rc3 !, threats 2 Bd3/Rb4
Be4; 2 Qe8
Re4 ; 2 Q x dS
the "Organ Pipes" (B, R, R, B next to each other on rank or
file), a name coined by F. Janet on seeing Sam Loyd's famous
double Grimshaw setting of 1 859.* In No. 102 the Organ
Pipes are blended with no fewer than seven Nowotny interfer­
ences-six tries and the key-with different pairs of threats in
each case. The construction of this ingenious problem is quite
remarkable, especially the varied use made of the black Q.
* No. A292 in CPIA.
63
Grimshaw and Nowotny
No. 1 03 is one of the best of several recent problems showing
a combination of the Grimshaw and Nowotny themes. The
Nowotny tries on e4 fail to the Grimshaw defences on c3, while
the key is a Nowotny on c3, leading to Grimshaw defences on
e4 ! The great unity of the strategy and the wonderful open
setting make this a memorable problem.

104 NOWOTNY
L. SzWEoowsKI
Second Prize,
Prob/eemblad, 1959
Set : Bd3 ; 2 Q x f3
Rd3 ; 2 Qe4
Key I Rd3, threats 2 Pe4/Se3
Sd6 ; 2 Q x f3
Bd6; 2 Qe4

No. 1 04 has a set Grimshaw on d3, with mates by the Q. The


Nowotny key rules out these mates by pinning the Q, but, by
opening the line of the Bb8, introduces two new mates as
threats. These are separated in the conventional way by the
captures on d3, and the two set mates by the Q reappear after
the unpinning defences 1 . Bd6 and 1
. . . Sd6. Readers may
. .

care to come back to this problem after they have studied the
examples of the Rukhlis theme in chapter 1 0.

M. LIPTON 106
3rd prize, B.C.P.S. McWilliam
Tourney, 1955

64
Grimshaw ·and Nowotizy

A. R. GOODERSON 107 J. M. RICE 108


Problemist, 1965 Die Schwa/be, 1965
(Version by A. C. RI!EVFS)

A. C. RI!EVFS 1® C. J. MORSE 110


6th hon. mention, B.C.P.S. British Chess Magazine, 1964
Ring Tourney, 1962

A. C. RBEVFS
The Tablet, 1965 2nd prize, Die Schwa/be, 1963
65
Grimshaw and Nowotny

C. MANSFIELD
1st prize, Die Schwa/be, 1956 U.S. Problem Bulletin, 1963

J. M. RICE us A. C. REEVES 116


1st hon. mention,
Deutsche Schachzeitung, 1958

66
CHAPTER S I X

Focal Effects
Klett's pioneer No. 1 1 7, distinguished by the fine key
1 Rg3 !, shows the classical Focal Theme. The black Q is forced
to abandon one or the other of its lines of control along which
lie squares b2 and h8-and White mates 2 Qb2 or 2 Qh8
accordingly. The black Q is said to "focus" White's potential
mating squares b2 and h8, which are called the "foci".
A feature of Klett's problem which we feel is desirable in all
focal problems is a White focus, as well as a Black focus, of
117 FOCAL THEME
P. KLETI
Schach-Probleme, 1878
Key 1 Rg3, zugzwang
Q- on file; 2 Qb2
Q- on rank ; 2 Qh8
Kg6; 2 Bd4

the potential mating squares. The Black focus is of main


thematic interest ; but a White focus, where just one White
piece (the white Q in No. 1 17) is used to give the mates, gives
greater unity and better economy. A feature typical of focal
play problems is the recurrence of the focal mates after inter­
ferences by Black's own force on the lines of Black's focal
control. This happens in No. 1 1 7 after 1 . . . Pd2, Pf2, Be2,
Bg2 ; 2 Qb2 and 1 . Bh3 ; 2 Qh3. Some problemists regard
. .

such interferences as distracting.


In No. 1 1 8, which shows a far from modem focal scheme,
the focal powers of line-moving pieces are put to slightly
different use. The lines of control of the black Q and black B
67
Focal Effects
bear on White batteries, so that lines rather than specific
squares are the foci Black has to hold. The threat 2 Qg4 forces
both the black Q and black B to move and lose control of one
or the other of the batteries. White is then able to exploit this
loss-of-focus weakness and mate by closing the line of the
remaining piece's guard, e.g. 1 . . Qxe2 ; 2 Sc6 mate.
.

118 FOCAL THEME : BATTERY PLAY


A. PIATESI

Dunaujvarosi Hirlap, 1963


Key 1 Qe2, threat 2 Qg4
Q x e2 ; 2 Sc6
B x e2 ; 2 7Sd5
Bd7; 2 Sc2
Qe6 ; 2 Sc4

119 FOCAL MUTATE


J. J. O'KEEFE and J. L. BEALE
(after A. N. LEBEDEV)
The Problemist, 1950
Set R- on file ; 2 Sd6
R- on rank; 2 Sg3
Key 1 Sc5, zugzwang
R- on file; 2 Qe6
R- on rank ; 2 Qg5

Advances in changed play techniques since Klett's day have


enabled composers to show more than one pair of focal mates
after the moves of a single black line-moving piece. Klett's
No. 1 1 7 has one pair of focal mates : O'Keefe's and Beale's
mutate No. 1 1 9 has two pairs after moves of the black R. In
the set play, the foci are d6 and g3, on which squares White
mates by either 2 Sd6 or 2 Sg3 after R moves. The unexpected
key destroys the set play and creates new foci at e6 and gS.
Now, R moves allow either 2 Qe6 or 2 QgS. There is a new
mate 2 Qe4 after the correction 1 . Rf6.. .

68
Foc#l.Effeits
In the l940's, try play became a means of giving added depth
to problem ideas-and more than two pairs of focal mates after
the moves of a single black line-moving piece became possible.
There are three pairs in the Zagoruyko framework of No. 120.
In the set play, White mates 2 fSd6 and 2 Se3 on the foci of
the black Q. Any waiting try is defeated by 1 . . . Q x b6 !
The plausible try . 1 Bd4 ! ? alters the foci so that 2 eSd6 and
2 Sd2 become the mates. The surprising key 1 Sd4 ! adds
guards to b3 and b5. Now, 2 Qc8 or 2 Rei follows black Q
moves. No. 128 shows four different pairs of focal mates.

120 FOCAL CHANGES : ZAGORUYKO

J. ALBARDA
Second Place,
Holland v. Germany, 1954
Set : Q- on rank ; 2 Se3
Q- on diagonal; 2 fSd6
Try 1 Bd4 ? Q- on rank ; 2 Sd2
Q- on diagonal ; 2 eSd6
Qf4 !
Key 1 Sd4 !, zugzwang
Q- on rank; 2 Rei
Q- on diagonal; 2 QcB

The recent development of focal shut-off tries in focal play


problems is shown in No. 121 where, in similar fashion to
Piatesi's No. 1 1 8, two white batteries are focussed by black
line-moving pieces. In No. 121, however, White does not wait
for the black Q and black R to weaken their grip on the
batteries, but takes the initiative by cutting black lines of control
in search of an irrefutable threat. The try 1 Qf5 ?, for example,
shuts off the black Q's control of the R+B battery to threaten
a shut-off of the black R, 2 Bdl mate. Attempts to regain
control of the R + B battery, 1 . . . Q x f5 and 1 . . . R x bl ,
cause the black Q and the black R to lose their focus of the
B + S battery and shut-off mates 2 Se4 and 2 Sf7 follow. Three
thematic tries and the key play out the theme in full. Excellent
use is made of the white Q to provide mates after the key
following moves which defeat tries.
69
Focal Effects
Ul FOCAL SHUT-OFF TRIES :
BATTERY PLAY

N. G. G. VAN DIJK
Third Prize,
Schweizerische Schachzeitung, 1963
Try 1 Qd1 ?, threat 2 Bc2
R x d1 ; 2 Sf7
Q x b1 ; 2 Se4
Pc2 ; 2 Q x d2
Pd4 !
Try 1 Qf5 ?, threat 2 Bdl
Q x f5 ; 2 Se4
Rxbl; 2 Sf7
Pd4 ; 2 Qc5
Pc2 !
Try 1 Qg7 ?, threat 2 Se4
Q x g7 ; 2 Bdl
R x e7 ; 2 Bc2
Ra6 !
Key 1 Qe2 !, threat 2 Sf7
R x e2 ; 2 Bc2
Q x e7 ; 2 Bd1
Pc2 ; 2 Q x d2
Ra6; 2 Q x b5

122 FOCAL SHUT-OFF TRIES

V. BARTOLOVIC
First Prize,
Die Schwa/be Theme Tourney, 1964
Try 1 Be5 ?, threat 2 Qe6
Q x e5 ; 2 Qc5
Q x d3 !
Try 1 Bd4 ?, threat 2 Qc5
Q x d4 ; 2 Qe6
Rc4 ; 2 Q x c4
B x d6 !
Try 1 Ba5 ?, threat 2 Q X aS
R x a5 ; 2 Qc4
Qa7 ; 2 Qe6
Qe8 ; 2 Qc5
R x f4 !
Key 1 Bb4 !, threat 2 Qc4
R x b4 ; 2 Q x as
Qd4 ; 2 Qe6
Qe4 ; 2 Qc5
70
Focal Effects
It was Nils van Dijk who, in an article in Die Schwa/be, 1 963,
suggested that the idea of No. 121 could be shown without
battery mates. Three tries and a key are to threaten the four
focal mates in turn ; ideally, the remaining three mates not
threatened should appear as variations in each phase. In No.
123 FOCAL SHUT-OFF TRIES
Touw HlAN BWEE
Die Schwa/be, 1964
Try 1 DeS ?, threat 2 Q x e4
Q x e5 ; 2 Q x g5
B x el !
Try 1 Bf6 ?, threat 2 Q x g5
Q x f6 ; 2 Q x e4
Bd2 !
Try 1 gSeS ?, threat 2 Q x e4
Q x e5 ; 2 Q x g5
B x d7 !
Try 1 gSf6?, threat 2 Q x g5
Q x f6 ; 2 Q x e4
Pg1 = Q!
Try 1 dSe5 ?, threat 2 Q x e4
Q x e5 ; 2 Q x gs
S x g4 !
Key 1 dSf6 !, threat 2 Q x g5
Q x f6 ; 2 Q x e4

1 22, the white B breaks the focal control of the black Q and
black R, but successfully only after 1 Bb4 ! This problem is
not thematically complete because the four thematic mates,
2 Q x aS, 2 Qd4, 2 Qc5, and 2 Qe6, do not all occur in every
phase of the play. However, this small weakness is offset by
the double focus by the white Q which delivers all the mates.
No. 1 33 is one of very few thematically complete examples.
Both white and black Qs focus e4 and g5 in the age-old focal
matrix of No. 123. But a modernist has been at work ! The
solver, for whom, according to some critics, the modernist has
scant regard, is asked to make the interesting and puzzling
choice of the right shut-off move at e5 or f6 from the six avail­
able. Each time, one of the two mates 2 Q x e4 and 2 Q x g5
is threatened, and the principal interest of the problem is centred
on the way in which the five tries are defeated.
71
FCJCal Effects
A well-known change-effect which can be thought of as
extending the Focal theme to the play of a black S and black
P is worth mentioning in this chapter.
The Focal Theme requires that Black should initially focus
at least two potential mating squares and, on moving, lose

124 MUTATE: PSEUDO-FOCAL


EFFECTS BY BLACK KNIGHT
T. KARoos
Third Hon. Mention,
Magyar Sakkelet, 1951
Set : eS.-; 2 Sg5
rs-; 2 Sd2
Pd3 ; 2 Q x d3
Key 1 Rf5, zugzwang
eS-; 2 Rf4
rs-; 2 sgJ
Pd3 ; 2 Q x e6
Pd5 ; 2 ReS
K x f5 ; 2 Qd3

control of one or the other of them. But Ss and Ps cannot


move and retain control of squares initially guarded. If there
is to be no white dual on the squares unguarded by black S or
black P and there is no dual-avoidance on Black's part, the
play of focal problems with black Ss and black Ps must be over
at least two phases of play. In the set play ofKardos's Meredith,
1 . eS random gives 2 Sg5 and 1 . . . fS random gives 2 Sd2.
. .

The flight-giving key realizes changed mates : 1 � . eS random ;


.

2 Rf4 and 1 . . fS random ; 2 Sg3. In each phase; White


.

mates on one or the other of what may be regarded as the foci


of the eS, g5 and f4, and the fS, d2, and g3. The extra change
·

after 1 . . . Pd3 is worth noting.


The black P gives much the same type of pseudo-focal effect�
as the black S, as will be seen in No. 136.

72
Focal Effects

N. A. MACLEOD 116
(after H. MUSANTE)
3rd hon. mention, B.C.P.S.
RIDg Tourney, 1961

N. A. MACLEOD 127
5th hon. mention, B.C.P.S. 2nd prize, American Chess
RIDg Tourney, 1962 Bulletin, 1958

B. P. BARNES 130
3rd prize, Probleemblad, 1 960 lst prize, Die Schwa/be, 1960
73
Focal Effects

N. A. MACLEOD 131 B. P. BARNES 131


British Chess Magazine, 1962 British Chess Magazine, 1964

B. P. BARNES 133 A. R. GOODERSON 134


Die Schwa/be, 1964 3rd commend., Die Schwa/be,
1962

A. R. GooDERSON B. P. BARNES 136


2nd prize, Die Schwa/be, 1960 Busmen's Chess Review, 1965
74
C H APTER S E V E N

Separation
(a) D U A L A V O I D A N C E
This chapter deals with various ways i n which Black compels
White to choose carefully from a number of second moves.
This element of Black action, affecting White choice, is essential
to any worthwhile two-move theme. It is Black who carries out
the avoidance of duals ; White, in giving a single mate, always
avoids nonmates, and this can't logically constitute a theme.
Often, White has to be careful about his choice of mates in a
systematic way : but this alone, however interesting it is, does
not suffice for dual avoidance. No. 1 37, a brilliant unpinner, is

137 WITHDRAWAL UNPINS

A. MARI
First Prize,
11 Problema, I932/I
Key I Rei , threat 2 R x e3
Bd3 ; 2 Sf4
Be2; 2 Sg5
Re2 ; 2 Sh4
Rd2 ; 2 S x e3

placed here to show clearly what dual avoidance is not. After


1 . . Bd3,. the unpinned white S must control d5, either from
.

c7 or from f4 ; but 2 Sc7 ? ? would fail to 2 . . Kf4. It is


.

equally true (if less subtle) that after I Re i , Bd3 ; 2 Q x d3 ? ?


would fail to 2 . . K x Q. Neither 2 Q x d3 nor 2 Sc7 is an
.

avoided dual : both are bad moves totally unaffected by Black


action. Undoubtedly, three of the four unpin variations
acquire extraordinary unity through the type of caution that
the mating piece has to exercise in each case : but that caution
is unrelated to Black's action, and is no more true "dual
75
Separation
avoidance" than is White's refusal to attempt to mate by
2 Qf3 ? or 2 Qd3 ?
No. 1 38, with its similar unhappy key and brilliant "pair of
pairs" of withdrawal unpins, is closely comparable with No.
1 37, but here there is true dual avoidance. In all four thematic
lines, the unpin of a Black man avoids a dual apparently
allowed by the defence. Thus 1 . . . Rh6 ? ? would allow 2 Qd3
or 2 Qe4 (or, indeed, the threat) ; but 1 . . . Rd6 stops 2 Qe4
(and the threat) by unpinning d5, and forces 2 Qd3, while
1 . . . Rf6 analogously forces 2 Qe4. The echoing pair of
Bishop defences should also be inspected. In the four unpin
lines of No. 1 37, the mating piece refrained from moves that

138 DUAL AVOIDANCE (+ UNPINS)

F. BOHM
Jornal Portuges, 1932

Key 1 Rd8, threat 2 Sf3


Rd6 ; 2 Qd3 (Qe4 ?)
Rf6 ; 2 Qe4 (Qd3 ?)
B x d8 ; 2 Rd3 (Re4 ?)
Bf6 ; 2 Re4 (Rd3 ?)

were silly irrespective of Black's defence ; in No. 1 38, the four


unpins are active dual avoidance, for each contains a new
element, helpful to Black, avoiding the dual.
Passive dual avoidance is shown in No. 1 39. Here, too, Black
action is involved, but the point is that one of the mates
apparently allowed would negate the error committed by Black.
For instance, _! . . . Bxe3 deprives the black K of both flights,
and seems to allow 2 Be5, 2 Sf5 or 2 Sf3 ; but the first two moves
would close the essential line opened by the black B, negating
the error, so only 2 Sf3 mates. There are five such variations
here. This "non-line-closing" avoidance is called the Mart
theme.
In No. 1 39, dual avoidance was the central theme, and the
purely Black strategy (flights, selfblocks) was subordinate.
No. 140 shows both active and passive dual avoidance, but as
76
Separation
means to the end-four interference unpins of the Se5. 1 . . .
Bd5 ; 2 Sf3 shows passive (Mari) avoidance of 2 Sc6. Mter
1 ... Sc5, it is the square-vacation (active dual avoidance) that
stops the line-closing 2 Sf3 ?, and now 2 Sc6 is forced. The other
139 PASSIVE DUAL AVOIDANCE
(MARI THEME)
0. STOCCHI
L'Italia Scacchistica, 1934
Key 1 Re3, zugzwang
B-.. ; 2 Re4 (Sf5 ?)
B x e3 ; 2 Sf3 (Be5 ?)
Se1, f4 ; 2 Sf5 (Re4 ?, Rd3 ?)
S x h4 ; 2 Rd3 (Re4 ?, Sf5 ?)
S x e3 ; 2 Be5 (Sf3 ?)
K x d5 ; 2 Pd8 = Q
K x e3 ; 2 Bg1

140 MIXED DUAL AVOIDANCE + UNPIN


OF WlllTE
V. BERNSTEIN and G. GAIDAROV
Ninth Prize, Smena, 1932
Key 1 Sf8, threat 2 Se6
Sc5 ; 2 S X c6 (Sf3 ?)
Bd5 ; 2 Sf3 (Sc6 ?)
Sg5; 2 S x d7
Kc5 ; 2 S x d3 (Se6 ?)

two interference unpins are equally interesting : notice particu­


larly how 1 .. . Kc5 defeats the threat. One wonders where the
other eight prizes went.
There is active dual avoidance again in No. 141, which shows
the celebrated Java theme, so-called because several examples
were composed by H. V. Tuxen while living in Java. 1 . . . Be4
and 1 . . . Be7 seem to allow a choice of double checks by the
unpinned S ; but each defence closes one of White's two lines
of guard of h4, thereby avoiding the mate that would close the
other line (e.g. 1 . . . Be7 ; 2 Sf4 ? Kh4). This Meredith,
combining Java and interference unpin, throws in two more
77
Separation
interferences for good measure-and attained no tourney
recognition whatever.
No. 1 42 uses halfpin to elevate the Java to a triple-avoidance
theme. Mter the key, the white Rh7 guards f7 and e7, the
white B e7 and f8, and the other white R f8 and f7. Clearly if
Black defeats the threat by closing any one of these lines of

141 JAVA + UNPIN OF WlllTE


K. A. K. LARSEN
Skakbladet, 1933
Key 1 Bd8, threat 2 Rh4
Be4 ; 2 Sf4 (Sg5 ?)
Be7 ; 2 Sg5 (Sf4 ?)
Sg2 ; 2 Rh1
Sf3 ; 2 Rg3

142 JAVA ("TRIPLE AVOIDANCE")


R. M. KOFMAN
First Prize, 64, 1934
Key 1 Rh7, threat 2 Re7
Sg7/Bg7 ; 2 S x g7 (Sd6?, Sf6 ?)
Sf4/Bf4; 2 Sf6 (Sg7 ?, Sd6?)
Sc5/Bd6; 2 Sd6 (Sf6 ?, Sg7 ?)

guard, he will avoid any mate that might close another. Thus
1 . . . Sc5 (or 1 . . Bd6) stops the threat; seems to allow the
.

triple 2 Sd6, 2 Sg7 or 2 Sf6 ; but closes b4--e7 to avoid the


closure of h7--e7 (2 Sg7 ? Ke7) and b4-f8 to avoid closure of
f2-f8 (2 Sf6 ? Kf8). The reasoning is similar for 1 . . . Sg7
(or Bg7), and for 1 . . . Sf4 (or Bf4), completing a sort of
"super-Java" (had not that name been preempted by the
jargoneers for another theme). Notice 1 . . . Q x f2, forcing
full use of the white Q.
78
Separation
Other dual-avoidance themes can be similarly elevated. The
Herpai, unlike the Java, requires a purely Black theme (inter­
ference) as well as dual avoidance. In the Herpai, a pair of
Black defences interferes with two black pieces, apparently
allowing two mates, each exploiting a different interference.
But an element, favourable to Black, in each defence avoids
143 HERPAI
R. BUKNE
First Prize,
Nortres Sjakkforbund, 1946
Key 1 PeS = S, threat 2 Sd6
eSfS ; 2 ReS (Rf4 ?)
dSfS ; 2 Rf4 (ReS ?)
Sc4 ; 2 ScS (Sf2 ?)
SbS; 2 Sf2 (ScS ?)

144 HERPAI

J. KNoPPEL and S. EKSTROM

First Prize,
Vart Hem, 1940/IV
Key 1 Bb1, threat 2 ReS
PdS ; 2 QeS (Sd6?, Qe4?)
fSdS ; 2 Sd6 (Qe4 ?, QeS ?)
cSdS ; 2 Qe4 (QeS?, Sd6 ?)

each half of the dual in turn. Thus in No. 143 1 . . . eSfS closes
h5-e5 and f8-f4, apparently allowing 2 R x eS or 2 R x f4 ; but
the first is forced (and the second avoided) by opening c1-f4.
1 . . . dSfS is analogous. The pair of interference unpins of
d3-avoiding duals by vacating squares against line-closures­
constitutes subtler, if as yet unjargonized, dual avoidance
(compare the variation 1 . . . ScS ; 2 S x c6 (Sf3 ?) in No. 140).
Elevation to "hyper-Herpai" status duly takes place in No.
144. If a dummy, with no power save to close lines, arrived
79
·separation
on d.5, it would stop the threat, but interfere with the black Q
(allowing 2 Sd6), the Rb5 (allowing 2 Qe5) and the Ba8 (allowing
2 Qe4). The specific arrivals on d5 of the black P, and both
Ss, stop every possible pair from this trio of permitted mates,
forcing each, in turn. Duals are avoided by the opening of
defensive lines of guard and pin, and by direct guard.
Recent though dual-avoidance themes may be, they have not
been immune from modernisation. No. 145 shows, not so much
a correct dual-avoidance theme, as the way such themes give
stimulus to the changed-mate composer. In the Herpai proper,
double interferences give single mates. In No. 145 the key
changes three mates after double interferences, so that a
different one is used before and after the key.
145 SET/ACfUAL HERPAI EFFECTS
E. I'EDERSEN
Skakbladet, 1944
Set : Sb5; 2 Sc5
Sg5 ; 2 Qf4
Se6 ; 2 Qe5
B x eJ + ; 2 R x e3
Key 1 Qc5, threat 2 Qd4
Sb5 ; 2 Qc2
Sg5 ; 2 Sg3
Se6 ; 2 Sd6
B x e3 + ; 2 Q x e3

(b) B LA C K CORRECTION
In Dual Avoidance, Black's moves are "equal" : each seems
to permit a choice of mates, but prevents all permitted choices
save one. In Black Correction, this equality vanishes. One
black move is a simple mistake, committed in defending a
threat or discharging the obligation to move. A second move
repeats the mistake, prevents its dire results by a dual-avoidance
device (Black Correction), but permits a new mate by a further
error.
Thus in No. 146 any withdrawal of the Se6 is a primary
defence by pinning White's Q (opening g4-c8). A random move
of this S-say 1 . . Sd8-com.mits a double primary error,
.

withdrawing from the half-pin line g8-c4 and opening d7-g4


to allow 2 Q X g4, exploiting the pin of d5. By 1 . . . Sf4 !
80
Separation
Black corrects this error by the secondary defence of closing
g4-c4, but commits the secondary error of closing g4-e4 to
allow 2 Re4. (The fact that this also exploits two primary
errors, the openings of g8-c4 and e8-e4, greatly enriches the
problem, but is irrelevant to the Correction theme.) The S
makes three more corrections ; twice the secondary error is
interference, once self-block. Closely analogous to 1 . . . S
146 BLACK CORRECTION
L. MILLINS
First Prize,
Grantham Journal, 1927
Key 1 Rb6, threat 2 QbS
eS....., ; 2 Q x g4
Sf4 ! ; 2 Re4
SgS ! ; 2 B x dS
ScS ! ; 2 Rb4
Sd4 ! ; 2 SaS
dB...., ; 2 Qd3
Be4 ! ; 2 Qd4

147 BLACK CORRECTION


J. HUCHWALD
Parallele 50, 1948
Key 1 Pa6, threat 2 QaS
s- ; 2 Se6
Sf5 ; 2 S x d3
Sd5 ; 2 B x d6
6R-; 2 Se6
Rd5; 2 Q x c6
Rf6; 2 B x d3
Rg6; 2 S x d3

random and. 1 . . . Sf4 ! is the correction pair 1 . . . B random


and 1 . . . Be4 ! ; again the primary error is line-opening ; again
the correction mate 2 Qd4 exploits two primary errors, line­
opening and half-pin, as well as the true secondary error of
interference. This extremely rich problem uses correction as a
means to unify numerous line and pin effects.
In No. 147, however, the half-pin and interferences are clearly
the means ; the rich correction relationships are the ends. Any
move of e7 (pinning the white Q) or d6 defeats the threat ;
6 81
Separation
1 . . . eS random or 1 . . . R on file at random makes the primary
error of unguarding e6, allowing the white S to mate there.
The black S twice, and the black R once, correct by closing
h5-c5, unpinning g5 to guard e6. All three corrections show
interference as secondary error, twice with half-pin. A further
pair of R moves, to f6 and g6, yield interferences, but not
corrections : the R does not commit, much less correct, the
primary error of losing control of e6 (compare the genuine
correction, 1 . . . Rd5). Notice also that the sequence 1 . . .
Rd5, 1 . . . Sd5 is arrival correction. Both remove all three

148 BLACK CORRECTION


( + WHITE HALF-PIN)

E. HOLLADAY
Hon. Mention,
B.C.P.S. Tourney, 1947-8
Key 1 Sc3, threat 2 B x d5
Pe4 ; 2 Sd2
5S�; 2 eP x d3
Se4; 2 S x e5 (eP x d3 ?, Sd2 ?)
6S�; 2 eP x d3
Sb4; 2 Pb3

guards from c6, and 1 . . . Rd5 allows the white Q to mate


there. 1 . . . Sd5 !, pinning her, stops White exploiting the
primary error of arrival on d5, but commits two secondary
errors (opening f8-d6 and closing d3-d6) to allow 2 B xd6.
In No. 1 48, again, correction is clearly the main theme,
unifying the beautiful but disparate pin-unpin elements.
Notice, first, the cook-tries, * the S checks on d2, defeated by
White half-pin d5-h 1 . Let this lead you naturally to the half-pin
c8--c4. The highly thematic key pins both d4 and f3 for sub­
sequent release. Random moves by either half-pinned S open
lines to protect the threatened black Q, but allow 2 ePxd3.
1 . . . Sb4 corrects by guard of d3, but commits a secondary
error (interference), allowing a new mate to exploit the primary
half-pin error. 1 . . Se4 unpins both pieces pinned by the
.

key : the black R to guard d3 (secondary defence), and the

* A term used by Brian Harley to denote tries which, while not thematic, lead
the solver to suspect a cook.

82
Separation
Sf3 to allow 2 S x e5. Now consider the sequence 1 . . . Pe4,
2 Sd2 and 1 . . . Se4 ! 2 Se5 ! (not 2 Sd2), and the last defence
is seen as secondary in two correction sequences, one arrival
and one departure.
No. 1 49 shows five interference unpins of White's Q : dual
avoidance is combined with black correction, the latter with a
new type of primary error-neither departure of a piece nor
arrival on a square, but arrival on the pin-line bl -h7. Random
arrival-say 1 ... Sg6-would allow either 2 Qe3 or 2 Qd4
(not a serious dual, as 1 . . . Sg6 ? fails to deal with the threat,
149 ARRIVAL CORRECTION
(UNPIN OF WIDTE)
V. BERNSTEIN and G. GAIDAROV
Hon. Mention,
Issaev Memorial Tourney, 1933
(version)
Key 1 Bh2, threat 2 Bg1
Pf5 ; 2 Qd4
eSf5 ; 2 Q x d5
dSf5 ; 2 Qb5
Se4; 2 Qc4
Pc2; 2 Q x a3

2 Bgl). All the specific defences to the threat that constitute


arrivals on this pin-line, in fact, stop 2 Qe3. 1 . . . Pf5 forces
2 Qd4 by unpinning d5. A random removal of d6 permits
2 Rc4. Either move of this S to the line bl-h7 stops this, by
closing the line of one or other white R; it also stops both
2 Qe3 and 2 Qd4, by guard or by this line-closing. However,
it unguards both b5 and c4, and seems to permit the unpinned
Q to mate on either of these squares. The closure by d6 of
each R line in turn, however, avoids that dual, as well as cor­
recting both the primary errors (of 1 ... dS random and of the
"random· unpin"). Similar analysis applies to the relations
between 1 ... Pf5 and 1 . . . Sc6, on the one hand, and 1 .. .
eSf5 ! on the other. 1 .. . Pc2 is a simpler correction, of the
random unpin alone. The key is excellent, and the reason why
1 Q X b l does not cook is far from obvious.
No. 1 50 combines corrections, half-pin, unpin and checks.
The rather perfunctory key acquires the third white S needed
83
Separation
to attain this immense theme combination : the white Q deals
with the random checks, the unpinned S with the corrections.
It says much for the convolutions of the last four examples that
this problem actually seems, now, to possess a certain simplicity !
Even more clear-cut is No. 151, one of the few really con­
vincing black Q corrections. Her random removal permits her
opposite number to mate by guarding both flights. Clearly,
this unpin error is corrected when the black Q occupies either
of these flights : but 1 . . . Q x e4 and 1 . . . Qxf2 are fatal
secondary errors, for exactly the same reason that makes them
150 BLACK CORRECTION
-=--=m-::-"""' ( + UNPIN OF WIDTE)
G. GUIDELLI
L'Alfiere di Re, 1924
Key 1 PdB = S, threat 2 Sc6
fS-+ ; 2 Q x e6
Sd4 + ; 2 S x e6
gS-+ ; 2 Q x g7
Se4+ ; 2 Sg6

good corrections. As th� black Q occupies each flight, she not


only guards the adjacent Q mate which attacks it, but also
blocks the flight, permitting a new mate by the unpinned Q : a
remarkably unified conception, strengthened further by the
third correction unpin-selfblock, 1 . . . Qf4.
No. 152 shows a difficult theme with a beautifully light touch.
Random removal of c6, unguarding d4, allows either Q or B to
mate on gl. This dual secondary threat is (a) first separated by
active dual avoidance, as Black closes White's Q and B guards
( 1 . . . Sb4 and 1 . . . Se5), tying to b8 the piece not cut off ;
and then (b) prevented by three secondary corrections, two
with interference.
Back to the heavy stuff with No. 153. Withdrawal of either
black S gives primary defences of d4 by line-opening, but
primary errors as d5 or e4 is unguarded, allowing the mating
Sf6 to immobilise the other guard by unmasking g7 to pin the
black R. The corrections on c4 unpin Black's Q, but seem to
84
Separation
commit double secondary errors, interfering with the black B's
guard to allow either 2 Se2 or 2 Qd3 ; the mates are separated
by line-opening dual avoidance. The ReS contributes two
checks, and an extra pair of Java dual avoidance lines, without
apparent effort by the composer.
No. 1 54 doubles a famous theme : tertiary correction.
Random moves of Sg2 open h1-d5 to stop the primary threat,

151 BLACK CORRECTION


-..,.,..,,....-..,-
( + UNPIN OF WIDTE)
A. MARI
Second Prize,
Grantham Journal, 1928
Key 1 Sc2, zugzwang
Q-; 2 Qe3
Q x e4 ; 2 Qg3
Q x f2; 2 Qg4
Qf4; 2 Qg2
K x e4 ; 2 Sd6
K x f2 ; 2 Rfl

152 BLACK CORRECTION


E. HOLLADAY
Version,
American Chess Bulletin, 1945
Key 1 Sa5, threat 2 S x c6
cS- ; 2 Q x gl/B x gl
Sb4; 2 Q x g1
Se5 ; 2 B x g1
Sd4; 2 Qb6
Se7 ; 2 Qb7
S x b8 ; 2 Q x bB

but unguard e3 (primary error) to allow 2 Pf4. 1 . . . Se3 stops


this by closing gl-d4 (secondary defence), but also shuts h6-d2
to allow 2 Rd2 (secondary error). 1 . . . Sf4 ! stops not only the
primary threat and the secondary threat 2 Pf4, but also the
tertiary threat 2 Rd2 ; the tertiary defence is to guard d3. The
new tertiary error is to close h6-e3. The black R follows out a
similar sequence.
85
Separation
153 BLACK CORRECTION

M. WROBEL
First Prize,
Lwowskie Kolo Problemistow, 1942/1
Key 1 Rf4, threat 2 Qd4
dS�; 2 Se4
eS- ; 2 SdS
dSc4 ; 2 Se2 (Qd3 ?)
eSc4 ; 2 Qd3 (Se2 ?)
RdS ; 2 S x dS (Se4?)
Re4 ; 2 S x e4 (SdS ?)
ReS + ; 2 S x e8
RhS + ; 2 S x hS

154 BLACK CORRECTION (TERTIARY)

R. TUMP
First Prize,
Chess Correspondent Theme Tourney,
1 946
Key I Q x c6, threat 2 Q x dS
gS�; 2 Pf4
Se3 ! ; 2 Rd2 (Pf4 ?)
Sf4 ! ! ; 2 Pf3 (Rd2 ?, Pf4 ? ?)
R-; 2 Qc4
Rd6 ! ; 2 Ra4 (Qc4 ?)
ReS ! ! ; 2 Qe4 (Ra4?, Qc4 ? ?)

155 CHANGED BLACK CORRECTION

L. KISS
Fifth Prize, Raketa, 1941
Set : S--; 2 Rd3
Sf3 ; 2 Qe4
Sc6; 2 QcS
Key 1 Q x f6, threat 2 Q x eS
s--; 2 Qd4
Sf3 ; 2 Be4
Sc6 ; 2 Bb3

We now pass to modern interpretations of correction ideas.


In No. 1 55, the mates following 1 S random, and two
. . .

correction interferences, are changed with great economy of


force. In No. 1 56, between try and key, the mates following
86
Separation
the random defence, two interference corrections, and a self­
block correction are all changed : an immense task, recalling
Loshinsky's achievement of four changed interferences (CPIA,
No. 58) and Bartolovic's fourfold selfpin change (CPIA, No.
65). Oddly enough, there is no really satisfactory rendering

156 CHANGED BLACK CORRECTION


L. I. LoSHINSKI
First Prize, Sahs, 1962
Try 1 Qc2 ?, threat 2 Q x c6
cS--; 2 Qf5
cSd4 ; 2 Qe4
Se5; 2 dSb6
Se7; 2 Qc5
Sc3 !
Key 1 Qa6!, threat 2 Q x c6
cS.-.; 2 Rh5
cSd4; 2 Be4
Se5 ; 2 Sf6
Se7 ; 2 Qd6

157 CHANGED BLACK CORRECTION


V. F. RUDENKO
L'Italia Scacchistica, 1958
Set: 2S.-.; 2 Rd1
Sd3 ; 2 Sc2
7S.-.; 2 Qg7
Se5; 2 QcS
Key 1 Qf4, zugzwang
2S.-.; 2 Rd2
Sd3 ; 2 Sf3
7S.-.; 2 Qf6
Se5 ; 2 Qe3

of the " apparently easier task of four changed self-blocks.


Finally, No. 1 57, sweetly simple as it is, shows changes after
random and correction defences of both black Ss !

(c) FLECK T H E M E
In No. 1 58, there are three threats, each forced, without duals.
This idea-several threats, each forced-is called the Fleck
theme. When these threats are primary (made by the key itself),
87
Separation
like the three Q mates threatened in No. 1 58, we have a primary
Fleck. An eightfold rendering of this theme (i.e. with eight
threats, each forced) has been shown without concurrent
mates,* but task Flecks are seldom attractive. In No. 1 58, we
also have a secondary Fleck: any removal of g5 (to defeat all
primary threats by opening the black R's line) seems to let in
three new mates, but the specific arrivals of the black S force
each in turn. The masked-self-pin key, thematic but bad, is the
only weakness of this fine work : primary Flecks tend to have
bad keys.

158 PRIMARY + SECONDARY FLECK


--=,.--:;:--==:----..,=
0. Sroccm
First Prize,
La Scacchiera, 1952
Key 1 Q x es,
threats 2 Qf5/Qg3/Qf4
Se2 ; 2 QfS
1Sh3 ; 2 Qg3
R x h4; 2 Qf4
ss�; 2 Q x h5/B x h5/R x e4
5Sh 3 ; 2 Q x h5
S x e6; 2 B x h5
Sf7 ; 2 R x e4

No. 1 59 is a sixfold secondary Fleck, with splendid economy.


Remove the S e5, and six new mates are let in ; six arrivals each
force just one ; and a seventh, on c6, stops the lot by correction,
forcing a new mate. (Note that a random move by this S does
not, in fact, defeat the threat.) In view of its ambush of the
white Q behind the thematic black piece-typical of the
secondary Fleck-::-the try 1 Qe7 ?, while thematically irrelevant,
is especially deceptive. (It deceived one of the authors, any­
way.) No. 1 59, the best problem in its tourney, should have won
first prize. Hartong was more fortunate with No. 1 60, judged
by Stocchi, himself one of the leading exponents of this
theme. The key sets up a block. If the Rb5 were lifted from
the board, three mates would ensue : 2 Qc6, 2 Q X d7 and
• Concurrent mates are mates by the same while piece on two or more different
squares on the same line and on the same side of the black K.

88
Separation
2 Rf5. Each of this black R's moves forces a different threat­
eliminating the other two by arrival. The Bb4 provides an
analogous trio. Withdrawals of the Rd7 also force three mates,
two allowed by withdrawal and separated by arrival in highly
thematic fashion ; but, as 2 P x d8 = Q cannot happen until the
R has played to d8, it is not a secondary threat. "Three or
159 SECONDARY FLECK
J. HARTONG and J. A. W. SWANE
Third Hon. Mention,
Schakend Nederland, 1961
Key 1 Qd7,
threat 2 QfS
eS.-.. ; 2 Rg3/Qf7/Qh3/Qd5/Qd3/Qd1
S x d7 ; 2 Rg3
Sf7 + ; 2 Q x f7
Sg6 ; 2 Qh3
Sg4; 2 QdS
Sd3 ; 2 Q x d3
Sc4 ; 2 Qd1
S x c6+ ! ; 2 Q x c6

160 DOUBLE SECONDARY FLECK


J. HARTONG
First Place,
Great Britain v. Holland, 1956
Key 1 Rf6, zugzwang
B.-.; 2 Qc4{Qd4/Q X e4
B x cS ; 2 Qc4
B x d2 ; 2 Qd4
Bc3 ; 2 Q x e4
bR.-.. ; 2 Qc6/Q X d7/Rf5
R x b7 ; 2 Qc6
R x cS ; 2 Q x d7
Rb6 ; 2 RfS

more" is the accepted criterion of intensity (or intention ?) for


the number of threats in a Fleck theme : No. 1 60 is therefore a
double secondary Fleck (b4 and b5) but not a trebling (d7).
No. 1 6 1 illustrates an extension of the primary Fleck,
combinative separation. The key carries four threats : Black's
fifteen defences force each possible combination of one, two,
three or four mates. A further defence, 1 . . . P x c4, stops all
four and forces a completely new mate. The same idea can be
89
Separation
applied to three or more secondary threats. Seven black R
moves in No. 162 lead to every possible combination of the
three secondary threats by the ambushed Queen. Two correc-
161 COMBINATIVE SEPARATION

J. HARTONG
First Prize,
Il Due Mosse, 1962
Key 1 S x c4,
threats 2 cSd2/Sd6/Re3/Rf4
Ph4; 2 cSd2/Sd6/Re3/Rf4
B x c2; 2 cSd2/Sd6/Re3
Qgl ; 2 cSd2/Sd6/ Rf4
Se8 ; 2 cSd2/ Re3/Rf4
Qdl ; 2 Sd6/Re3/Rf4
Se6; 2 cSd2/Sd6
Pg5 ; 2 cSd2/ Re3
Sf5 ; 2 cSd2/ Rf4
R x c2 ; 2 Sd6/Re3
Qel ; 2 Sd6/ Rf4
Q x g2 ; 2 Re3/Rf4
Q x h2 ; 2 cSd2
Qcl ; 2 Sd6
Qfl ; 2 Re3
R x b3 ; 2 Rf4
P x c4 ; 2 Bb7 !

SECONDARY COMBINATIVE
SEPARATION

J. HARTONG
I/ Due Mosse, 1958
Key 1 Bb7,
zugzwang
Rd7 ; 2 Qa3/Qb4/Qc5
Rd5 ; 2 Qa3/Qb4
R x d3 ; 2 Qa3/ Qc5
R x e6 ; 2 Qb4/Qc5
Rb6 ; 2 Qa3
Rc6 ; 2 Qb4
Rd4 ; 2 Qc5
Rd8 + ; 2 Q x d8
R x�+; 2 Rx�

tions, both checks, produce new mates. A. R. Gooderson­


who, like Jan Hartong, is among the very few composers to
have made a really extensive study of the theme-produced in
1948 a remarkable work (CPIA No. 43) where the black Queen
90
Separation
combinatively separates four secondary threats, but normally
the maximum is three.
In No. 1 63, two new principles are introduced : arrival Fleck
and progressive separation. In the arrival Fleck, a number of
Black men can move to a single square, separating duals that
would arise if the piece arriving there had no positive powers
(cf. No. 144). Progressive separation requires that one Black
move should permit a wide choice of mates, made more and
more restrictive until only one is allowed. Thus in No. 163
(where Fleck effects are secondary) the arrival of a black R on

163 SECONDARY ARRIVAL FLECK


�,..,� + PROGRESSIVE SEPARATION
u. CASTI!LLARI
To Mat, 1954
Key 1 Q x d6, threat 2 Q x d4
R x e3 ; 2 Sg5/Qd5/Bg6/Bd5
dP X e3 ; 2 Sg5/Qd5/Bg6
fP x e3 ; 2 Sg5/Qd5
dS x e3 ; 2 Sg5
gS x e3 ! ; 2 Qe7
K x e3 ; 2 Q x f4

e3 allows four mates to exploit the self-block; 1 . . . dP X e3


stops 2 Bd5 but permits the other three ; 1 . . . fP X e3 stops
both 2 Bd5 and 2 Bg6 but allows the remaining two ; and
1 . . . dS x e3 stops 2 Bd5, 2 Bg6 and 2 Qd5, forcing 2 Sg5
alone. Notice that a mate, once eliminated in the sequence,
never recurs. In No. 1 63 the theme is enriched by the correction
1 . . . gS X e3, stopping all four secondary threats and forcing
a new mate.
There are few Flecks with changed play, owing no doubt to
the complexity of the theme and the many mates required.
No. 1 64 shows total primary Fleck in two phases (only possible
with virtual change, of course). Some people would regard the
duplication of capture defences of a2 and c l as a slight weakness.
The defence 1 . . . S x f4, too, is "superfluous" in both phases,
but its strengths and weaknesses in each phase are distinct and
91
Separation
interesting. No. 1 65 shows changed secondary Fleck. None of
the changes is a mere linear shift of a set mate along the same
line : the fact that theprimary threat (2 Qa5) is such a linear shift,
of a set secondary threat (2 Qb4), adds to the interest of Black's
defensive techniques. No. 1 66 is a very modern multi-phase

164 CHANGED PRIMARY FLECK


0. STOCClfl
Second Prize, Problem, 1961
Try 1 Ba6?, threats 2 S x e2/Rd7/Sb3/Rc4
Q x a2 ; 2 S x e2
B/S x c1 ; 2 Rd7
S x g1 ; 2 Sb3
P x gS ; 2 Rc4
B x a2 !
Key 1 Bb7 !, threats 2 Sf3/Rd5/Se6/Ra4
Q/B x a2; 2 Sf3
B/S x c1 ; 2 RdS
S x gl ; 2 Se6
P x gS ; 2 Ra4

165 CHANGED SECONDARY FLECK


0. STOCClfl
First Prize ex aequo,
El Ajedrez Espaiiol, 1952
Set : bS-; 2 Qb4/Qb2/Q x d6
Sc4; 2 Qb4
SdS ; 2 Qb2
Sa4; 2 Q x d6
Key 1 Qa7, threat 2 QaS
bS-; 2 Bc3/R x a2/Qe3
Sc4; 2 Bc3
SdS; 2 R x a2
Sa4 ; 2 Qe3

development of the Fleck tradition. From setplay to the play


after the try 1 Qb5 ? there are three changed secondary-Fleck
mates after moves of the Sc4. 1 Qc2 ? and the key each intro­
duce a three-fold primary partial Fleck: in this theme, not all
Black defences force unique threats, but by careful choice he
can limit White to each in turn. Once more, the Sc4 does the
92
Separation
166 MULTI-PHASE FLECK
N. PETROVIC
Twelfth Hon. Mention,
Sao Paulo Tourney, 1956
Set cS-; 2 Qg4/Rf5/Qf4
S X d6/Sb2/Sd2; 2 Qg4
Se5 ; 2 Rf5
Se3 ; 2 Qf4
Try 1 Qb5 ?, threat 2 Q X d5
cS,_, ; 2 Q X fl/Qe2/Qd3
Sb2/S X d6/Se5 ; 2 Q X f1
Se3 ; 2 Qe2
Sd2 ; 2 Qd3
R x dl !
Try 1 Qc2 ?, threats 2 Qf5/Qe2/Qg2
Se5 ; 2 Qf5
Se3 ; 2 Qe2
Sb2; 2 Qg2
Sd2; 2 Qd3
S x d6 !
Key 1 Qd7 ! , threats 2 Qf5/Qg4/Qh3
Se5; 2 Qf5
Sd2/Sb2/S x d6 ; 2 Qg4
Se3 ; 2 Qh3

separating in both primary-Fleck phases : thus, in four phases,


he separates three threats (two trios primary and two secondary).
Ten distinct mates are involved-nine by the Queen !

M. LIPTON 167 J. M. RICE 168


AI Hamishmar, 1953 Problemist, 1955
93
Separation

M. LIPTON 169 B. P. BARNES


AI Hamishmar, 1955 Correspondence Chess, 1957

M. LIPTON 171 M. LIPTON


(after M. ADABASCHEY) British Chess Magazine, 1956
British Chess Magazine, 1963

M. LIPTON 173 174


Version, 4th prize, Die Schwa/be, M. LIPTON (after G. LATZEL)
1956 Die Schwa/be, 1957
94
Separation

N. A. MACLEOD 175
2nd special prize, M. LIPTON & E. HoLLADAY
Christian Science Monitor, 1948 (after F. GAMAGE)
(Gamage version : 3rd prize,
De Maasbode, 1939)

177 M. LIPTON 178


B. p. BARNES & A. c. REEvEs Problemist, 1951
1st prize ex aequo Die Schwa/be,
1964/II

179 180
M. LIPTON (after J. R. HOOLE) M. LIPTON (after G. GUIDELLI)
The Tabkt, 1961 Observer, 1962
95
Separation

J. M. RicE J. M. RICE & M. LIPTON 182


The Problemist, 1955 Problem, 1957

R. C. 0. MATIHEWS 183
3rd prize, Stratford Express, 1 950 British Chess Magazine, 1956
(Version by E. HOLLADAY)

M. LIPTON 185 A. R. GOODERSON 186


Version, 1st prize, 11 Due Mosse, 1st hon. mention, B.C.F. Tour­
1958 ney, 1957
96
Separation

A. R. GOODERSON 188
4th place, Great Britain v. British Chess Magazine, 1948
Holland, 1956

A. R. GOODERSON 189 J. M. RICE


1st prize, British Chess Magazine, Problemist, 1964
1962

A. C. REEVES 191 N. A. MACLEOD 192


Probleemblad, 1964 Hon. mention,
American Chess Bulletin, 1954
7 97
Separation

J. M. RICE 193 J. M. RICE 194


2nd hon. mention, Die Schwa/be, 1965
British Chess Magazine, 1965

J. M. RicE 196
Die Schwa/be, 1965 3rd prize, B.C.F. Tourney, 1964

98
CHAPTER E I GH T

Half-battery
One of the many useful classifications of two-movers could be
based on "units separating a line-piece from the K of opposite
colour". White K, white intervening unit and black rear-piece
give the white self-pin and black unpin themes (chapter 4).
Change the colour of the intervening piece and we have cross­
checkers like Nos. 44-64. Two white men on the line give a
white half-pin (No. 72) : one white and one black might produce
defences by pin of White with dual avoidance (No. 147). A
black K, separated by a single white man from white R or white
B, introduces black self-pin or white battery play. One black and
one white man gives a masked battery (No. 76) ; one black
unit yields numerous possible black self-unpin themes ; two,
and we have a half-pin; two black and one white, a masked
half-pin ; and so on.
This is more than a game; it suggests (a) the relationship
among various themes, and hence the possibilities for unified
combinations of themes; and (b) possible groups of themes that
have escaped attention. One could pretend that the traditional
context of the half-battery was evidenced by Alain White's
incidental, and somewhat undistinguished, 1 9 1 1 rendering; but
the real intellectual ancestor of the half-battery is the half-pin.
Intensive work on the half-battery really dates from 1 957,
when Ahues, Lipton and Raring (in that order by a matter of
weeks-not that it is of any importance!) published examples.
Two years later, an article by Lipton in Die Schwa/be led to a
theme tourney of great strength (several prizewinners are cited
in CPIA) and for some years many of the better two-move
tourneys have been dominated by half-battery problems. In
more casual publications, the theme was often handled with
scant imagination. A justified solver-reaction has set in against
those dreary half-batteries where a pair of white Rs separates
white B from black K, and a pair of black Rs attacks the
99
Half-battery
battery to move away in turn, producing repetitive pairs of
tedious unguards in try and key. But, as we hope to show, good
half-batteries are not like that at all. Properly handled, the
theme is almost as varied and fruitful as its ancestor, the
half-pin.
197 HALF-BATTERY
C. MANSFIELD
Second Prize,
Il Due Mosse, 1960
Try 1 Bd4 ?, threat 2 Qc5
Rc2 ; 2 Bh3
Rcl ; 2 Bg4
Qc4; 2 Qd7
Rg7 !
Key 1 Bd7 !, threat 2 Qc6
Rc2; 2 Bh2
·Rc1 ; 2 Bg3
Qc4; 2 Qd6

198 HALF-BATTERY + BLACK


SELF-PIN
E. VISSERMAN
First Prize,
Schweizer Arbeiter-Schachzeitung, 1961
Try 1 dS x c3 ?, threat 2 Q x g5
Q x c3 ; 2 bSc7
R x c3 ; 2 S x a3
Sf7!
Key 1 bS x c3 !, threat 2 Qf6
Q x c3 ; 2 dSc7
R x c3 ; 2 Sb4

No. 197-Mansfield again !-is a perfect illustration of how


even the simplest idea can be freshened up. The try is defeated
by a subtle defence, which requires the anticipatory-unpin key,
to shut g7-a7. A third change, after the self-block I . . .

Qc4, is thrown in for good measure. Few composers can obtain


such delightful results from such simple thematic ingredients :
some might view the latter as rather dull, but such problems
(like most Bohemian three-movers) rely, as Harley wrote, on
"total effect" for their charm. They make a pleasant change
100
Half-battery
from more heavy and complex work, at which Mansfield, of
course, can excel when he chooses.
The half-battery succeeds best when combined with other,
suitably-matched ideas. Thus No. 198 doubles the paired
199 HALF-BATTERY + BLACK
SELF-PIN
H. A.HuEs
Third Hon. Mention,
Schach-Echo, 1962
Try 1 Rb3 ?, threat 2 Q X d3
Q x d4 ; 2 S x d8
R x d4; 2 S x a7
KfJ ; 2 SeS
BfS !
Key 1 Sb4!, threat 2 Q X d3
Q x d4; 2 Rd7
R x d4; 2 R x a7
KfJ ; 2 Rf7

200 HALF-BATTERY (ZAGORUYKO)


H. IIERMANSON
Version, First Prize,
Deutsche Schachzeitung, 1962-3
Try 1 B x g4 ?, threat 2 Be2
Rb2; 2 Se8
Qh2; 2 Sc8
BhS !
Try 1 SfS ?, threat 2 Qf1
Rb2; 2 Be8
Qh2; 2 Bc8
Qhl !
Key 1 S x c4!, threat 2 Qfl
Rb2 ; 2 S x b2
Qh2; 2 S x eS
R x c4 ; 2 BfS
K x c4; 2 Be6

theme called the "Mansfield couplet", in which each of two


black men, in turn, loses control of a white battery by self-pin,
allowing the firing piece to mate by capturing (or cutting off)
the defender that has not pinned itself. Here this happens in
try and key. Visserman produces a delightfully economical
rendering, but unfortunately the try looks less likely than the
key, so that the solver may miss the point. Better in this regard,
101
Half-battery
and perhaps in others, is Ahues' No. 199. Here, the four self­
pin errors (the two black defences in try and key) stop the
threat by tying the threat-piece to the pin-line. The third
half-battery change, following the flight, is a fine addition.
201 BLACK SELF-PIN + MATE
TRANSFERENCE
C. MANSFIELD
Problem, 1962
Try 1 Pe5 ?, threat 2 Sb4
eS x d5 ; 2 Re2
fS x d5 ; 2 Rg6
K x d5 ; 2 Qc4
R x dS !
Key 1 S x b6 ! , threat 2 S-...
cS x e4 ; 2 Re2
fS x e4 ; 2 Rg6
Bb7 ; 2 Qc4
aP x b6; 2 Q x as
eP x b6 ; 2 QeS
R x dS ; 2 P x dS = S

20l HALF-BATTERY + PIN OF BLACK


-l'Zfto/.-=­
H. K.NuPPERT
Problemnoter, 1961
Try 1 Rf4 ?, threat 2 ReS
Bc7 ; 2 R x e7
Bb6 !
Try 1 ReS ?, threat 2 Rf4
S x h6 ; 2 Rb7
Bc4 !
Try 1 Rf5 ?, threat 2 Rb8
Bb6+ ; 2 R x b6
Bb5 !
Key 1 RbB !, threat 2 Rf5
S x h6 ; 2 Re7

No. 200 is one of only a very few extant Zagoruyko half­


batteries. Two of the thematic pairs of mates use the half­
battery, and the tries are far more plausible than the fine
sacrificial key. Even more unusual in layout is Mans:field's No.
201 , in which two-thirds of a "third-battery,, provide mate
transference from virtual to actual play. There are three white
102
Half-battery
Q mates after self-blocks-one a further mate transference,
from the virtual flight. It is perhaps a slight weakness that the
try gives a flight, whereas the key does not.
No. 202 shows the half-battery linked to a try-pattern theme
rather than to changed play as such. To threaten mate effec­
tively, the pair of white Rs has to pin both d8 and f7. So there
are two positions they can adopt, and two "ways round" to get
to each : b8 and f5, or c8 and f4. The sequence of first move
and mating threat is thus reversed between one pair of tries,
and again between the third try and the solution. The theme
is "double sequence reversal".

J. M. RICE 203 B. P. BARNES 204


Die Schwa/be, 1963 The Tablet, 1961
(a) diagram
(b) turn board 90° anticlockwise

J. M. RicE 205
Die Schwa/be, 1961 M. LIPToN, B.
J. M. RICE
4th commend., B.C.P.S. Ring
Tourney, 1960
103
Half-battery

M. LIPTON 207 208


Ceskoslovensky Sah, 1962 M. LIPTON & B. P. BARNES
Hon. mention, Die Schwalbe,
1963

M. LIPTON 209 M. LIPTON 210


Problemnoter, 1962 1st hon. mention,
Tijdschrift v.d.K.N.S.B., 1961

M. LIPTON 211 J. M. RICE 212


Hon. mention, Version, Die Schwalbe, 1963
Problemisten, 1963
104
Half-battery

A. C. REEVES 213
Probleemblad, 1963 1st prize, Problemisten, 1963
(a)diagram
(b) move pawn h3 to hS

M. LIPTON 216
Problem, 1964 Co"espondence Chess, 1963

M. LIPTON 217 M. LIPTON 218


L'Italia Scacchistica, 1965 Jerusalem Post, 1962

105
Half-battery

M. LIPTON 219 B. P. BARNES 220


Commended, Castellavi Tour­ Themes 64
ney, 1964

B. P. BARNES 221 M. LIPTON 222


Skakbladet, 1961 Hon. mention, Die Schwa/be,
1961

224
2nd prize, B. P. BARNES & M. LIPTON
Problem Theme Tourney, 1964 Version, British Chess Magazine,
(a) diagram 1962
(b) add black pawn g7
106
Half-battery

M. LIPTON 226
Observer, 1962 Commended, Die Schwa/be, 1962

107
CHAPTER NINE

Tasks

Because chess problem composition is an art, classification is


bound to be, to some extent, a matter of taste. Thus No. 27
is cited as a half-pin and No. 46 as a Cross-check, but their
positions could as well have been reversed. But our difficulties
in deciding what is and what is not a Task Problem go deeper
than such borderline disputes. It is very rare for a composer to
make anything worthwhile by "doodling" with pieces on the
board in the vague hope that a masterpiece will materialise.
Almost always he reaches into the box of chessmen with some
idea of what he wants to get out of it. "Think of a theme,
double it . . . "; usually, unless he is lucky enough to hit on a
simple yet original setting, he will seek to show the theme he
has in mind in as many variations as he can, given his notions
of economy, clarity and subtlety. This process of intensification
-almost another way of saying Economy-means that, as often
as not, a good problem will attain some maximum effect,
however special.
Even among the "classical" tasks, few that we want to cite
are simple multiplications of lines of play from a single unit.
With few exceptions, modern technique has improved hugely
on the crude keys and crowded positions of pioneer works like
The Problem Art or even Les Tours de Force.* There are,
though, some early masterpieces. Nobody has shown the S
wheel more perfectly than Tuxen (No. 227). There are only 1 4
men, yet five of the spokes produce interferences, and the
defences are square-vacations, not those panic retreats of an
attacked S that are almost standard for routine examples of this
task. Notice the immense efforts of White's Q: she guards
* The first was a collection of powers-of-pieces tasks-8 white S and black S
variations, 14 whiteR mates, etc.-published by the English composer, T. B. Row land,
in the year 1887. Most of the problems are pretty crude, but the work has great
pioneer value. The second, a collection of assorted tasks, was one of the earlier books
in the Alain White Christmas series (1906).

108
Tasks
four flights (including f3, d3 and d5) and gives 5 mates (including
one at d4) in the course of the play. The key is a little per­
functory, but not actually bad.
The great unattained S task is undoubtedly the Interference
Wheel-8 distinct mates forced by black S interferences. So far
this has not been shown without promoted force. No. 228 is
227 BLACK S WHEEL
H. V. TUXEN

First Prize,
Deutsche Schachzeitung, 1919
Key 1 Sf3, threat 2 Sd2
Sc2; 2 Qd3
Sb3; 2 Qxb1
SbS; 2 Bxb7
Sc6; 2 QdS
Se6; 2 ReS
SfS; 2 Rg4
Sxf3; 2 Pxf3
Sxe2; 2 Qxe2

228 SEVEN INTERFERENCES BY ONE


-=..--== BLACK S
M. BUKOFZER

First Prize,
Good Companions, 1922
Key 1 QeB, threat 2 Qxe4
Sc3; 2 Sb4
Sd2; 2 2Sc3
Sd6; 2 Qxc6
Sf6; 2 Qe6
Sf2; 2 Rd4
ScS; 2 Sxb6
SgS; 2 QeS

a splendid approach to this task, securing 7 post-key interfer­


ences-and an eighth if we count the set 1 . . . Sf6 ; 2 Qd6.
Note the ingenious correction-type play after 1 . . . Sd2 and
1 . . . Sf6, the good use made of the white K, and the openness
of the position, unusual for an extreme task.
With No. 229, we pass from departure tasks (based on mates
after a black piece leaves its initial square) and look at an
arrival task, which depends on repetitions of arrival errors,
with distinct mates. Here, the sacrificial key is followed by
1 09
Tasks
seven distinct mates after the self-blocks on e4. All seven
defences are double errors-there is no dual avoidance (con­
trast Overkamp's No. 46 in CPIA). Notice the use made of the
White Q-laterally as rear piece in an incomplete half-pin after
1 . . . fP x e4, diagonally and laterally in 1 Q x e4 ; 2 Qh8,
. . .

diagonally to guard f3 after the flight. That is what good

229 SEVEN SELF-BLOCKS ON ONE


SQUARE
J. R. NEUK.OMM (after A. MosELEY)
Die Schwa/be, 1930
Key 1 Se4, threat 2Re7
dP x e4; 2 Bd4
fP x e4; 2P x f4
R x e4; 2R x f5
cS x e4; 2R x d5
B x e4; 2Pd4
fS x e4; 2S x d3
Q x e4; 2Qh8

230 EIGHT SELF-BLOCKS


G. H. DRESE
Tenth Prize,
La Settimana, 1933/1
Key 1 Bd4, threat 2Qc5
P x d4; 2B x e4
bR x d4; 2R x b5
eR x d4; 2R x e5
B x d4; 2S x b4
S x d4; 2S x c3
Q x d4; 2Sf6
Rc4; 2Qd7
Se6; 2Rd7
K x d4; 2Qd6

construction means ! No. 230 is a distant cousin, with eight


self-blocks in all, equalling the Fink-Stimson record (No. 14 in
CPIA) but with six of the self-blocks on a single flight. The
lines 1 . . . eR x d4 and 1 . B x d4 form a Nowotny, with black
. .

R and black B getting in each other's way to permit mate as they


capture the sacrificed man. (Notice also the Nowotny in No .
229.) In Drese's problem, the new mate after the flight-not
the threat-is a pleasant extra feature for so intensive a task.
110
Tasks
Many of the great tasks are intensive renderings of themes,
not just displays of the powers of the pieces. Loshinski shows
five white interferences of a special kind (No. 231): White is
allowed to close his line of guard because it has been replaced
by another, just opened by Black. For example, 1 ... Qb4
opens both a1-d4 and b3-d3, so that 2 fSd5 White may close
d7's guard of both d3 and d4 with impunity. The Russians, for
reasons best known to themselves, call this theme, which is as
old as the hills, "Theme B" or the "Somoff theme". In any
event, this rendering is a masterpiece. All five variations have

131 TASK: WlDTE INTERFERENCES


-=-
L. I. LosHINSKI

First Prize,
Shakhmaty w SSSR, 1936
Key 1 Pg6, threat 2 Qh6
QaS; 2 Bd4 (2 SdS ?)
Qb4; 2 fSdS (2 bSdS ?)
QeS; 2 Pd4 (2 SdS ?)
Qxf6; 2 bSdS (2 Pd4 ?)
Pxg6; 2 Sg4
(Qc4; 2 Pxc4
QcS; 2 QxcS)

something special. 1 ... Qb4 and 1 . . . Q x f6 are single­


variation doublings, with two lines opened to permit the White
interference with d7. 1 ... Qa5 opens a gate a1-d4 for the
mating piece as well as the thematic b3-d3. 1 ... Qe5; 2 d4
is most unusual: the opened line promptly works as a battery,
giving a critical shut-off of the black Q once she has passed over
the critical square d4. Finally, after 1 ... P x g6, the mating
piece completes the unmasking of f8-f3. Notice the dual
avoidance after black Q moves, including the use made of the
white K, and the Black Corrections 1 ... Qc4 and 1 ... Qc5,
stopping all the four White Interference mating possibilities
created by the simple removal of the Q.
The half-pin has produced many ingenious extreme effects.
H. W. Bettmann has shown eleven mates forced by a single
half-pin system-six of them from the white K-but the problem
111
Tasks
is not one of his best.* Hesselgren is one of those composers
noted for just one masterpiece: No. 232 is much the best triple
half-pin. All three half-pins are homogeneous (the half-pinned
pieces in each pair are identical twins), creating unity without
tedium. The key, for such an ambitious task effort, is marvel­
lous. Bottachi, too, secures in No. 233 a fine key, leading to
232 TRIPLE HALF-PIN
A. HESSELGREN
Second Prize,
Budapest Chess Club Tourney, 1932-3
Key 1 Qe2, threat 2Q X f3
Rf6; 2Sg5
Rf5; 2Sd6
Sd4; 2Q x e3
S x c3; 2Q x c4
B x c3; 2Qd3
B x e2; 2S x c5

233 TASK: HALF-PIN+ INTERFERENCES


-...,..,,....-...,.--,
A. BOTIACCffi
First Prize,
Densmore Memorial Tourney, 1918
Key I Bd7, threat 2Q x g5
Se4; 2Qf4
Bf4; 2Rg4
Sh7; 2Rh6
Bh6; 2Qh5
(Rh5; 2Sf5
Rg4; 2P x g4)

four half-pin-interference "ditheme" defences. Notice the


prevention of 2 Sf5 after black B defences, and the ingenious
(if rather expensive) handling of the nuisance defence 1 ... Rg4.
To show this massive task with a mere 17 men is a great con­
structional feat, and the problem is a perfect answer to those
who dismiss symmetry as necessarily mechanical or dull. No.
234 is another half-pin, and Alvey, a distinguished Hampshire
• In Forsyth notation, the position is: 3S4/2pQP3/2PP!p2/2pkqblr/!PS5/
IPPPIK2/5RBI/8. Key I Ra2. The problem appeared in the Good Companion
Folder, May, 1921.
112
Tasks
composer, reminds us of No. 228 with another magnificent
"almost". No one has yet achieved two half-pin systems with
a half-pin interference variation from each 6f the four half­
pinned men (Mansfield has shown this with half-pin + self-
234 TASK: HALF-PIN+ INTERFERENCES
G. ALVEY
Second Prize, Observer, 1920
Key 1 Qb2, threat 2 ReS
Bd4; 2 Sd3
SdS; 2 Sc6
BdS+; 2 Rc4
Rd4; 2 PeS = Q

235 DOUBLE ALBINO

M. R. VUKCEVIC
Fourth Prize ex aequo,
Die Schwa/be Theme Tourney, 1961
Try 1 Pc4 ?, threat 2 Pd3/4
BxeS; 2 Pd4
PgS; 2 Pd3
Pxc4 e.p.; 2 Pxc3
Se3; 2 Pxe3
Sd3; 2 Bxd3
Pb3!
Key 1 Pd3!, threat 2 Pc3/4
BxeS; 2 Pc3
Bg8; 2 Pc4
Sxd3; 2 Pxd3
Pb3; 2 Pxb3
Se3; 2 Qxe3

block). In No. 234, the 4 half-pin lines include 3 interferences,


3 self-blocks, a White Interference and a cross-check.
From half-pin to half-battery: Vukcevic (No. 235) shows a
rather more modem task. Each white P withdraws to allow
four forced mates by the other. The let-throughs of b l and cl,
in turn, by try and key are a highly thematic adjunct to the
battery play.
8
113
Tasks

237
1st prize, B.C.F. Tourney, C. J. MoRSE (after A. C. WHITE)
1964-5 The Guardian, 1960

238 J. M. RicE 239


C. J. MORSE & E. HOLLADAY Correspondence Chess, 1958
U.S. Problem Bulletin, 1963

M. LrProN 240 241


1st hon. mention, C. J. MoRSE (after D. M. DAVEY)
American Chess Bulletin, 1957 The Tablet, 1962
1 14
Tasks

E. LERTORIA 241
Observer, 1962 Probleemblad, 1965

C. J. MoRSE 244 C. J. MORSE 245


The Prob/emist, 1964 1st prize, B.C.P.S. Ring
Tourne y, 1964

A. C. REEVES 246 H. W. GRANT 247


The Problemist, 1966 The Problemist, 1966
(a) diagram; (b) Re2 to d5.
1 15
c:HAPTER TE
, ,N

Mate Transference and Rukhlis

In the majority of the multi-phase problems we have discussed


so far, the changes have been ofWhite's mates; Black's defences
have usually remained the same. There is, however, a further
form of changed play, in which the mates remain the same, but
the defences are changed. This is known as Mate Transference.
The transfer of a single mate to various black defences in the
course of the solution is seen in No. 248. In the set play,
2 Bxe3 follows the simple unguard 1 Pd3. The try 1 Pxd4?
. . .

opens a line of guard to e3 from the black R, so that 2 B X e3


now mates after the R has moved to aS to defeat the threat of
2 QeS. The second try 1 S x d4? leaves the B f2 holding g3, so
that 2 B x e3 is mate only after the self-block I . Sg3. After
. .

the third try 1 Qxc4?, Black has a flight on eS; 2 B X e3 thus


mates after the self-block 1 . PeS, as the P d4 is now pinned.
. .

The key 1 dSxe3! puts a white piece on the B's mating square,
so that 2 B x e3 will now wm:k only after this piece has been
captured. So this extraordinary problem has five phases
altogether, with 2 B xe3 appearing after five different defences!
The problem was shown some years ago, without comment, at
a meeting of the British Chess Problem Society in London, and
the assembled problemists were invited to discover the theme.
It was a long time before anyone tumbled to the composer's
idea, which is more a reflection on the obscurity of the problem
than on the solving expertise of those present! In all fairness to
Hermanson, however, the concept of mate transference was
very little known in this country at the time. Happily this is no
longer the case.
Rather unexpectedly, one of the earliest known examples of
mate transference (No. 249) is by Comins Mansfield. The set
mates for 1 . P/RxbS and 1 . PxcS reappear after the
. . . .

key transferred to the defences 1 . .. R X b4 and 1 ... P/RxbS


respectively. A great many of the changed play problems of
1 16
Mate Transference and Rukhlis
the Good Companion era, like this ingenious mutate, contain
examples of mate transference, but the device did not acquire its
name until very much later, when composers began to thematise
it in much the same way as they had worked on the concept of
changed mates in a non-block setting thirty years or so earlier.
248 MATE TRANSFERENCE
H. HERMANSON
First Hon. Mention,
Sao Paulo Chess Club, 1955
Set: Pd3; 2 B xe3
Try 1 Pxd4 ?, threat 2 Qe5
RaS; 2 Bxe3
Pf6 !
Try 1 S X d4 ?, threat 2 Se2
Sg3 ; 2 Bxe3
Ra2!
Try 1 Qxc4 ?, threat 2 Qxd4
PeS; 2 Bxe3
Ra4 !
Key 1 dSxe3 !, threat 2 Sg2
Pxe3; 2 Bxe3

249 MATE TRANSFERENCE (MUTATE)


C. MANSFIELD
Chess Amateur, 1918
Set: R/PxbS; 2 Rcl
Pxc5; 2 Qe4
Rb4; 2 Rxb4
PdS; 2 Qc2
Key 1 Bb4, zugzwang
Rxb4; 2 Rc1
R/PxbS; 2 Qe4
PdS; 2 Qfl

No. 250 has a pair of white mates which reappear after differ­
ent black defences in three phases. Note that this problem does
not illustrate the Zagoruyko theme, which requires that the
mates, and not the defences, shall be changed. In No. 251 three
mates are transferred, but only from set to actual play.
No. 252 illustrates an elaboration of the idea of mate trans­
ference. The self-blocks by the black Q and Sc3 on e4 are
1 17
Mate Transference and Rukhlis
followed in the·set play by mates by the white Q on a7 and by
the 7S on e6 respectively. The key 1 Se5 requires the white Q
to hold e5, thereby destroying the set mates. But these mates
now occur after the self-blocks on e5 by the two Ps: 1 . . .

rPxe5; 2 Qa7; and 1 .dPxe5; 2 Se6. That is ordinary


. .

mate transference. But the set defences, which also defeat the
250 MATE TRANSFERENCE
�=--;;;---,
E. LIVSIDTS
Set: gS-; 2 Be4
gSf5; 2 Bf7
Try 1 Qg11, threat 2 Qxg3
dS-; 2 Be4
dSf5; 2 Bf7
Rb4 !
Key 1 Rg2!, threat 2 Rxg3
Pc2; 2 Be4
Bf5; 2 Bf7

251 MATE TRANSFERENCE


V. F. RVDENKO
Problemnoter, 1958
Set: Rxe3; 2 Sf2
Bxe3; 2 Sxc3
Pf5; 2 Qxh1
Key 1 Sc4!, threat 2 Qf5
Kd3; 2 Sf2
Kxd5; 2 Sxc3
Kf3; 2 Qxhl

threat of 2 Sc6, are now self-pins, and lead to new mates:


1 . . Qxe4; 2 Sf5; andl ... Sxe4; 2 Pc3. This arrangement
.

is known as the Rukhlis theme, after a Russian composer whose


examples first drew general attention to it. Some problemists
have used the term Rukhlis to apply to ordinary mate transfer­
ence, without the addition of new mates for the set defences.
We prefer the more restricted application, since the term "mate
transference" is perfectly adequate for the general concept.
In No. 253 there are set mates by the white Q after the self­
blocks on the flight d4 by the black B and R a4. The key takes
1 18
Mate Transference and Rukhlis
this flight but offers e6 in exchange. The same Q mates now
follow the self-blocks by the S and the R h6 on this new flight,
while the original defences on d4 are now self-pins and lead to
new mates by the Q. The absence of a set mate for the strong
defence 1 . . K x d4 is the only weakness in this otherwise
.

superb problem. No. 254, a refinement of a setting that many

251 RUKHLIS
E. LIVSlllTS

Suomen Shakki, 1959


Set: S x e4; 2 Se6
Q x e4 ; 2 Qa7
Key 1 Se5, threat 2 Sc6
dP x e5; 2 Se6
fP x e5 ; 2 Qa7
S x e4; 2 Pc3
Q x e4; 2 Sf5

153 RUKHLIS
L. I. ZAOORUYKO

Fourth Hon.Mention, Trud, 1950


Set: B x d4 ; 2 Qhl
R x d4; 2 Qb5
Key 1 Rdl, threat 2 Sc7
S x e6; 2 Qhl
R x e6; 2 Qb5
B x d4 ; 2 Qf5
R x d4 ; 2 Qc4
(K x e6 ; 2 Qf7)

composers have shown, has three set mates transferred to new


defences after the key-to be precise, to correction-defences
that were impossible before the key-while the original defences
acquire new mates.
A special form of the Rukhlis theme is the ideal Rukhlis: not
only do the original defences have new mates, but the new
defences also have set mates. This is illustrated by No. 255.
The mates 2 Sf5 and 2 Q x g7 occur after 1 . . Be5 and 1 ...Se3
.

1 19
Mate Transference and Rukhlis
in the set play, and after 1 . Rxe4 and 1 . B X e4 following
. . . .

the key. These new defences have 2 Sf3 and 2 Sb3 as set mates,
and the original defences acquire, after the key, the mates
2 Qxe5 and 2 Qxe3.
RUKHLIS
M. PARTH ASARATHY
Second Commendation,
B.C.P.S. Ring Tourney, 1963
Set: 6S�; 2 gSe7
4S�; 2 Sf6
B�; 2 Pc4
Key 1 Bxe5, zugzwang
6S�; 2fSe7
4S�; 2 Se3
B�; 2 Qd4
6S xe5; 2 gSe7
4Sxe5 ; 2 Sf6
Bxe5; 2 Pc4

255 IDEAL RUKHLIS


L. SzWEoowsKI
First Prize,
Sportowiec, 1959
Set: Be5; 2 Sf5
Se3; 2 Qxg7
Rxe4; 2 Sf3
Bxe4 ; 2Sb3
(Pxe4 ; 2 Rc4)
Key 1 Sc4, threat 2 Q xd5
BeS; 2Qxe5
Se3; 2 Qxe3
Rxe4; 2 Sf5
Bxe4 ; 2 Qxg7
(Pxe4 ; 2 Qd8
Pxc4 ; 2 Rxc4
Kxe4; 2 Qxh4)

In the last few years a number of composers have produced


examples of combined change- and transference-play in three
phases. No. 256, for instance, has changes of mate after a pair
of defences from the set to the virtual play, and transference of
the two virtual play mates to new defences after the key.
Problems of this kind may be regarded as an extension into
120
Mate Transference and Rukhlis
three phases of the Rukhlis theme. The following combinations
are possible:
(1) Set/virtual change, with virtual/actual transference (No.
256);
(2) Set/virtual transference, with virtual/actual change (No.
257);

256 SET/VIRTUAL CHANGE-


VIRTUAL/ACI'UAL TRANSFERENCE
E. LIVSHITS
Le Probleme, 1960
Set: BdS+; 2KxdS
Bd3+; 2Kxd3
Try 1 Qd7?, threat 2 Qg4
BdS+; 2 SxdS
Bd3+; 2 Sxd3
PfS!
Key 1Kb3 !, threat 2 Q X e4
PfS; 2 SdS
Pg4; 2 Sd3

257 SET/VIRTUAL TRANSFERENCE-


VIRTUAL/ACI'UAL CHANGE
V. F. RUDENKO and E. LIVSHITS
Problemas, 19S9
Set: ReS; 2 Be3
DeS; 2 QfS
Try 1 ScS?, threat 2 Sg2
Be4; 2 Be3
Re4; 2 QfS
Qh8!
Key 1 Sc3 !, threat 2 Sg2
Be4; 2 Se2
Re4; 2 Rf6

(3) Set/virtual change, with set/actual transference (No. 1 12


in CPIA);
(4) Set/virtual transference, with set/actual change;
(5) Set/actual change, with virtual/actual transference;
(6) Set/actual transference, with virtual/actual change (No.
258).
121
Mate Transference and Rukhlis
In addition to these six arrangements, two others are possible,
but produce combinations we have seen before:
(7) Set/virtual change, with set or virtual/actual change-the
Zagoruyko theme; and
(8) Set/virtual transference, with set or virtual/actual trans­
ference, which is found in No. 250.

258 SET/ACfUAL TRANSFERENCE-


vm.TUAL/ACfUAL CHANGE
C. GROENEVELD
First Prize,
Springaren, 1955
Set: Bc3; 2 Qxg3
Rc3; 2 Bxd4
Try 1 Sxg3?, threat 2 dRxe6
Kxd6; 2 gSf5
Kxf6; 2 Sh5
Rf 3 !
Key 1 Sc3 !, threat 2 dRxe6
Kxd6; 2 Qxg3
Kxf6; 2 Bxd4

259 CHANGE AND TRANSFERENCE


�=--==- COMBINATIONS
E. LIVSHITS
Tidskrift for Schack, 1960
Try 1 RbS?, threat 2 Sd5
Bxb6; 2 Qxd6
Qxb6; 2 Qxc5
Bxd4!
Try 1 Rf4?, threat 2 Sc2/c6
Bxd4; 2 Qxd6
Qxd4; 2 Qxc5
Rxb2!
Try 1 Qh4 7, threat 2 Sc2/c6
Bxd4; 2 Bxd6
Qxd4; 2 Bxc5
Rg4!
Key 1 Qb7!, threat 2 Sd5
Bxb6; 2 Bxd6
Qxb6; 2 Bxc5
1 22
Mate Transference and Rukhlis
[N.B:: In the above patterns, it is assumed that the problem
has a set phase; however, the same groups apply if the problem
has two virtual phases in place of one set and one virtual.]
Of course further combinations can be achieved if the number
of phases is increased to four. No. 259 shows mate transference
between the first two phases, change between the second and
third, further transference between the third and fourth,
and change between the first and fourth phases. Just how much
further scope this theme offers is difficult to judge.

J. E. DRIVER 260 261


3rd prize, M. LIPTON & H. ALBRECHT
British Chess Magazine, "1961 lst prize, Piran Composing
Tourney, 1958

J. M. RICE M. LIPTON & J. M. RICE 26.3


4th hon. mention, Die Schwa/be, Die Schwa/be, 1951
1957
123
Mate Transference and Rukhlis

M. LIPTON 264 265


2nd prize, M. LIPTON & A. C. REEVES
American Chess Bulletin, 1961 2nd prize, Schweizerische Schach­
zeitung, 1963

M. LIPTON 266 M. LIPTON 267


2nd prize, 5th commend., Prob/eemblad,
U.S. Problem Bulletin, 1963 1956

J. M. RicE 268 A. c. REEVES 269


Commended, Problemist, 1964
15th Olympic Tourney, 1962
1 24
-
Mate Transference and Rukhlis

A. C. R.EEVF3 M. LIPTON 171


Schweizerische SchachzeitiDig, Comm.ended, Problem, 1960
1965

125
CHAPTER ELEVEN

White Correction and


Threat Correction

In Szoghy's No. 272, the general error of a random move of


the white Se5 (e.g. 1 Sf7?), threatening 2 Re6 mate, is the
failure to provide for what becomes the general defence, 1 . . .
Bxf6! Six correction tries provide five different mates after
1 ... Bxf6 but each try commits a secondary error, e.g.
1 eSxc6!? Bxf6; 2 Qd5 but 1 ... Qxb8!; 2 Bxc6?-the
S blocks c6. The correction key 1 Sd7! displays White Correc­
tion in that it provides again for the general defence and avoids
a secondary error. This intensive rendering of White Correction
is coupled with the task of the S's tour of the eight squares at
its disposal.
Common to all forms of White Correction is improvement
upon the error made by a random move. This may be done
either by nullifying the . general defence to the random move
(1 Sxg5!? would have been a very effective nullification of
1 ... Bxf6 in No. 272!) or, preferably, by providing for the
general defence in a strategic manner (e.g. 1 Sxg6!? Bxf6;
2 Qf5 in No. 272).
A similar-looking white S tour masterpiece is quoted to make
clear what White Correction is not. In No. 273, there is no
general error involved by a random move of Sd5 to threaten
2 Rd5 mate. In fact, 1 dS random would solve the problem­
but the white S must move to a particular square. There is no
general error to correct and no correction element to "guide"
the white S to a particular square. It is a trial and error affair.
The S's error lies in arrival only-and there are seven arrival
errors in the course of the solution.
In the 1940's, when White Correction was developed inten­
sively as a theme, Arnoldo Ellerman did much to popularize
a more interesting type of Secondary White Correction in which
126
White Correction and Threat Correction
there are not only virtual-changed mates to the general defence
(as in No. 272 after 1 . . . B x f6), but also a set mate provided
for the move which becomes the general defence. No. 274 makes
272 SECONDARY WlflTE
CORRECTION (WHITE S TOUR)
J. SzooHY
First Prize,
Magyar Sakkelet, 1955
Try 1 eS-7 Bxf6!
Try 1 eSxc6!? B X f6 ; 2 Qd5
Qxb8!
Try 1 Se4!? Bxf6 ; 2 Sd2
Pd2!
Try 1 Sxd3!? Bxf6 ; 2 Qe2
Ba2!
Try 1 eSf3 !? Bxf6; 2 Sd2
Sg4!
Try 1 Sg4!? Bxf6 ; 2 Sxf6
Sf3!
Try 1 Sxg6!? Bxf6; 2 Qf5
Sf7!
Key 1 Sd7!!, threat 2 Re6
Bxf6; 2 Sxf6

273 WlDTE S TOUR


(TRIES WITH COMMON AIM)
A. TRn.LING
Second Prize ,
Mitteldeutsche Zeitung, 1939
Try 1 Sb6? Sc7!
Try 1 Sc7? Sb6!
Try 1 Se7? Sf6!
Try 1 Sf6? Se7!
Try 1 Sf4? Pe3!
Try 1 Se3? Rh5!
Try 1 Sc3? Bc4!
Key 1 Sb4!, threat 2 Rd5

clear this refinement of a set mate and introduces a more com­


plex form of correction, Tertiary White Correction. Mate 2 Bg3
is set for 1 . eS random. 1 fS random? threatens 2 Rf5, but
. .

the general error is the removal of the S's guard on g3. With
2 Bg3 no longer available, 1 . .eS random! becomes the
.

general defence. A correction 1 Se3!? yields a new mate 2 Sd5


1 27
White Correction and Threat Correction
after 1 . . . eS random-the black S at b4 is now pinned-but
makes the secondary error of preventing the white Q from
moving to e3 so that 1 . . Sc3 ! becomes the secondary defence.
.

A further correction, the key 1 Se7 ! !, again gives 2 Sd5 after

274 TERTIARY WlllTE CORRECTION


S. BREHMER
Parallele 50, 1949
Set: eS-; 2 Bg3
Try 1 fS- ?, threat 2 Rf5
eS-!
Try 1 Se3 ! ?, threat 2 Rf5
eS-; 2 Sd5
Sc3 !
Key 1 Se7! !, threat 2 RfS
eS-; 2 Sd5
Sc3; 2 Qb8

275 TERTIARY WlllTE CORRECTION


(ZAGORUYKO)
V. BARTOLOVIC
First Prize,
Probleemb/ad, 1961
Try 1 cS-?, threat 2 Qe5
Rg2; 2 4Rb5
Pf6; 2 6Rb5
Rxf4; 24Rb5
Qa5 !
Try 1 Sb5! ?, threat 2 Qe5
Rg2; 2 Sd4
Pf6; 2 Sd6
Rxf4 !
Key 1 Sd5! !, threat 2 Qe5
Rg2; 2 Sxe3
Pf6 ; 2 Se7
Rxf4; 2 Rxf4

. . . eS random but, while it commits the same secondary error


as before, a compensatory, tertiary element is introduced : an
interference on the black R at g7. 2 Qb8 mate follows what
was the secondary defence 1 . . Sc3 ! ? In general, the key in
.

Tertiary White Correction provides yet again for the general


defence, commits again the secondary error but provides for the
1 28
White Correction and Threat Correction
secondary defence by introducing a tertiary element-and does
not commit a tertiary error!
In its simplest form, White Correction is rarely sufficient for
a problem idea, but its logic makes it interesting and valuable.
In combination with other problem ideas, White Correction­
in all its grades-can make tries more plausible as well as
enriching a problem's content. The solver's credulity is not
strained in No. 275-a combination of Tertiary White Correc­
tion+3 x 2 Zagoruyko-for he is not expected simply to accept
1 Sb5!? as a try: the move is forced on him by the logic of

TIIREAT CORRECTION
P. TEN CATE
Schweizerische Schachzeitung, 1956
Try 1 dR-?, threat 2 Bd3
Kxe3+; 2 Bc4
Pc4!
Key 1 Rd6!, threat 2 Re6
Ke5+; 2 Rd4
Kxe3+; 2 Bc4
Pxd6; 2 Qe8
Pe5; 2 Bd3

Correction. The set play 1 ... Rg2; 2 4Rb5 and 1 ... Pf6;
2 6Rb5 is brought to the solver's attention by the need to move
Sc3, bringing the white Q into play and threatening 2 Qe5
mate. But the general error of 1 cS random? is to fail to
prevent the general defence 1 .. . Qa5! from defeating the
threat. A correction 1 Sb5! ? nullifies the general defence-and
there are mates 2 Sd4 and 2 Sd6 after 1 ... Rg2 and 1 ... Pf6
respectively. 1 ... R x f4! (2 4Rb5?) defeats 1 Sb5!? because
this try has committed the secondary error of blocking the fifth
rank. The correction key 1 Sd5!! again nullifies the general
defence and, although making the same secondary error, pro­
vides for the secondary defence by adding a guard on f4.
1 ... R X f4 is met by 2 R x f4-and for the third time there is a
different pair of mates (2 S x e3 and 2 Se7) after 1 ... Rg2 and
1 ... Pf6.
No. 276 shows an idea closely related to White Correction-
9 129
White Correction and Threat Correction
Threat Correction. 1 dR random? threatens 2 Bd3 mate but the
general error is a failure to provide for 1 . . . Pc4 !, an effective
general defence. White can make no ordinary correction to
keep 2 Bd3 as an adequate threat, so he corrects not the general
error but the threat itself. 1 Rd6 ! corrects to create a new
threat 2 Re6-2 Bd3 being ruled out because of the new flight
at e5. It is interesting to note that whereas White Correction
failed to threaten 2 Bd3, this initial threat is brought in by mate
transference after 1 . . . PeS and 1 . . . R x f5. Most composers
agree that mate transference (see chapter 1 0) is a very desirable
feature in Threat Correction problems.

2TI THREATCORRECTION
J. HANNELWS
Second Prize ex aequo,
Die Schwa/be, 1950/11
Try 1 eS--?, threat 2 Bc3
Rxc5!
Try 1 Sd2!?, threat 2 Rd3
Bxc5!
Key 1 Sd6!!, threat 2 Sb5
Rxc5; 2 Rd3
Bxc5 ; 2 Bc3
Kxc5; 2 Sb5

The threat correction of No. 276, where an initial threat is


corrected once, is carried a little further in No. 277. Here, an
initial threat is corrected twice. 1 eS random? threatens
2 Bc3 mate-but 1 . . . R x c5 ! A correction 1 Sd2 !? eliminates
2 Bc3 but by adding a guard to c4, threatens 2 Rd3. This fails
to the pinning defence 1 . . . B x c5 ! A further correction,
the key 1 Sd6 !, rules out both 2 Bc3 and 2 Rd3 as threats
because of the flight at c5 but threatens 2 Sb5 mate. Mate
transference brings in the original threats 2 Bc3 and 2 Rd3 after
the self-blocks 1 . . . B x c5 and 1 . . . R x c5. Incidental to the
threat correction, there is a reciprocal relationship between the
threats which the defences prevent in the try play, and the mates
which the defences realise in the post-key play.
A curious recent development not far removed from Threat
Correction is the Dombrovskis Theme. There is no true
1 30
White Correction and Threat Correction
correction element but there are different threats by different
pieces, and there is a special relationship between the threats
and the defences to the tries. In No. 278, by the originator of
the theme, 1 Bel ? threatens 2 Sf4 but 1 . . . Bd2! 1 Sg3?

278 DOMBROVSKIS THEME


A. DoMBROVSKIS
First Prize,
Prob/eemblad, 1958
Try 1 Bel ?, threat 2 Sf4
Bd2!
Try 1 Sg3 ?, threat 2 Rd4
Qe2!
Key 1 Se3 !, threat 2 Qc2
Bd2; 2 Sf4
Qe2; 2 Rd4

threatens 2 Rd4 but 1 ... Qe2! The key 1 Se3 ! threatens 2 Qc2
and now the very defences which defeated 2 Sf4 and 2 Rd4 in
the try play give those same mates in the actual play when the
black B and Q play to defeat 2 Qc2-1 . . . Bd2; 2 Sf4 and
1 ... Qe2; 2 Rd4! Problem No. 290 enriches the paradoxical
Dombrovskis Theme-by providing changed mates for the non­
defeating thematic defences.

P. c. AsBURY-SMITH 279
Correspondence Chess, 1957 2nd prize,
British Chess Magazine, 1963
131
White Correction and Threat Correction

B. P. BARNES 281 282


3rd bon. mention, Sahs, 1964 B. P. BARNES & A. C. R.EEVFS
Die Schwa/be, 1966

A.C.R�v� � J. M. RICE
2nd bon. mention ex aequo, 6th hon. mention,
British Chess Magazine, 1965 Probleemblad, 1964

J. E. DRIVER
4th commend, Die Schwa/be, 1st prize, B.C.P.S. Ring Tourney,
1962 1963

132
White Correction and Threat Correction

B. P. BARNES 287 M. LIPTON 288


British Chess Magazine, 1963 3rd prize, Die Schwa/be, 1962

A. R. GOODERSON 289 B. P. BARNES 290


3rd prize, 1st commend., Die Schwa/be,
British Chess Magazine, 1963 1962

133
CHAPTER TWELVE

Patterns
We have already discussed a number of problems in which
much of the interest is centred on the recurrence of mates in
different phases of the play. TheRukhlis problems in chapter
10, for example, depend for their effect on the fact that the same
mates occur after different defences in the two phases, with new
mates following the original defences after the key. In this
chapter on pattern play, we come to problems whose theme is
the relationship between moves, rather than the strategy of the
moves themselves. Unfortunately, not all problemists agree
that problems of this kind 1;1.re valuable. We invite you to study
the examples we discuss, and then make up your own mind.

RECIPROCAL AND CYCLIC BLACK CORRECTION

Reciprocal Correction in actual play occurs in its most common


form when the random. and correction moves of a black piece
X allow mates A and B respectively, and the random and
correction moves of another black piece Y allow mates B and
A respectively. Less commonly, the AB: BA reciprocal pattern
follows the moves of a single black piece if it is a line-moving
piece-B, R or Q-and the two pairs of random and correction
moves are confined to different lines.
Why an AB: BA thematic mating pattern emerges in reciprocal
correction is seen from a study of Kidson's No.291 . 1 ... dS
random? makes the general error of opening the line of the
whiteR's guard to d6, one of Black's two flight-squares d6 and
b4-and White mates by 2 Sd3 (Mate A). A correction
1 ... Sb4! prevents 2 Sd3 but makes the secondary error of
self-blocking flight-square b4. White now mates by 2 Se4
(Mate B). 1 . cS random? makes the general error of opening
. .

the line of the white R's guard to b4---and 2 Se4 (Mate B)


follows. The self-blocking secondary error of the correction
1 34
Patterns
1 ... Sd6! permits 2 Sd3 (Mate A). Reciprocal effect is here
achieved because the general error of the random move of each
of two black pieces gives the same mate as the secondary error
of the correction move of the other black piece.
T. R. Dawson's celebrated No. 292 legitimately confines the
random and correction moves of both the black R and B to
RECIPROCAL CORRECTION
H. E. KIDsoN
Illustrated London News, 1880
Key 1 Re3, zugzwang
dS-; 2 Sd3 (A)
Sb4 !; 2 Se4 (B)
cS-; 2 Se4 (B)
Sd6!; 2 Sd3 (A)

292 DOUBLE RECIPROCAL


CORRECTION
T. R. DAWSON
(version by J. KNCiPPEL)
Problemist, 1 929
Key 1 Sc4, zugzwang
R- on file; 2 Qg2 (A)
Rb4 !; 2 Sa5 (B)
B- NE/SW; 2 Sa5 (B)
Be3 !; 2 Qg2 (A)
R- on rank; 2 Qb6 (C)
Re3 ! ; 2 Rh 6 (D)
B- NW/SE; 2 Rh6 (D)
Bb4 !; 2 Qb6 (C)

different lines in turn, to produce double reciprocal correction


in actual play. Whether or not this or the double Grimshaw
which the problem also displays was the composer's prime
intention is unimportant. The problem has two pairs of mates,
which occur in the reciprocal pattern AB: BA/CD: DC.
Interest lies more in the way in which the pattern of mates is
achieved than in the actual mates themselves, yet, surprisingly,
reciprocal correction is a far from recent idea. Look at the
date of No. 291! Another giant of the English problem scene,
J. Rayner, had made an example of the theme also in 1880-
135
Patterns
more than 50 years before the idea was to become widely
popular and be associated with the name of T. E. Feldmann.
The Dutch master composer, E. Visserman, was one of the
first to realise that the key to the possibilities of reciprocal
correction was the combination of pairs of corresponding
general and secondary errors giving the same white mate-as
shown in Nos. 291 and 292. C. J. Morse's recent classification
of corresponding errors makes clear that problems showing
reciprocal correction in actual play fall into three main groups :

Group !-Line-opening and Self-block


General Error :
Opening of line of white guard on square in black K's field.
Secondary Error:
Self-block.
Group 11-Unpin
General Error :
Unpin by withdrawal.
Secondary Error:
Unpin by interference.

Group 111-Unguard by a Line-moving Piece


General Error :
(a) Guarding piece moving off the guard line.
(b) Guarding piece being pinned by moves of another
black piece off a half-pin line or a masked half-pin line.
(c) Line-clearance to permit double check.
Secondary Error :
(d) Interference with the guarding piece.
(e) Guarding piece moving on to the guarded square.
(f) Guarding piece moving on to a square where its guard
is obstructed.
(g) Guarding piece pinning itself on the guard line.

Illustrative of Group I is Kidson's problem with its two pairs


of line-opening and self-block errors. The variations leading to
mate A in Visserman's No. 293 are typical of Group 11, with
the general withdrawal-unpin error 1 . . . Q random ? and the
136
Patterns
secondary interference-unpin error 1 . . . Be5 ! ? The variations
leading to mate B represent the most common combination of
Group lll unguard-errors-{a) + (d)-shown four times in
No. 292. No. 294 shows a different pair of unguard errors­
(c) + (g)-alongside a pair of Group I errors. Jeremy Morse
293 RECIPROCAL CORRECTION
E. VISSERMAN
Jaarboek, 1942
Key 1 Pxh7, zugzwang
Q- ; 2 Qg6 (A)
Qg5!; 2 Rxh4 (B)
B- NE; 2 Rxh4 ( B)
Be5! ; 2 Qg6 (A)

294 RECIPROCAL CORRECTION


E. VISSERMAN
Joorboek, 1942
Key 1 Qg5, threat 2 Qe3
5R- ; 2 Re7 (A)
ReS! ; 2 Sf6 ( B)
B- ; 2 Sf6 (B)
Bxg4! ; 2 Re7 (A)

has established that all combinations of general and secondary


errors in Group Ill are possible.
Visserman's No. 295 is one of the earliest examples of
Cyclic* Black Correction in which three pairs of corresponding
general and secondary black errors allowing the same white
mate extend the reciprocal pattern to a cycle of AB: BC: CA­
as the solution by the diagram shows. The combination of
three pairs of line-opening and self-block errors in No. 295 is
• The adjective "reciprocal" is used when two elements are involved (A and B),
"cyclic" when the number is increased to three or more (A, B and C, etc.).
137
Patterns
the most common method of achieving cyclic black correction.
No. 3 18 has three different pairs of corresponding errors.
For many years, composers assumed that a four-fold correc­
tion cycle-AB: BC: CD: DA-was only just possible by ortho­
dox means. There were simply not enough pieces in the box
to arrange four pairs of corresponding general and secondary
295 CYCLIC CORRECTION
E. VISSERMAN
First Prize,
Ti.Jdschrift v.d.K.N.S.B., 1941
Key 1 Sd5, zugzwang
cS-; 2Qg4 (A)
Se5 !; 2Sd2 (B)
rs-; 2sd2 (B)
S x e3 !; 2Sf6 (C)
R-; 2Sf6 (C)
R x d5 ! ; 2Qg4 (A)

296 CYCLIC CORRECTION


M. PARTHASARATIIY
First Prize,
B.C.F. Tourney, 1962-3
Key I Ba6, zugzwang
cS-; 2S x f4 (A)
Sd4!; 2Bc4 (B)
R- on file; 2 Bc4 (B)
Rf5 !; 2Q x f5 (C)
R- on rank; 2Qf5 (C)
Re4! ; 2Qd7 (D)
B-; 2Qd7 (D)
B x c5!; 2S x f4 (A)
errors by four black men. The only worthwhile example had
an unprovided check and a P=Q key ! Then, in 1962, Jeremy
Morse, studying Dawson's No. 292 in an article in the British
Chess Magazine, realised that corresponding errors made by a
line-moving piece confined first to one line and then another
effected the economies in material necessary to show the four­
fold cycle artistically. The talented Indian, M. Parthasarathy,
demonstrates his skill in No. 296 where a flight-giving key is
added to make a most artistic presentation of four-fold cyclic
black correction. It was inevitable that a five-fold cycle should
138
Patterns
follow: of his two achievements of this task, Parthasarathy's
No. 297 is probably the better. The AB:BC:CD:DE:EA
pattern of five-fold cyclic black correction is evident from the
solution by the diagram.

21J7 CYCLIC CORRECTION


M. PARTHASARATIIY
First Hon. Mention,
Die Schwa/be, 1963
Key 1 Pg7, zugzwang
Q,..... on rank; 2Pg8= Q (A)
Qa2+; 2Bxa2 (B)
Q,..... on file; 2Ba2 (B)
Qe4; 2Qd6 (C)
s ;...... 2Qd6 (C)
Se5·' 2Qd4 (D)
B....., NW/SE ; 2Qd4 (D)
Bd8 +; 2Rxd8 (E)
B....., NE/SW; 2Rd8 (E)
Be5; 2Pg8= Q (A)

2.98 CHANGED RECIPROCAL


CORRECTION
L. SALAI
Second Prize,
Ceskoslovensky Sach, 1961
Try 1 cRd5 ?, zugzwang
5R,...;.. 2Re6 (A)
Rxf5 !; 2Rd4 (B)
4R,.....; 2Rd4 (B)
Rxf4 !; 2Re6 (A)
Kxf4 ! !
Key 1 Ba4!, zugzwang
5R,..... ; 2Bc6 (C)
Rxf5 !; 2Rc4 (D)
4R,..... ; 2Rc4 (D)
Rxf4 ! ; 2Bc6 (C)

Like most actual-play themes, reciprocal correction has found


contemporary expression in phases other than that following
the key. The greater canvas of set and try play has enabled
composers to show changed reciprocal correction-Salai's No.
298 has a virtual-actual change. 1 cRd5 ? gives the AB : BA
reciprocal pattern of mates after random and correction moves
139
Patterns
of the black Rs--but 1 . . . K x f4 ! 2 6Re4. The cunning
retreating key 1 Ba4 ! gives a CD :DC pattern of changed mates.
Reciprocal correction may be split over two phases as in No.
321, where one black piece in the try play gives AB and another
in the actual play gives BA. A more sophisticated means of
achieving the AB: BA pattern is shown in No. 299 which is just

299 RECIPROCAL CORRECTION


(SET-ACTUAL)
E. LIVSHITS

First Prize,
Dnepropetrovsk Tourney, 1957
Set s-; 2 Sc6 (A)
Se4!;
2 Rd3 (B)
Key 1 Qf5, threat 2Qe5
S- ; 2 Rd3 (B)
Se4! ; 2Sc6 (A)

300 DOUBLE RECIPROCAL


CORRECTION (VIRTUAL-ACTUAL)
H. HERMANSON
Second Prize,
Problem Theme Tourney, 1959
Try 1 Pc6 ?, threat 2Qd5
eR- ; 2 Bc5 (A)
Rxc6! ; 2Sxc6 (B)
eR- ; 2Se6 (C)
Rxe5 ! ; 2Bxe5 (D)
Kd3!
Key 1 Pe6 !, threat 2 Rd5
eR- ; 2 Sc6 (B)
Rxc5! ; 2 Bxc5 (A)
eR- ; 2 Be5 (D)
Rxe6 ! ; 2 Sxe6 (C)

as much an example of reciprocal change with black correction


as of split reciprocal correction. In the set play, mates A and
B follow 1 . . . S random ? and 1 . . . Se4 ! ? respectively : in the
post-key play, mates are reciprocally changed to B and A. No.
300 doubles this idea, with different correction moves, after try
and key. It is worth noting that the disruptive effect of a try
140
Patterns
or key .in splifreciprocal correction complicates the pairing of
corresponding general and secondary errors tabulated for
problems in actual play only.
The black arrival correction of No. 301 is yet another means
of showing the AB: BA pattern. Mter the key, a random
capture of the white Sf4, 1 . . . S x f4, prevents the threat but
the self-blocking arrival error permits 2 Kd2 (Mate A). 1 . . .
B x f4 ! is a correction in that it prevents the threat and 2 Kd2
but the error of this further arrival at f4 (opening the line

301 RECIPROCAL ARRIVAL


--�� CORRECTION
P. OVERKAMP
Jaarboek, 1942
Key 1 Sf4, threat 2 Sg6
S x f4; 2 Kd2 (A)
Bxf4 !; 2 Kd3 (B)
Pxf5; 2 Kd3 (B)
Bxf5 !; 2 Kd2 (A)
(Se7; 2 Kxb4)

h5-f5) allows 2 Kd3 (Mate B). Similarly, 1 . . . P x f5 prevents


the threat but permits 2 Kd3 (Mate B) because of the self­
blocking arrival error : the line-opening error of the arrival
correction 1 . . . B x f5 ! allows 2 Kd2 (Mate A).

RECIPROCAL AND CYCLIC CHANGE


Consider the moves 1 . . . Pc4 and 1 . . . B x e4 in the mutate
No. 302. In the set play these lead respectively to the mates
2 S x c6 and 2 Pd4 ; White exploits the half-pin in each case
(chapter 2). The key 1 Qe1 abandons the half-pin arrangement,
but provides a further guard for e4, so that now 1 . . . Pc4
allows 2 Pd4 (which previously followed 1 . . . B x e4). The
key also turns 1 . . . B x e4 into a self-pin of the B, so that the
mate following that move is now 2 S x c6 (which before was the
mate after 1 . . . Pc4). Such an interchange of mates following
a pair of defences is known as reciprocal change. Defences X
141
Patterns
and Y lead to mates A and B in the set play or the virtual play,
and to mates B and A after the key. lbis is a favourite modem
theme, which has been extensively studied by composers of
many countries, notably Russia and Israel, as well as Great
Britain. That the theme is not new, however, is shown by the
date of Faulkner's example, thought to be the first.

302 RECIPROCAL CHANGE


W. J. FAULKNER
Fourth Prize ex aequo,
Good Companions, 1924
Set: Pc4; 2 Sxc6 (A)
Bxe4 ; 2 Pd4 (B)
Key 1 Qel, zugzwang
Pc4 ; 2 Pd4 (B)
Bxe4; 2 Sxc6 (A)

303 RECIPROCAL CHANGE


(JNTERFERENCES)
s. BREHMER
First Prize, Schach, 1952
Set: dSe5 ; 2 SfS (A)
fSe5 ; 2 Qxg3 ( B)
Key 1 Sf6, threat 2 Qg4
dSeS; 2 Qxg3 (B)
fSe5 ; 2 Sf5 (A)
( Sh6 ; 2 Qh5)

Reciprocal change has been applied at various times to


practically every two-move theme, from the simplest to the
most complex. We shall discuss here only some of the most
common themes into which reciprocal change has been incor­
porated. One such is the half-pin, as in No. 302; another is
Black Correction, as we have seen in No. 299.
Black interference has yielded its share of reciprocal change
problems. Sometimes the interference occurs in only one of the
two phases or in only one variation, but in No. 303 there is
142
Patterns
black interference in both variations in both phases. Notice
how the key opens one prospective black line (b1-f5), but closes
another (f8-f5), and shifts the S's guard from g3 to h5 : all this
strategy is essential for the reciprocal change to work. In both
phases the random arrival on e5 allows 2 Sf5, while the correc­
tion arrival, opening both black and white lines, allows 2 Q x g3.

304 RECIPROCAL CHANGE


,......-.,..,
(FLIGWS)
A. DOMBROVSKIS
Second Prize,
Schachmaty, 1950
Set: Ke3 ; 2 Se2 (A)
KgS ; 2 SxhS (B)
Key 1 Qb6, threat 2 Qx h6
Ke3 ; 2 Sxh5 (B)
Kg5 ; 2 Se2 (A)

305 RECIPROCAL CHANGE


(FLIGHTS)
V. F. RunENKO and V. I. TCHEPIZHNI
Fourth Prize, Problem, 1958
Set : Kxc5 ; 2 Qxb4 (A)
Ke4 ; 2 Qxe3 (B)
Key 1 Sf4, threat 2 Qd5
Kxc5 ; 2 Qxe3 (B)
Ke4 ; 2 Qxb4 (A)

Many problems have been made showing reciprocal change


after flights. No. 304 is a little known example by the editor of
the problem section of the Latvian magazine Sahs. The rather
unexpected key by the Q produces reciprocal change after
1 . . . Ke3 and 1 . . . Kg5 by altering the guards on three of the
squares in the black K's extended :field, and by opening the
black line a2-g2. No. 305 is a much more complex example,
with pin-mates throughout. The key-move again alters the
guards on various squares in the black K's :field, and also
143
Patterns
prepares for· the pin of the Re5 after 1 . . . K x c5. Not all
examples of reciprocal change after flights are as rich in
thematic strategy or as ingeniously constructed as this one.
The theme that has provided more examples of reciprocal
change than any other is that of Unpin of White by Black (see
chapter 4). The set play of No. 306 is introduced by the very
plausible try 1 Qb5 ? The black Q defends by capturing a
white piece to give a potential flight-square, but in doing so
unpins the Bd2 and allows the R + B battery to open. The B
must take care to guard the new flight when mating : 1
306 RECIPROCAL CHANGE
(UNPIN OF WIDTE)
I. BIRBRAGER
lst prize, Lenin Tourney, 1951
Set : Q x c4 ; 2 Bf4 (A)
Q x g6 ; 2 Bb4 (B)
(Try l Qb5 ?, threat 2 Qd7,
Sc5!)
Key l Qh7 !, threat 2 Qd7
Q x c4 ; 2 Bb4 (B)
Q x g6; 2 Bf4 (A)

Q x c4 ; 2 Bf4 (not 2 Bb4?), and 1 Q x g6 ; 2 Bb4 (not


2 Bf4 ?). The key reverses these mates by providing a second
guard for c7 and e7, and at the same time removing the second
guard from c5 and e5. It is now these squares that the B must
guard after the unpins.
A rather unusual arrangement is found in No. 307. In making
the key, the white Q leaves the masked battery-line, but pins
the white S. The variations by the Rd5 are now unpins,
instead of unmaskings of the battery, and the S, in mating, can
interfere with the white Rs, because the Q now guards c5
and e5.
Let us now see what happens when a third black defence is
added to the scheme. Black has defences X, Y and Z, and these
lead in the set play to mates A, B and C respectively. The key
then shifts these mates, so that X, Y and Z are now followed
respectively by B, C and A. Such a thematic mating pattern is
called a cyclic shift. Logically, there could be a third phase in
144
Patterns
which X, Y and Z lead to C, A and B in that order, but formid­
able constructional difficulties lie in the way of this task!
It would be wrong to suggest that No. 308 is a simple
example of a cyclic shift, for no example of this complex
thematic pattern could be described as simple! Rudenko's
problem does, however, have the merit of clarity. The thematic

307 RECIPROCAL CHANGE


(SET SELF-BLOCKS, ACTUAL
UNPINS)
L. LOSHINSK.I
First Prize,
Latvian Chess Club Tourney, 1950
Set : Rxc5; 2 Sb5 (A)
Rxe5 ; 2 dSf5 (B)
(Qxe3 ; 2 Qxg4)
Key 1 Qe7, threat 2 eSf5
Rxc5 ; 2 dSf5 (B)
Rxe5 ; 2 Sb5 (A)
(Qxe3 ; 2 Rxg4)

308 CYCLIC SIDFT


V. F. RUDENKO
Praca, 1958
Set : Qxd4 ; 2 Rxe4 (A)
Qxf4 ; 2 Sc6 (B)
Bc6 ; 2 Sg6 (C)
Key 1 Qh2, threat 2 Rxd5
Qxd4; 2 Sg6 (C)
Qxf4 ; 2 Rxe4 (A)
Bc6 ; 2 Sxc6 (B)

defences 1 . . . Q x d4, 1 . . Q x f4 and 1 . . . Bc6 are, in the set


.

play, a self-pin, a self-block and an unguard respectively. The


key interchanges the first two, and for the third allows White
to take advantage of a different unguard (c6 instead of g6). A
study of the variations as set out beside the diagram will reveal
the method by which this cyclic shift is achieved.
10 145
Patterns
PERMUTATION EFFECTS
Cyclic Refutation
Imagine a problem scheme in which Black has three defences
which are used in turn to defeat three thematic tries-and White
provides mates for the other pair of black defences after each
try and for all three defences in the actual play. Such a scheme
would exemplify Cyclic Refutation. But this same scheme is a
feature of many ordinary mutates (see p. 14) which are in no
way interesting as pattern-problems. Cyclic Refutation as a
thematic pattern becomes interesting only when White's mates
are changed in the various phases.

309 CYCLIC REFUTATION


H. GRASEMANN
First Place,
Baden v. Berlin, 1953
(For solution, see text.)

No. 309 is an attractive example. Any move by White's


Se5 threatens 2 Qe5, and Black has three defences which defeat
this threat, 1 . . . Sd6, 1 . . . B x d4 and 1 . . . Bd6. A random
move by the white S (e.g. 1 Sf7 ?) fails to all three of these
defences. The three tries fail to each in turn, while the key
introduces mates for them all. As will be seen from the tabu­
lated solution below (which, incidentally, shows the cyclic

1
White mate in reply, after
Black defence
I S random ? 1 1 Sf3 ! ? 1 1 Sg4 ! ? 1 1 Sg6 ! ? I Key 1 Sd3 ! !
1 . . . Sd6 none 2 Sc3 2 Sf6 none 2 Sc3

l . . . B x d4 none 2 R x d4 none 2 Se7 2 Sb4

1 . . . Bd6 none none 2 Qg8 2 Qg8 2 Qb3

1 46
Patterns
nature of the theme), White has seven different mating moves­
bear in mind that three different mating moves are the uninter­
esting minimum. A problem illustrating three-fold cyclic
refutation can have nine different mating moves, but the ideal
is very hard to attain.

Cyclic Mating Permutation


310 PERMUTATION : CYCLIC MATES
�-=,----,;;:,...-�
E. VISSERMAN
First Hon. Mention ex aequo,
Dutch Problem Society Jubilee Tourney,
1961
(For solution, see text.)

This theme is closely related to Cyclic Refutation, but there


are only three phases instead of four, and the same mates recur,
in a cyclic patter:n, after different defences. The cyclic pattern
is thus achieved by an ordered combination of changed play
and mate transference. There are two possible basic arrange­
ments for this theme. In the first, illustrated by No. 3 1 0, Black
has three thematic pieces, each controlling two mating squares,
in such a way that piece X controls squares A and B, piece Y
controls squares B and C, and piece Z controls squares C and
A. In each phase White destroys the control exercised by one
of these pieces, by interference if it is a line-piece, by direct pin,

Black move Try 1 Qc7 ? Try 1 Qc3 ? Key 1 Q x e2!

1 . . . Bd3 (X) 2 R x d5 (A) 2 Sf3 (C) Impossible


1 . . . Sb5 (Y) 2 Sc6 (B) Impossible 2 Sf3 (C)
1 . . . Rc6 (Z) Impossible 2 S x c6 (B) 2 R x d5 (A)

Refutation : 1 . . . Rcl ! 1 . . . B x f5 ! None !

1 47
Patterns
or sometimes even by capture. In Visserman's example, the
three thematic black pieces (Rd6, Sd4 and Be4) control between
them the mating squares d5, c6 and f3, and can also defend a
threat of 2 Sc4. The above tabulated solution shows what
happens when each of these three pieces becomes pinned in
turn in the three phases.
The second basic method of setting this theme is found in
No. 3 1 1 . Here Black has three line-pieces all controlling a
white R+S battery. In the two tries and the key White's Rg3
closes one of these lines ; Black, in defending against the threat
of 2 Qg2 by pinning the white Q, himself destroys a second
control ; and finally White shuts off the remaining control in
mating. A good feature of this problem, the best in the tourney
in which it gained only 5th hon. mention, is that the half-pin is
complete after the key.

Black move Try 1 Rb3 ? Try 1 Rc3 ? Key 1 Re3 !

1. . . Rb8 (X) 2 Sc3 (A) 2 Sb2 (C) 2 Rei (d)


1. . . Qf8 (Y) 2 Se3 (B) None 2 Sb2 (C)
I . . . ReS (Z) None 2 Se3 (B) 2 Sc3 (A)

Scores of problems have been composed showing this theme


in its simplest form, in settings similar to that of No. 3 1 1 but
without the refinements of the black half-pin line and pinning
defences. A number of variants on these basic themes may be
found among the problems for solving.

REDUCED ZAGORUYKO

With No. 3 1 2 we revert to two thematic variations only, but


now we have three phases instead of two. The set mates for
the self-block captures on d3 and f3 by Pe4 are white interfer­
ences by the B. The try 1 Sd4 ? (2 Q X e2) rules out 2 Bd4 by
blocking that square, but 2 Bf4 is now possible after 1 . . .

P X d3 because f3 is guarded. 2 Bf4 is not a threat, however,


for 1 Sd4 ? has the further effect of making d3 a flight-square
by interfering with the Rd8. 1 . . . P x f3 leads to a different
white-interference mate, 2 Sf5, which lets through the R's
148
Patterns
guard to d3 once again. But 1 . . . Rg2 ! foils White's plans, so
instead he must play 1 Sf4 !, now giving a flight on f3. Neither
of the two mates of the try-play can now be played, but 2 Bd4
becomes available once more, and is the mate after 1 . . . P x f3.
As you would expect from the symmetry of the position,
1 . . . P x d3 now allows 2 SdS, yet another white-interference
311 PERMUTATION : CYCUC MATES
M. PARTHASARATHY and
S. SUBRAHMANYAM
Fifth Hon. Mention,
B.C.F. Tourney, 1961-2
(For solution, see text.)

312 REDUCED ZAGORUYKO


--=-------��
F. w. NANNING
First Prize,
11 Due Mosse, 1955
Set : Pxd3 ; 2 Bd4 (A)
Pxf3 ; 2 Bf4 (B)
Try 1 Sd4?, threat 2 Qxe2
Pxd3 ; 2 Bf4 (B)
Pxf3 ; 2 Sf5 (C)
Rg2 !
Key 1 Sf4 !, threat 2 Q X e2
Pxd3 ; 2 Sd5 (d)
Pxf3 ; 2 Bd4 (A)

mate. So this problem shows a reciprocal change of the set


mates, but over two phases of the play, and with two other
mates incorporated as well. The problem illustrates the Zago­
ruyko theme (see page 1 9), but, to execute the usual six white
mates following the two defences in the three phases, there are
here only four thematic moves. Such a pattern is called a
reduced Zagoruyko, because there is a thematic reduction of
mating moves. Some problemists have criticised the reduced
1 49
Patterns
Zagoruyko on the grounds that the composer should aim at
incorporating into his problem as many thematic mating moves
as possible. But not everybody agrees that this aim is necessarily
desirable. Many of the finest modern themes-such as mate
transference and all aspects of reciprocal and cyclic play­
depend for their effect on relationships between various moves

313 REDUCED ZAGORUYKO


(CYCLIC CHANGE)
V. I. TCHEPIZHNI
First Prize ex aequo,
Galitzky Memorial Tourney, 1 964
(a) Key 1 Sf4, zugzwang
Kc5 ; 2 Qd5 (A)
Ke4 ; 2 Q x b4 (B)
(b) Key 1 Rd6, zugzwang
Kc5 ; 2 Q x b4 (B)
Ke4 ; 2 Q x e3 (C)

(a) diagram (c) Key 1 Sb6, zugzwang


(b) Pg2 to g4 Kc5 ; 2 Q x e3 (C)
(c) Pf5 to c6 Ke4 ; 2 Qd5 (A)

and the patterns created by the distinct lines of play. And it is


precisely these fields of. composition that are currently the
richest in strategic ideas and that provide the greatest contem­
porary composers with their finest inspirations.
The triple-setting problem No. 3 1 3, with its two thematic
defences, has only three thematic mates, but each defence is
followed by a different mate in each part ! Defences X and Y
lead to mates A and B in the first position, to mates B and C
in the second, and to mates C and A in the third-a complete
cycle of mates. This problem, therefore, in addition to being a
reduced Zagoruyko, exemplifies cyclic change. Readers may
like to compare the setting with that of No. 305.
The heterogeneous mixture of problems that follows is not
intended to indicate all that has been achieved in the field of
pattern play, but rather to offer the solver something in the way
of a challenge. Solve and appreciate these problems, and you
will be well on the way to a full understanding of the contem­
porary two-move chess problem !
1 50
Patterns

C. J. MORSE 315
1st hon. mention, B.C.P.S. Ring 4th hon. mention,
Tourney, 1959 British Chess Magazine, 1962

J. M. RICE 316 B. P. BARNES 317


1st prize, 2nd hon. mention,
American Chess Bulletin, 1959 American Chess Bulletin, 1958

C. J. MORSE 318
Problemist, 1965 2nd prize,
British Chess Magazine, 1962
151
Patterns

J. M. RICE 320 B. P. BARNES 321


British Chess Magazine, 1966 1/ Due Mosse, 1959

N. A. MACLEOD 323
Correspondence Chess, 1962 Commended,
British Chess Magazine, 1961

A. C. REEVES 324 B. P. BARNES 325


British Chess Magazine, 1963 2nd hon. mention,
British Chess Magazine, 1964
1 52
Patterns

N. A. MACLEOD 326 B. P. BARNFS 3rt


1st hon. mention, Sunday Times, 1964
British Chess Magazine, 1962

M. LIProN 328 M. LIProN


5th prize, 1st prize, B.C.P.S. McWilliam
British Chess Magazine, 1955 Tourney, 1956

B. P. BARNFS J. M. RICE 331


Schach-Echo, 1961 Version, Correspondence Chess,
1962

1 53
Patterns

B. P. BARNES
Jrd prize, Skakbladet, 1961 American Chess Bulletin, 1960

B. P. BARNES 334 · M. LIPTON 335


2nd hon. mention, Cornrnended, Problemnoter, 1 960
British Chess Magazine, 1961

336 A. c. REEVES 337


J. M. R.ICE (after B. P. BARNES Europe Echecs, 1963
& C. VAUGHAN)
The Tablet, 1962
1 54
Pattern s

B. P. BARNES 338 B. P. BARNES 339


5th hon. mention, Die Schwa/be, 5th prize, B.C.P.S. Ring Tour­
1961 ney, 1962

B. P. BARNFS 340 M. LIPTON 341


2nd hon. mention, 3rd hon. mention, Probleemblad,
Problemnoter, 1961 1957

M. LIPTON 342 N. A. MACLEOD


Die Schwalbe, 1964 Parallele 50, 1950
155
Patterns

B. P. BARNES 344
1st prize, B.C.P.S. McWilliam L . DAWSON & c. P.
Tourney, 1958 FARLOW
Die Schwa/be, 1962

B. P. BARNES 346 B. P. BARNES 347


1st prize, Prob/emnoter, 1961 4th prize, Die Schwa/be, 1960

M. LIPTON 348 M. LIPTON 349


3rd prize, B.C.P.S. 40th Anni­ 1 st hon. mention,
versary Tourney, 1959/60 Tidskrift for Schack, 1961
156
Patterns

J. M. RICE 350 J. M. RICE 351


Problemisten, 1963 Schakend Nederland, 1963

M. LIPToN 35:Z
/1 Due Mosse, 1957 2nd hon. mention,
Problem Theme Tourney, 1961

J. M. RICE 354 J. M. RICE 355


Die Schwa/be, 1963 5th hon. mention, Probleemblad,
Three solutions 1963

1 57
Solutions to Problems for Solving
CHAPTER 1
11. Set : 1 . . . Ka4 ; 2 Kc3. 1 . . . Kc5 ; 2 Kb3. Try 1 S ran­
dom + ?, Kc4 ! Try 1 S x d6+ ! ?, Kc5 ! Key 1 Sa3 + !,
Ka4 ; 2 Kb2. 1 . . . Kc5 ; 2 Kd3. 1 . . . K x a3 ; 2 Ral .
Changes, with the thematic mates delivered by indirect
Royal batteries (white piece + white K) in each phase­
impossible without a checking key.
12. Try 1 cS x d4 ? (threat 2 Bc6/c4), Kc5 ; 2 S x e6. 1 . . .
Ke5 ; 2 S x f3 . 1 . . . Qc5 ! Key 1 eS x d4 ! (threat 2
Bc6/c4), Kc5 ; 2 Sb3. 1 . . Ke5 ; 2 Sc6. 1 . . . Pc5 ;
.

2 S x f3. Each white S must avoid playing to a square


guarded by a piece whose line it has opened on its first
move.
13. Try 1 Qc2 ?, K x d7 ; 2 Qc6. 1 . . . K x f7 ; 2 Q x g6. 1 . . .
Pg5 ! Try 1 Bc5 ?, K x d7 ; 2 Pe8 =Q. 1 . . . K x f7 ;
2 Pe8 = S. 1 . . . Pg5 ! Key 1 Bg5 ! (zugzwang), K x d7 ;
2 Pe8 =S. 1 . . . K x f7 ; 2 Pe8 =Q. The Zagoruyko
theme : the two K-fligb.ts have different mates in the three
phases. Have another look at this problem after you have
studied the examples of reciprocal change and reduced
Zagoruyko in chapter 1 2 !
14. Set : 1 . . . Kb7 ; 2 Sc5. 1 . . . Kd5 ; 2 Sf6. Try 1 Qfl ?
(threat 2 Qb5), Kb7 ; 2 Qa6. 1 . . . Kd5 ; 2 Qc4. 1 . . .
Pe2 ! Key 1 Qh3 ! (threat 2 Qd7), Kb7 ; 2 Qc8. 1 . . . Kd5 ;
2 Qe6. A simple but elegant Zagoruyko.
1 5. Try 1 Qe1 ?, Kf3 ; 2 Sd4. 1 . . Kd5 ; 2 eSf4. 1 . . . P x e5 !
.

Try 1 Qd1 ?, Kf3 ; 2 Sg3. 1 . . . Kd5 ; 2 Sc5. 1 . . . Pd5 !


Key 1 Qb1 ! (waiting), Kf3 ; 2 Sel . 1 . . . Kd5 ; 2 dSf4.
1 . . . Pd5 ; 2 Sel . 1 . . . P x e5 ; 2 Bc6. One of the earliest
British Zagoruykos-by a three-move expert ! Notice the
way in which the Q and Ss form both direct and indirect
batteries.
1 6. Try 1 S x d7 ?, Ke6 ; 2 Sf8. 1 . . . Ke4; 2 Sf6. 1 . . . Sg4 !
Try 1 S x f3 ?, Ke6 ; 2 Sd4. 1 . . . Ke4; 2 Sd2. 1 . Be6 !
. .

1 58
Solutions to Problems for Solving
Key 1 S x d3 ! (threat 2 Q x f5), Ke6 ; 2 Sf4. 1 . . . Ke4;
2 S x f2. 1 . . . Be6 ; 2 S x f2. 1 . . . Sg4 ; 2 Sc5. The S sets
up a different battery in each phase. Regrettably, the Rd8
and the Bh1 are idle after the key.
17. Set : 1 . . . K x h5 ; 2 Q x g6. 1 . . . Kf5 ; 2 B x e6. Try
1 S x e6 ?, K x h5 ; 2 Sf4. 1 . . . Kf5 ; 2 Sd4. 1 . . . Kf3 ;
2 Sg5. 1 . . . Pg5 ! Key 1 S X g6 ! (zugzwang), K X h5 ; 2 Sf4.
1 . . . Kf5 ; 2 S x e7. 1 . . . Kf3 ; 2 Se5. Three flights
changed from virtual to actual play, with set mates for two
of them. Perhaps this problem was rather lucky to win a
first prize ?
18. Try 1 Qg7 ?, Kc5 ; 2 Qa7. 1 . . . Ke5 ; 2 Rh6. 1 . . . Ke3 ;
2 6Rf3. 1 . . . Kc3 ; 2 6Rf3. 1 . . . Pc3 ! Key 1 Qg1 !
(zugzwang), Kc5 ; 2 2Rf5. 1 . . . Ke5 ; 2 Re2. 1 . . . Ke3 ;
2 Rg2. 1 . . . Kc3 ; 2 Qa1 . 1 . . . Pc3 ; 2 Re2. Changed
star-flights, with three of the four flights given by try and
key. A fine conception, marred only by the double appear­
ance of 2 6Rf3 in the virtual play.
19. Try 1 Qa8 ?, Kc6 ; 2 Sc5. 1 . . . Kc4 ; 2 Sa5. 1 . . . Ke4 ;
2 Sd6. 1 . . . Ke6 ; 2 R x e5. 1 . . . Pf6 ! Key 1 Bg2 !
(zugzwang), Kc6 ; 2 S x e5. 1 . . . Kc4 ; 2 Sd2. 1 . . . Ke4 ;
2 Sh4. 1 . . . Ke6 ; 2 Q x f7. Changed star-flights again.
The Rc2 is an unpleasant constructional necessity.
20. Try 1 Qdl ?, Kc4 ; 2 Sb2. 1 . . . Kc6 ; 2 S x e5. 1 . . .
K x e6 ; 2 Sc5. 1 . . . Ke4 ; 2 Sf2. 1 . . . Pe4 ! Key 1 Qa2 !
(zugzwang), Kc4 ; 2 Ra3. 1 . . . Kc6 ; 2 Rb6. 1 . . . K x e6 ;
2 Rb7. 1 . . . Ke4 ; 2 Rb4. 1 . . . Pe4 ; 2 Rb6. Yet more
changed star-flights ! The (unintentional) try 1 Rb7 ?
(1 . . . Pe4 !) gives two more changes.
21. Set : 1 . . . Kc5 ; 2 dSe4. 1 . . . Ke5 ; 2 S x f7. 1 . . . Ke3 ;
2 Sf5. 1 . . . Kc3 ; 2 Sb5. Key 1 Qg4+ , Kc5 ; 2 Qc4.
1 . . . Ke5 ; 2 Qe4. 1 . . . Ke3 ; 2 Qf4. 1 . . . Kc3 ; 2 Qb4.
The set play has mates by the Q + S battery. The checking
key replaces them by Q-mates on the fourth rank.
22. Set : 1 . . . K x c4 ; 2 Sb6. 1 . . . Ke4 ; 2 Sf6. 1 . . . Ke2 ;
2 Sf4. 1 . . . Kc2 ; 2 S x e3. Key 1 Sc7 + , K x c4 ; 2 Qb5.
1 . . . Ke4 ; 2 Qd4. 1 . . . Ke2 ; 2 Qd2. 1 . . . Kc2 ;
2 Qdl . Similar to No. 21, but here the battery S delivers
the check, to let the Q through down the file.
1 59
Solutions to Problems for Solving
CHAPTER 2
32. 1 Qa2 (zugzwang). 1 . . . R x c3 + ; 2 K x c3. 1 . . . gRf2 ;
2 Pg8 = Q. 1 . . . fRg3 ; 2 Ka3. 1 . . . Sc2 ; 2 Kb2. 1 . . .
Sd3 ; 2 Pc4. Note the change from the set 1 . . . R x c3 + ;
2 S x c3. A simple one to start with.
33. 1 Ke3 (zugzwang). 1 . . . Re6 + ; 2 Be5. 1 . . . Rc4 ; 2 Pc3.
1 . . . Rb4 ; 2 Sc3. 1 . . . R X c2 ; 2 Q x c2. 1 . . . Rc3 + ;
2 B x c3. 1 . . . Rbl ; 2 Bb2. The first and last variations,
with crosscheck and critical move respectively linked to
half-pin, are the best : in crossing the critical square b2,
1 . . . Rb1 allows the white B to cut off the wandering
Rook. Six halfpin variations, with extra battery variations
and checks, the last allowed by the key. Unfortunately
there are some multiple choices of mate after silly moves
like 1 . . . Rc6 ? ?
34. 1 bRa5 (zugzwang). 1 . . . R x a5 + /S x a5 ; 2 b x a5.
1 . . . Rb5 ; 2 Qc4. 1 . . Rc5 ; 2 P x c5. 1 . . . R on file ;
·.

2 R x e5. 1 . . . S x b4 ; 2 R x b4. 1 . . . Sd4; 2 Sc5.


1 . . . cS else ; 2 Pb5. All moves by the half-pinned men
give thematic mates-seven in all. The key completes the
block : 1 Bg3 ? cS,.._, !
35. 1 Re2, threats (Sb3) ; 2 Sbc3 and (Sb5) 2 Rd2. 1 . . . B X e2 ;
2 Pc3 (not 2 Pc4). 1 . . . S x e2; 2 Pc4 (not 2 Pc3). 1 . . .
·

K x e2 ; 2 Sac3. The half-pin is linked to dual-separating


self-blocks. In the two thematic lines, the white P must
take care to close the line Black has just opened.
36. 1 R x f3 (threat 2 R x h3). 1 . . . Bg3 ; 2 Rf2. 1 . . . Qg2 ;
2 Rfl . 1 . . . Q x h7 + ; 2 Rf5. Half-pin plus unpin of
White, by interference in the first variation, by withdrawal
in the second (combined with an unusual sort of self-pin).
The third, non-thematic, defence shows unpin plus cross­
check, and a switchback mate in which the key-piece
returns to its initial square. The halfpin-unpin combination
cannot be shown more economically-but the cost of such
miserliness is several inaccuracies (culminating in a choice
of ten mates after 1 . . . Qh4 ? ?). The authors rank economy
of force above economy of play : many experts differ from
them.
160
Solutions to Problems for Solving
37. 1 K x b7 (zugzwang). 1 . . . Qh7 + ; 2 Bd7. 1 . . . Bf3 + ;
2 Bc6. 1 . . . Qa2 ; 2 Sc2. 1 . . . B x a4 ; 2 R x a4. 1 . . .

Qd3 ; 2 Bb5. 1 . . . Bb3 ; 2 B x b3. Half-pin plus cross­


check, with a thematic key and six half-pin variations, in
Meredith. This has similar strengths and weaknesses to
the last two problems ; the dual after the flight, and the
lazy white Sd4, must be offset against the economy of
force.
38. Set : 1 . . . Q x b3 ; 2 Scl . 1 Be6 (zugzwang), Q x b3 ; 2
Sc3. 1 . . . Pd1 =Q ; 2 Sc3. 1 . . . Pdl = S ; 2 Scl . 1 . . .
Q X b1 ; 2 Ra3. The composer of this attractive mutate is
General Editor of The Prob/emist and also editor of the
flourishing problem section in The Observer, and is a tireless
worker in the cause of chess problems.
39. Try 1 Rc4 ?, dSc3/f6 ; 2 Rc3. 1 . . . eS,...._, ; 2 Rf4. 1 . . .
S x g3 ; 2 R x g3. 1 . . . S x f2 ! Key 1 Re6 ! (zugzwang),
dSc3/f6 ; 2 Rf6. 1 . . . . Sf4/e3 ; 2 B x e4. 1 . . . eS,....., ;
2 Re3. 1 . . . S x g3 ; 2 P x g3. 1 . . . S x f2 ; 2 B x d5.
Three virtual changes, with beautiful construction. In a
position like this the solver can scarcely fail to see the try,
which is at least as apparent as the key. The puzzle is to
decide why one move solves the problem and the other
doesn't.
40. Set : 1 . . . Q x f4 ; 2 Pd8 =S. 1 . . . Bg5 ; 2 Sbd4. Try
1 Sg6 ?, Qf4 ; 2 Se7. 1 . . . Bg5 ; 2 Se5. 1 . . . Qc5 ! Key
1 Se6 (zugzwang). 1 . . . Qf4 ; 2 Sd8. 1 . . . Bg4 ; 2 eSd4.
Here the Zagoruyko theme is linked to the half-pin ;
in both try and key, the white Sf4 masks the half-pin line,
and must therefore leave the sixth rank to exploit the
masked half-pin in mating. The white Re2, needed to mate
after 1 . . Q x e6, is a pity in an otherwise economical
.

problem, but at least gives an extra (non-thematic) try,


1 Ra2 ? Qd4 !
41. Try I Bh7 ? (threat 2 Qh5). 1 . . . Rf6 ; 2 B x f6. 1 . . .
P x d6 ; 2 Sg6. 1 . . . B x e4 ! Key 1 Qb5 ! (threat 2 Qb2).
1 . . . Pc4 ; 2 R x e6. 1 . . . Bb3 ; 2 Pd4. Change of de­
fences and mates, from one lateral half-pin to another,
emphasised by a try which makes the set play clear.
Compare Ceriani's problem in the text.
161
Solutions to Problems for Solving
42. Try 1 Bf7 ? (threat 2 R X g8). 1 . . . R x b1 ; 2 Sgl . 1 . . .
Rc2 ; 2 Sf2. 1 . . . Re4 ; 2 Sf4. 1 . . . Rd3 ! Key 1 hS x g5 !
(threats 2 Qh7/2 Sf7). 1 . . . R x b1 ; 2 Bdl . 1 . . Rc2 ;
.

2 Be2. 1 . . . Re4 ; 2 Bg4. 1 . . Rd3 ; 2 Bf3. 1 . . . R x d7 ;


.

2 Bf7. The half-battery mechanism produces three changed


half-pin variations, and two new ones after the key. The
cost of this extreme effect is a brutal key and double threat
-but the economy is some compensation . The cumber­
some array in the N.W. corner is to stop a cook : I Qg6 ?
Q x e6 !
43. Try I Sb x c7 ? Ba7 ; 2 Se7. I . Q x c7 ; 2 Se3. 1 . . .
. .

Qd4 ! Key 1 dS X c7 ! (zugzwang). 1 . . . Ba7 ; 2 Sd6.


1 . . . Q x c7 ; 2 Sd4. A distant cousin of No. 40. Here
the two Ss mask the half-pin ; in turn, each makes the first
move, to allow its partner to complete the unmasking at
the mating move. There is a good deal of by-play, none of
it very thrilling. It is fortunate that the less likely S­
nearer the black K to begin with-makes the key. These
last two problems show radically different ways of inte­
grating the themes of this chapter and chapter 8.

CHAPTER 3
50. 1 S x g5 (threat 2 Qf4). 1 . . . R-.. on file + ; 2 Sf3. 1 . ..
R on rank + ; 2 Bf3. 1 . . . Rd4+ ; 2 Se4. 1 . . . Qd4 ;
2 Bfl . I . . . PeS ; 2 Se6. The key opens the black B + R
battery, to give three distinct checking variations. Unfor­
tunately it also provides for the flight at d4, but the by-play
is of more interest than is usual with cross-checkers.
5 1 . 1 Qe2 (threat 2 Rd5). 1 . . . R x f5 + ; 2 Rc3. 1 . . . Rd5 + ;
2 Se5. 1 . . . ReS + ; 2 cSd4. 1 . . . R on file + ; 2 fSd4.
The four cross-checks are combined, in turn, with unguard,
interference, White interference and line-opening. Thematic
key, but no by-play, and-perhaps more seriously-a pawn
position that cannot be explained unless there were promo­
tions in the game that produced it.
52. 1 Pg5 (threat 2 Bf3). 1 . . . Rb2+ ; 2 Sd2. 1 . . . Rc2+ ;
2 Be2. 1 . . . Bc5 + ; 2 Se3. The first two variations
combine cross-check with half-pin and black interference,
the last with interference alone. The key provides for
1 62
Solutions to Problems for Solving
t . . . Rc2+, a serious drawback, but how does one avoid
it ? The Pf4 stops two more unprovided checks and could
as well be a black Pf6, but the composer felt that, for once,
economy of black force mattered more.
53. 1 S x e5 (threat 2 Qd3). 1 . Bd4+ ; 2 Qc6. 1 . . . B else
. .

NW/SE+ ; 2 Sc6. 1 . . . B NE/SW+ ; 2 Qc4. A focal


effect, of the type discussed in chapter 6 ; the black B must
abandon d4 or e7, unless it is to visit d4, which involves a
new error. Notice how a single mate is forced after the
(unfortunately unprovided) flight.
54. 1 R x f6 (threat 2 Rd6). 1 . . . Sd6 + ; 2 Rf3. 1 . . . S x f6 + ;
2 Bf3. 1 . . . S else + ; 2 Rc6. 1 . . . Re6 ; 2 Qd5. 1 . . .
Be6 ; 2 Rf4. 1 . . . R x f6 ; 2 eSc6. The three BS checks
are supplemented by a Grimshaw and a self-pin, as well as
a fine thematic key. Only the R+B battery mars the
otherwise striking economy.
55. 1 Sd3 (threat 2 Qf4). 1 . . . Se6+ ; 2 g7. 1 . . Sf5 + ;.

2 Sf6. 1 . . . S else + ; 2 Sge5. 1 . . . Qe3 ; 2 gSf2. Like


No. 54, this shows two correction cross-checks by a black
S, an idea explained in chapter 7.
56. 1 Bd6 (threat 2 Qg4). 1 . . . S x h4+ ; 2 Sf4. 1 . . . Sh6 + ;
2 Sf6. 1 . . . S x d6 + ; 2 Qf3. 1 . . . Pg4 ; 2 Rh6. 1 . . .
P X h4 ; 2 Q x h4. The first two variations combine half­
pin, cross-check and self-block ; the third, half-pin and
cross-check ; and the last two show simple half-pin. The
key-square must be picked with care, to stop 1 . . . R X e6.
Plugs like d4, e3 and g3 are perhaps forgivable in view of
the rich all-round effects.
57. 1 Qc7 (threat 2 Qcl). 1 . . . P x g5 + ; 2 e6. 1 . . . Pf5 + ;
2 Bc6. f x e5 + ; 2 Bg6. Cross-check combined, in the
first variation, with half-pin ; in the second, with self-block;
and in the third, with self-pin. The dual after 1 . . . S X e5
is a great pity, since it thwarts the completion of the half­
pin : 2 Q X e5, but also the threat.
58. 1 Kc4 (threat 2 Qc5). 1 . . . Pd2 + ; 2 Se2. 1 . . . fB --·+ ;
2 cSe4. 1 . . . eR-+ ; 2 Sd5. All three cross-checks open
a line to guard f5. The key exposes White to all the checks.
Notice also 1 . . . Kf5 ; 2 Ra5 (with double self-pin), and
not 2 Qc5 ? Re5 !
1 63
Solutions to Problems for Solving
59. Set : 1 . . . Pe4+ ; 2 Bd4. 1 . . . Rf3 + ; 2 Be3. Key
1 Kb4. Threat, 2 Sc3. 1 . . . Pd5 + ; 2 Bc5. 1 . . . Rb7 + ;
2 Bb6. Total change, presented so that nobody could miss
the set play. The battery in the SW corner is rather expen­
sive. Note also 1 . . . Sg2 ; 2 Bh2.
60. 1 Qb6 (threat 2 Se4), fS ,- + ; 2 Se4. 1 . . . S X d6 + ;
...

2 Sd3. 1 . . . Sd4+ ; 2 Rf5. 1 . . . P x f6 + ; 2 Sb7. 1 . . .


P x d6 + ; 2 Sd7. Five cross-checks, four of them different
mates from the threat. Other features to observe : the set
play (1 . . . fS,._,+ ; 2 Sd3), the flight-giving key, and the
variations 1 . . . K x f6 ; 2 Qb2, and 1 . . . K x d6 ; 2 Rd4.
6 1 . Set : 1 . . . B x e4+ ; 2 fSe5. 1 . . . B x g4+ ; 2 Sg5. Key
1 Qa3 (threat 2 S x f2). 1 . . . B x e4+ ; 2 Sde5. 1 . . .
B x g4+ ; 2 Sc5. 1 . . . K x e4 ; 2 Qa8. Two changed
mates after cross-checking self-blocks of flights. The threat
is pleasing : the slender use off7 after the key (to guard g5),
the white Rh3 and the unprovided flight 1 . . . K x e4,
are less so.
62. Try 1 Rb3 ? (threat 2 Rb8). 1 . . . Qh8 + ; 2 Re8. 1 . . .
Qh4+ ; 2 Re7. 1 . . . Qd1 + ; 2 Rd4. 1 . . . Rb5 ; 2 Ra4.
1 . . . Qb1 ! Key 1 Rb4 ! (threat 2 Rb8). 1 . . . Qh8 + ;
2 Rf8. 1 . . . Qh4+ ; 2 Rf6. 1 . . . Qd1 + ; 2 Rd3. 1 . . .
Rb5 ; 2 Ra3 . Three c9.anged-ifunprovided-cross-checks,
from Try to Key. Since any intelligent White first move
provides for the check, the formal defect is of no importance
in this Meredith. The somewhat tedious similarity of the
mates in try and solution is much more serious, but is the
price of striving after extreme economy. 1 Ra3 ? Pe1 = Q !
63. 1 2S ,...._, ? (e.g. I Sal ?) Bg7 ! 1 3S ,..._, ? (e.g. 1 Sb1 ?) B x c5 !
1 Se2 ! ? B x c5 ? 2 cS mates, but 1 . . . Pd2 ! (2 Qe2 ? ?)
1 Sd4 ! ? Bg7 ?? 2 cS mates. 1 . . . Qb8 + ; 2 Sb5. 1 . . .
Qh2+/Qf2+ ; 2 Se2. 1 . . . Pe2 ! (2 cS + ; Q x cl +). Key
1 Se4 ! (threat 2 cS mates). 1 . . . Qb8 + ; 2 Sb4. I . . .
Qe5 + ; 2 Sd4. 1 . . . B x c5 ; 2 R X c5. White correction
(see chapter 1 1) by both the Knights, ending with changes
of cross-check from try to key. Random moves by each S
fail for a certain reason, and more careful moves improve
on the random move, ultimately with success. Here each
Knight, in correcting, unpins the BQ, allowing her a pair
164
Solutions to Problems for Solving
of shots at the white K to separate the multiple threat.
Notice the role, in the defences to tries, of (a) pin of
White (1 . . . Bg7) and (b) line-opening for a piece un­
pinned by White (I Se2 ! ? Pe2 !). The absence of any
forced mate from the post-key masked battery g4-c4 is a
very serious drawback.
64. 1 0-0 ? (threats, 2 either Rei). 1 . . . Ke4+ ; 2 Sc5.
1 . . . Ke2+ ; 2 Sd4. 1 . . . P x c4 ! Key, 1 0-0-0 !
(threats, 2 either Rel). 1 . . . Ke4+ ; 2 Sg5. 1 . . . Ke2+ ;
2 Sf4. 1 . . . Sd4; 2 S x d4. A little light relief to finish
with. White must choose which way to castle into a pair
of BK discoveries, duly disposed of by cross-checks from
the Q + S battery. The defence to the try is strong enough,
but can any solver really miss such a try ?

CHAPTER 4
75. Key 1 Qc3 (zugzwang), Pe5 ; 2 B X d7. 1 . . . Pd5 ; 2 B x e6.
Two unpins of the white B, with several minor variations,
including a Gamage unpin of the black Q : 1 . . . Pd6 ;
2 Qh8.
76. Set : 1 . . . Q x b5 ; 2 Sc5. 1 . . . Qb8 ; 2 eSc7. 1 . . . Qh8 ;
2 Sg7. 1 . . . Qh5 ; 2 Sg5. 1 . . . Qg3 ; 2 Sf4. Key 1 eS x d4 !
(threat 2 R x e5), aSc3 ; 2 Sc2. 1 . . . eSc3 ; 2 Sf5 (not
2 Sc2 ?). 1 . . . Sg3 ; 2 Qf3. Radical change : the set
strategy, defences and mates are destroyed, and replaced
by an unpin-combination with dual-avoidance.
77. Set : 1 . . . Rc4 ; 2 Re5. 1 . . . Sc4 ; 2 5Rd4. Key Q1 b7 !
(threat 2 Q x e7), Rc4 ; 2 Rc5. 1 . . . Sc4 ; 2 Rb5. Direct
mates by the R in the set play, battery mates after the key.
78. Set : 1 . . . Qc6 ; 2 Q x c6. 1 . . . Qd6 ; 2 Q x d6. Try
1 Qe3 ? (threat 2 Sf4), Qc6 ; 2 Qh3. 1 . . . Qd6 ; 2 Q x e5.
1 . . . Pe4 ! Key 1 Qf2 ! (threat 2 R x f6), Qc6 ; 2 Qf5.
1 . . . Qd6 ; 2 Q x f6. 1 . . . Pd4 ; 2 Qa2. The Q mates are
changed by her moves along the pin-line. Based on a
two-phase problem by E. Pedersen.
79. The white K is in check ! Try 1 Sd5 ? (threat 2 Qb3), Sd6 ;
2 Se3. 1 . . . Sd4 ; 2 Sb6. 1 . . . Qg3 ! Key 1 Sd3 ! (threat
2 Qb3), Sd6 ; 2 Se5. 1 . . . Sd4 ; 2 Sb2. Two unpins in
165
Solutions to Problems for Solving
each of two phases of any piece other than the Q on the
same line can only be achieved with the white K in check
in the diagram position, unless twin settings are used.
80. Try 1 Q x c4 ? (threat 2 S x d3), Bc2 ; 2 Q x c5. 1 . . . Be4 ;
2 Q x e4. 1 . . . Be2 ; 2 Q x e2. 1 . . . B x c4+ ; 2 S x c4.
1 . . Bfl ! Key 1 Q x c6 ! (threat 2 Rd5), Pe6 ; 2 Q x c5.
.

1 . . . Bd6 ; 2 Qd5. 1 . . . Sb6 ; 2 Q x c7. 1 . . . Be4 ; 2


S x c4. 1 . . . Rd8 ; 2 R x e7. The Q is unpinned twice by
withdrawal in the virtual play, and three times by inter­
ference after the key.
8 1 . Try 1 S x g6 ? (threat 2 Sg3), R x h3 ; 2 Sh4. 1 . . . Rb3 ;
2 R x c4. 1 . . . R x g6 + ; 2 B x g6. 1 . . . Qc7 ! Try 1
S x c6 ? (threat 2 Rd4), Qb3 ; 2 Sb4. 1 . . . Q x c6+ ;
2 Q x c6. 1 . . . Q x c5 ! Key 1 S x c4 ! (threat 2 Pd3),
Rb3 ; 2 Sd6. 1 . . . R X h3 ; 2 B X g6. 1 . . . Qb3 ; 2 Q X c6.
1 . . . B X c4+ ; 2 R X c4. Three phases and three different
threats. Note how the mates 2 B x g6, 2 Q x c6, and 2 R x c4
are transferred in the course of the solution.
82. Try 1 3Sb4 ? (threat 2 Bg4), Sd4; 2 Sf4. 1 . . . Sd6 ; 2 Sc7.
1 . . . Bb1 ! Key 1 5Sb4 ! (threat 2 Bg4), Sd4 ; 2 Sf4. 1 . . .
Sd6 ; 2 Sc5. White half-pin (self-pin by withdrawal).
Note the cook-tries 1 5Sf4 + ? and 1 3Sf4 + ?, both failing
on account of the half-pin.
83. Try 1 Sd2 ? (threat 2 Qe4), Pf3 ; 2 Qg5. 1 . . Sf3 ; 2 Qh3.
.

1 . . . Qc6 ! Key 1 Qg7 ! (threat 2 Q x h7), Pf3 ; 2 Sg3.


1 . . Sf3 ; 2 Sd6. White half-pin again, with a fine flight­
.

giving key.
84. Try 1 S x d7 ?, Be7 ; 2 Se5. 1 . . . R x c8 ; 2 Sc5. 1 . . . S
any ; 2 R x b6. 1 . . . Pd4 ! Key 1 P x d7 ! (zugzwang),
Be7 ; 2 Pd8 =S. 1 . . . R x c8 ; 2 P x c8 =Q. 1 . . . S
random ; 2 Qe6. 1 . . . Sd6 ! ? ; 2 Sd4. White self-pin by
capture in try and key. Regrettably the Sf8 is idle in the
actual play.
85. Try 1 Q X e7 ? (threat 2 Q/B X e3), Se6 ; 2 Qb4. 1 . . . Se5 ;
2 Qc5. 1 . . . Sg2 ! Key 1 S x e7 ! (zugzwang), fS random ;
2 Q x d5. 1 . . . Se6 ! ? ; 2 Sc6. 1 . . . dS random ; 2 Q x f6.
1 . . . Se5 ! ? ; 2 S x f5 . 1 . . . Ke5 ; 2 Sc6. The self-pin of
the Q carries a threat, while that of the S sets up a block
position.
1 66
Solutions to Problems for Solving
86. Try 1 2R x d3 ?, Qc1e1 ; 2 3Rd4. 1 . . . Qd1 ; 2 Rc3 . 1 . . .
S x d5 ; 2 Q x d5. 1 . . . Qc2 ! Key 1 S x d3 ! (zugzwang),
Qc1 ; 2 Se5. 1 . . . Qe 1 ; 2 S x b2. 1 . . . Qc2; 2 R x c2.
1 . . . S x d5 ; 2 Qe4. White self-pin by capture, followed
by withdrawal unpins.
87. Try 1 B x c4 ? (threat 2 Bd5), Q x c2 ; 2 Bb5. 1 . . . R x c2 ;
2 S x c2. 1 . . . Kf4 ; 2 Sd5. 1 . . . R x b4 ! Key 1 S x c4 !
(threat 2 Bf3), Q x c2 ; 2 Sb6. 1 . . . Kd5 ; 2 Se3. Inter-
esting unpin and battery strategy ; the very strong defence
to the try is a blemish.
88. Try 1 Bd8 + ?, B x f8 ; 2 P x f8 = Q. 1 . . . Sf7 ! (2 S x d4 ?).
Try 1 S x d4+ ?, B x d4 ! (2 Bd8 ?). Try 1 S x f4 ?, R x h5 !
Try 1 S x g5 ?, Sc6 ; 2 Bd8. 1 . . . Pd6 ! (2 B x e5 ?). Key
1 Sd8 ! (threat 2 R x e5), eS,._, ; 2 Q x d7. 1 . . . Sc6 ;
2 B x d4. 1 . . . Bd6 ; 2 Be7. 1 . . . Pd6 ; 2 B x e5. White
and Black half-pin combined. The check-tries fail because
of the pin of the other thematic piece. Note set play.
89. Try 1 B x d6 ?, Rc6/Rf2 ! Try 1 S x d6 ?, Rf2 ! Try 1 B x g5 ?,
Rc6 ! Key 1 S x g5 ! Two withdrawal unpins in each of
four phases, with mate-transference elements. The double
refutation of 1 B X d6 ? is an unfortunate but inevitable
feature of this task.
90. Try 1 B x e4 ?,. eS random ; 2 Qe2. 1 . . . Sc4 ! ? ; 2 Bf3.
1 . . . Sg4 ! ? ; 2 B X g6. 1 . . . R X h3 ! Key 1 S X e4 !
(zugzwang), Sc4 ! ? ; 2 Sf6. 1 . . . Sg4 ! ? ; 2 Sg3. Tertiary
play by the black S i n each phase (see page 86). The setting
has many defects : the Q and Rc6 do little, and the key­
piece is right out of play.
9 1 . Try 1 Bc8 ?, Kc4 ; 2 Ba6. 1 . . . Sc4 ; 2 Bf5. 1 . . . Pc5 !
Try 1 B x c6 ?, Kc4 ; 2 Bb5. 1 . . . Sc4 ; 2 Be4. 1 . . . Sd1 !
Key 1 S x c6 ! (zugzwang), Kc4 ; 2 Se5. 1 . . . Sc4 ; 2 Sb4.
1 . . . Sd 1 ; 2 Ba6. 1 . . . aS random ; 2 bR x c3. Zago­
ruyko, with white self-pin in two of the three phases. Note
that one of the unpins is effected by the black K himself.
92. Try 1 P x g6 ? (threat 2 Pg7), Qh7 ; 2 P x h7. 1 . . . Q x f7 ;
2 P x f7. 1 . . . Qh8 ; 2 Q x h8. 1 . . . Q x d8 ! Try 1 S x g6 ?
(threat 2 Be7), Qf8 ; 2 S x f8. 1 . . . Q x d8 ; 2 Sh8. 1 . . .
Q x f7 ! Key 1 B x g6 ! (zugzwang), Qh7 ; 2 B x h7. 1 . . .
Qf7 ; 2 B x f7. 1 . . . Q x d8 ; 2 Be8. 1 . . . Qf8 ; 2 Q x f8.
1 67
Solutions to Problems for Solving
1 . . . . Qg7 ; 2 Qg5. Self-pin in all three phases, with unpin
by withdrawal. Unfortunately the try-pieces play no part
after the key. The following version of this setting has only
two phases, but jive unpins of the key-piece, two of them
with cross-check : 3S2ql/5B2/3PlkpQ/7P/5Pl S/8/6Kl/8.
1 . P x g6 ? Q x d8 ! 1 B x g6 !

CHAPTER 5
105. Set : 1 . . . Bf7 ; 2 Q x f8. 1 . . . Rf7 ; 2 Sg8. Key 1 Pg7 !
(threat 2 Qh5), Bf7 ; 2 P x f8 =Q. 1 . . Rf7 ; 2 Pg8 = S.
.

The mates are given on the same squares, but by different


pieces, before and after the key.
106. Set : 1 . . . Bb5 ; 2 Rc5. 1 . . . Rb5 ; 2 B x c6. Key
1 R x c6 (zugzwang), Bb5 ; 2 2Rc5. 1 . . . Rb5 ; 2 6Rb5.
Changed Grimshaw in a mutate setting.
107. Try 1 Sd6 ? (threat 2. Sf3), Bg4 ; 2 S x c4. 1 . . . Rg4 ;
2 Re6. 1 . . . Rd4 ! Try 1 S x c5 ? (threat 2 Sf3), Bg4 ;
2 Qd4. 1 . . . Rg4 ; 2 Sd7. 1 . . . Be6 ! Key 1 Rf4 !
(threat 2 Sf3), Bg4 ; 2 Re4. 1 . . . Rg4 ; 2 Rf5. A three­
phase (Zagoruyko) Grimshaw, one of very few known
examples without concurrent changes. The white Q is
unfortunately rather lazy.
108. Set : 1 . . . Re5 ; 2 Sc7. 1 . . . Be5 ; 2 Qg4. Key 1 Re4 + !,
Re5 ; 2 Qg4. 1 . . . Be5 ; 2 Sc7. 1 . . . Kd5 ; 2 Qb3.
1 . . . Kf5 ; 2 Re2. The set mates after the Grimshaw are
reciprocally changed (see page 141) by the checking key,
which turns the interferences into self-pins. It seems to be
impossible to set this idea without a checking key.
109. Set : 1 . . . B X d3 ; 2 Q X f3. 1 . . . R X d3 ; 2 Se3. 1 . . .
Bd4; 2 R x c3 . 1 . . . Sd4 ; 2 S x c3 . Key 1 Pd4 ! (threat
2 Rc5), Bd3 ; 2 S x c3. 1 . . . Rd3 ; 2 Rb4. 1 . . . B x d4 ;
2 Qf5. 1 . . . S x d4 ; 2 Q x g8. The set self-pins on d3
are changed by the key to interferences, while the self­
block and interference on d4 become self-pins. A magnifi­
cent problem, which deserved a higher award.
1 10. Key 1 Qb4 (threat 2 Pc6), Bc6 ; 2 P x b6. 1 . . . Pc6 ;
2. Bd6. 1 . . . Rc6 ; 2 Rd7. A cycle of interferences on
c6, with a fair amount of interesting by-play.
1 68
Solutions to Problems for Solving
111. Key 1 Sb4 (threat 2 Bc5), Bd4 ; 2 Rd5. 1 . . . dRd4 ;
2 S x c4. 1 . . . hRd4 ; 2 Qh6. Another interference cycle,
this time with a B and two Rs (one being pinned).
1 12. Try 1 Pg6 ?, B x g6 ; 2 Sc6. 1 . . . R x g6 ; 2 Qd3. 1 . . .
Be3 ! Try 1 fSg6 ?, B x g6 ; 2 Qd6. 1 . . . R x g6 ; 2 Sf5.
1 . . . R x g5 ! Try 1 Qg6 ?, B x g6 ; 2 Sc6. 1 . . . R x g6 ;
2 Sf5. 1 . . . Sc4 ! Key 1 eSg6 !, B x g6 ; 2 Qd6. 1 . . .
R x g6 ; 2 Qd3. A choice of four Nowotnys on one
square, with different pairs of threats in each case. (All
the mates shown above are threats.)
1 1 3. Try 1 Pg4 ?, R x g4 ; 2 Qdl . 1 . . . B x g4 ; 2 Q x e4.
1 . . . S x f2 ! Try 1 Pg3 ?, R x g3 ; 2 B x b3. 1 . . . B x g3 ;
2 Qe3. 1 . . . Sc2 ! Try 1 Pf4 ?, R x f4 ; 2 B x b3. 1 . . .
B x f4 ; 2 Q x e4. 1 . . . Pe3 ! Key 1 Pf3 !, R x f3 ; 2
Qdl . 1 . . . B x f3 ; 2 Qe3. A modern classic, brilliantly
combining the Nowotny-choice with the Organ-pipes (cf.
No. 102). The mates shown are all threats, but after the
key Black has two defences defeating both threats :
1 . . . Rf4 and 1 . . . Bf4. However, these two moves,
being interferences, lead to the two thematic mates not
threatened by the key, 2 B x b3 and 2 Q x e4. So this fine
Nowotny problem is perfectly rounded off by a Grimshaw
in the post-key variation play.
1 14. Try 1 Bf4 ?, Rd3 ! Try 1 Bd4 ?, Bd3 ! Try 1 Bd6 ?, Re7 !
Try 1 Bc7 ?, Be7 ! Key 1 Bb8 ! (threat 2 B x e4), Rd3 ;
2 Rf1 . 1 . . . Bd3 ; 2 Sd4. 1 . . . Re7 ; 2 Sd6. 1 . . . Be7 ;
2 Qc8. In making its tries, the white B four times occupies
a square or blocks a line required for one of the thematic
mates following the two pairs of Grimshaw interferences.
1 1 5. Set : 1 . . . Re4 ; 2 R x d5. 1 . . . Be4 ; 2 B x e5. Try
1 Bd6 ?, Re4 ! Try 1 Rd6 ?, Be4 ! Key 1 Qd6 ! (threat
2 Se6), Re4 ; 2 Q X d5. 1 . . . Be4 ; 2 Q x e5. Grimshaw
tries by White, refuted by Grimshaw defences by Black.
The key, which changes the set mates, is an arrival correc­
tion by White of the general errors committed by the
indiscriminate closing of the line b6--e6.
1 1 6. Try 1 gR on file ?, Rb5 ! Try 1 Rf4 ! ?, Bb5 ! Try 1 B to
south-west?, Bb5 ! Try 1 Bf4 ! ?, Rb5 ! Key 1 Bh2 ! (threat
2 Qf3), Rb5 ; 2 P X c4. 1 . . . Bb5 ; 2 Sb6. Each thematic
1 69
Solutions to Problems for Solving
white piece attempts, with its second try, to retain con­
trol of e4 or e5, as the case may be, but in doing so
interferes with the other thematic piece. Black's defences
thus appear in a reciprocal pattern.

CHAPTER 6
125. Try 1 4Sa3 ?, K x c5 ; 2 Qc7. 1 . . . cB moves ; 2 Sb4 or
2 Sd4. 1 . . . S x c5 ! Key 1 2Sa3 ! (zugzwang), K x c5 ;
2 Qd6. 1 . . . cB moves ; 2 Se5 or 2 Sa5. 1 . . . Bb7 ;
2 Qd6. 1 . . . aB else ; 2 Qc8. 1 . . . S any ; 2 Qb6. The
black B loses focal control in masked indirect half-battery
setting. The full use of the white Q is clever-as is the
change after 1 . . . K X c5.
126. Try 1 Sd3 ?, Q moves ; 2 Se7 or 2 Sd4. 1 . . . Qb7 ! Try
1 Se6 ?, Q moves ; 2 S x g7 or 2 eSd4. 1 . . . Qa1 ! Key
1 Sd5 ! (zugzwang), Q moves ; 2 S x e3 or 2 dSe7. 1 . . . eS
any ; 2 Pe4. Only after the key is the black Q unable to
retain focal control. A beautiful Zagoruyko in Meredith
setting.
127. Try 1 Sd6 ?, B moves ; 2 dSb7 or 2 Sc4. 1 . Bb3 ! Try
. .

1 Sd4 ?, B moves ; 2 Sc6 or 2 dSb3. 1 . . . Bb7 ! Key


1 Sc3 ! (zugzwang), B moves ; 2 Sb7 or 2 Sb3. The Focal
Theme shown to perfection in contemporary Zagoruyko
form, with Java-type defences to tries (see chapter 7).
128. Try 1 Sf6 ?, B moves ; 2 fSd7 or 2 Se4. 1 . . . P x e5 !
(2 Qc6?). Try 1 Sf4 ?, B moves ; 2 Se6 or 2 fSd3. 1 . . .
Pd3 ! (2 Qe3 ?). Try 1 Se3 ?, B moves ; 2 eSd7 or 2 eSd3.
1 . . . Pd3 ! (2 Qe3 ?). Key 1 Qg6 ! (zugzwang), B moves ;
2 Rc8 or Q X c2. 1 . . . Pd3 ; 2 Qgl . 1 . . . P x e5 ; 2 Qc6.
In this 4 X 2 Zagoruyko, the black B is forced to abandon
its focus of one or the other of potential mating squares
created by tries and key. Four pairs of different focal mates
are rare.
1 29. Try 1 Re6 ? (threat 2 6Se4), B x e6 ; 2 Sfl . 1 . . . Qd5 ;
2 Sf3. 1 . . . B x d1 ! Try 1 Re4 ? (threat 2 Sf5), Rh6 !
Try 1 Re2 ? (threat 2 Sfl), Q x d1 ! Key 1 Rei ! (threat
2 Sf3), Q x e1 ; 2 Sf5. 1 . . . B x d1 ; 2 6Se4. 1 . . . Kd4 ;
2 S X b3. Shut-off tries and key break the black B's and
1 70
Solutions to Problems for Solving
. black Q's focal control of the white batteries. The flight­
square adds some interest.
1 30. Try 1 Bb1 ? (threat 2 bSd3), Rc3 ; 2 Rh5. 1 . . . R x b1 ;
2 Rg5. 1 . . . P x b3 ! Try 1 Bd3 ? (threat 2 Sd1), P x b3 ;
2 S X b3 etc. 1 . . . S X c5 ! Try 1 Bg6 ? (threat 2 Rh5),
1 . . . Rf3 ! Key 1 Bh7 ! (threat 2 Rg5), R X h7 ; 2 bSd3.
1 . . . Rg7 ; 2 Sdl . 1 . . . Rf3 ; 2 Rf5. 1 . . . Pd5 ; 2
Se6. One of the earliest examples of focal shut-offs with
battery play. This problem is enriched by the provision
of mates for certain defences which are used in another
phase to defeat the try (compare van Dijk's No. 1 21).
1 3 1 . Set : 1 . . . Q moves ; 2 Be6 or 2 Scl . 1 . . . Qg5 ! (2 Be6 ?
Qd5 !). Try 1 Pe5 ?, Qh1 ! Try 1 Re5 ?, Qc6 ! Key 1 Be5 !
(zugzwang), Q moves ; 2 Be6 or 2 Scl . The tries and key
are prospective interferences to break the black Q's focal
control. The error of the tries is to let the Q assume
control from a new square. Very unusual.
132. Try 1 Bf8 ? (threat 2 Sf6), Pc5 ! Try 1 Be7 ? (threat 2 Qe6),
Rel ! Try 1 Bb4 ? (threat 2 Sc3), Rcl ! Key 1 Bb6 !
(2 S x c7), B x b6 ; 2 Sc3. 1 . . . Re7 ; 2 Sf6. 1 . . . Re6 ;
2 Q x e6. 1 . . . R x g8 + ; 2 Q x g8. 1 . . . Sd4 ; 2 R x d4.
Focal shut-off tries and key but without battery play.
133. Try 1 Bc3 ? (threat 2 Bb3), R x c3 ; 2 Qf5. 1 . . . Qc5 ;
2 S x c5. 1 . . Qg5 ; 2 S x g5. 1 . . . Rfl ! Try 1 Bd6 ?
. ·

(threat 2 Sc5), Q x d6 ; 2 Sg5. 1 . . . Rf5 ; 2 Q x f5. 1 . . .


Rb3 + ; 2 B x b3. 1 . . . P x d6 ! Try 1 Bf6 ? (threat
2 Sg5), Qc5 ; 2 S x c5. 1 . . . Rf5 ; 2 Q x f5. 1 . . . Rb3 + ;
2 B x b3. 1 . . . Q x f6 ! Key 1 Bf4 ! (threat 2 Qf5), R x f4 ;
2 Bb3. 1 . . . Qc5 ; 2 S x c5. 1 . . . Qg5 ; 2 S x g5 . 1 . . .
Pf6 ; 2 Q x e7. 1 . . . Se5 ; 2 R x e5. Again, focal shut-off
tries and key without battery play. This problem is
perhaps the only example of the theme with the four
thematic mates recurring as threats and variations
throughout the four phases. A difficult task.
1 34. Try 1 Sf5 ?, bS any ; 2 Sd6. 1 . . . gS random ; 2 Rh4.
1 . . . Sf4 ! ; 2 Bf3. 1 . . . Se3 ! ? ; 2 Sg3. 1 . . . Pd3 ;
2 P x d3. 1 . . . Ph6 ! Key 1 Sd3 ! (zugzwang), bS any ;
2 Sc5. 1 . . . gS random; 2 Rel . 1 . . . Sf4 ! ; 2 Sf2.
1 . . . Se3 ! ; 2 Bf3. 1 . . . Ph6 ; 2 Bg6. The loss of
171
Solutions to Problems for Solving
"focus" by the black Ss is of much less interest than the
very attractive changed play following the random and
two correction moves of Sg2. Notice the simple but
perfect defeat of the try. A beautiful work.
1 35. Try 1 Se5 ?, aS any ; 2 Qc4. 1 . . . hS any ; 2 Sf3. 1 . . .
P x d6 ; 2 Q x d6. 1 . . . Pb3 ; 2 Bc3. 1 . . . P x f2 ;
2 B x f2. 1 . . . Pe2 ! Key 1 S x e3 ! (zugzwang), K x e3 ;
2 Qe4. 1 . . . aS any ; 2 Sc2. 1 . . . hS any ; 2 Sf5. I . . .
P x d6 ; 2 Qb6. 1 . . . Pb3 ; 2 Qc3 . In virtual and actual
play, the black Ss lose "focal" control of c4fc2 and f3/f5.
The problem's charm lies in the plausible try and its quiet
refutation ; the sacrificial, flight-giving key which offsets
the P capture ; the additional changes after 1 . . . P x d6
and 1 . . . Pb3 ; and in its perfect construction.
136. Set : 1 . . . Pc5 ; 2 Qd5. 1 . . . Pd2 ; 2 Sc2. 1 . . . fS any ;
2 Q x d3. Key 1 Sc3 ! (zugzwang), Pc5 ; 2 Sb5. 1 . . . Pd2 ;
2 Se2. 1 . . . fS any ; 2 Re4. 1 . . . P x c3 ; 2 Q x a4.
1 . . . R any ; 2 Q x b4. 1 . . . hS any ; 2 Sf3. A mutate
in which black Ps c6 and d3-as well as Sf2-are given
"focal" powers from set to actual play.
CHAPTER 7
167. 1 Qd3 (threat 2 Qc4). 1 . . . Sd6 ; 2 S x f4 (2 S x c7 ?).
1 . . . Se5 ; 2 S X c7 (2 S X f4 ?) (1 . . . K X e6 ; 2 Qf5).
Herpai, with dual avoidance by Black self-unpin, a flight­
giving key and some by-play.
1 68. 1 Bf8 (threat 2 Se7). I . . . Pc4+ ; 2 S x d4 (2 Q x a4 ? ?).
1 . . . Sb4+ ; 2 Q x a4 (2 S x d4 ? ?). In this Herpai, Black
avoids duals by opening lines-to check the white King !
The by-play includes two more checks.
1 69. Set : 1 . . . Sd6fcRd6 ; 2 S x e7. 1 . . . Se5 ; 2 Qf8. Key
1 Qd5 (threat 2 Qd7). 1 . . . Sd6 ; 2 Q x c6 (2 Q x e6 ?).
1 . . . Bd6 ; 2 Q x e6 (2 Q x c6 ?). 1 . . . eRd6 ; 2 S x e7.
1 . . . cRd6 ; 2 Qb7. 1 . . . Se5 ; 2 Qd8. Probably the
composer's best example of this theme (Herpai with inter­
ruption of a line of mutual guard), despite the non­
homogeneous dual avoidance (opening g8-e6 in one
defence, direct guard of c7 in the other), and the lazy
white S. Luckily, the Meredith setting yielded a lot of
1 72
Solutions to Problems for Solving
thematically relevant by-play and changed play (including
mate transference). 1 Qb5 ? Rc7 !
1 70. 1 Ra5 (threat 2 Qe3). I . . . Bf3 ; 2 Sc5 (2 Sf2 ?). 1 . . .
Bg4 ; 2 Sf2 (2 Sc5 ?). Differs from Larsen's example in
the text (No. 141) in that four White lines of guard are
involved ; the line Black closes to stop the dual, in each
variation, is totally distinct from either of the lines of
guard that White has to avoid. This makes for a richer
effect, but at some cost in by-play (or else in economy).
1 7 1 . 1 Ba3 (threat 2 Rb2). 1 . . . Bc4 ; 2 Sc3 (2 Sd2 ?). 1 . . .
Be2 ; 2 Sd2 (2 Sc3 ?). The simpler type of Java, in which
the line closed by Black in each defence is the line avoided
by White in the other variation. Again this is combined
with unpin. In both thematic variations, line-closing also
corrects against 2 Qc2 (forced after 1 . . . Bc2).
1 72. 1 Rh3 (pseudo-threats 2 either R x e3). 1 . . . Rc3 ; 2 Bd3
(2 Bf3 ? Kd3). 1 .. . . Rg3 ; 2 Bf3 (2 Bd3 ? Kf3). In each
variation, the black R clears the third rank for one white
R, but prevents one of the two mates apparently allowed
by this clearance, because there is simultaneously an anti­
clearance of the third rank for the other white R. The
only example of this form of the Java known to the
authors ; a p�or key, but fair economy (Meredith) and
some by-play, including four line-opening defences from
the black Ps. Neither threat ever happens ; all Black's
moves stop them.
1 73. Try 1 Se4 ? (threats 2 Rd4, 2 Qd4). 1 . . . Qb2 ; 2 Sc3
(2 Sf6 ?). 1 . . . Qg7 ; 2 Sf6 (2 Sc3 ?) (1 . . . Pb2 ; 2 Rd4
(threat).) 1 . . . R x f5 ! Key 1 Re4 ! (threat 2 Qd4).
1 . . . Qb2 ; 2 Rd4 (2 Re5 ?). 1 . . . Qg7 ; 2 Re5 (2 Rd4 ?).
1 . . . Pb2 ; 2 Qa2. Java in each phase, with most of the
work done by the masked battery, though the white Q is
made to give four mates.
I 74. Try 1 Se6 ? Sc7 ; 2 Sf4 (threat) (2 Sg5 ? Kg3 !). 1 . . . Bg4 ;
2 Sg5 (threat) (2 Sf4 ? Kg3 !). 1 . . . Be2 ! (2 Sf4 ? K x h2 ! ;
2 Sg5 ? Kg2 !). Try 1 Sd3 ? Be2; 2 Sf2 (threat) (2 Sf4 ?
K x h2 !). I . . Sc7 ; 2 Sf4 (threat) (2 Sf2 ? K x h2 !).
.

1 . . . Bg4 ! (2 Sf2 ? Kg2 !, 2 Sf4 ? Kg3 !). Try 1 Se4 ? Bg4 ;


2 Sg5 (threat) (2 Sf2 ? Kg2 !). 1 . . . Be2 ; 2 Sf2 (threat)
1 73
Solutions to Problems for Solving
(2 Sg5 ? Kg2 !). 1 . . . Sc7 ! (2 Sg5 Kg3 !, 2 Sf2 ? K x h2 !).
(Key, 1 Sf3 !). The actual play is unimportant : all
depends on the try pattern, a cyclic virtual Java. Notice
that the white Rs and B are set up vis-a-vis the black K
just as in Kofman's No. 142. In all three tries, the two
threats are separated Java-wise, but both are defeated by
closing the guard line that the white S cannot reach. The
"camouflage" white Sc5, useless after the key, of course
creates the entire problem, and whatever worth it has.
175. 1 Sg6 (threat 2 Se7). 1 . . . Bd4 ; 2 dSf4 (2 gSf4 ? Ke4).
1 . . . Bc5 ; 2 gSf4 (2 dSf4 ? Kd6). A very complex theme,
distantly related to the Java. White has two possible
mates, each closing the same two lines of guard. Each
mating move also opens a white guard-line on to a flight,
thus compensating for each line-closure in turn. The
choice is determined (as in the Java) by Black's closing of
a further guard line on to each flight in turn. Thus there
are three thematic lines of guard to each flight (h6-d6,
h2-d6 and b4-d6 ; and b1-e4, h4-e4 and b4-e4). The
key is thematic and good.
1 76. 1 S x e5 (threat 2 Qg8). 1 . . . Q x e5 ; 2 Sc5 (2 Sg5 ? Qe4,
2 Sd2 ? Be4). 1 . . . B x e4 ; 2 Sf7 (2 Sf3 ? Bf5, 2 Sd3 ? Qe5).
In both half-pin+ self-pin lines, White must avoid destroy­
ing both the pin-lines created by Black (passive dual
avoidance). 1 . . . Q x e5 ; 2 Sf2 ? is a Mari avoidance.
Gamage's original was /1 s1Q4/bpp2K2/3p l PP1/3kS2R/
2pqS1Pl /2Pb2Pl /8/3R2BB/ (1 Qe8) ; No. 1 76 saves one
unit and replaces two major duals by minor variations.
Does it improve the key ?
1 77. Set : 1 . . . Kd4 ; 2 Rc6, 2 Rb5, 2 R x b4 and 2 R x d6.
Try 1 Pb3 ? (threat 2 Qc4). 1 . . . Kd4 ; 2 Rc6. 1 . . . Pd5 !
Try 1 Sf4 ? (threat 2 Qd5). 1 . . . Kd4 ; 2 Rb5. 1 . . .
R x f6 ! Try 1 Be4 ? (threat 2 Qd5). 1 . . . Kd4 ; 2 R x b5.
1 . . . Rh5 ! Key 1 Bd3 ! (threat 2 Qc4). 1 . . . Kd4 ;
2 R x d6. There are four mates set for the flight; each
of the three tries, and the key, gives a further flight in the
black K's extended field, so that 1 . . . Kd4 avoids duals
by compelling the mating white R to guard that new
flight. 1 Bd3 ! Pd5 ; 2 Re6.
1 74
Solutions to Problems for Solving
178. 1 Pe8 =R (zugzwang). S ,...., ; 2 Ra8/2 Re4. 1 . . . Sd4/
Se5fSe7 ; 2 Ra8. 1 . . . Sa7/Sb8/Sd8 ; 2 Re4. 1 . . . Sa5 ! ;
2 Sc5. 1 . . . Sb4 ! ; 2 Sc3. The black S separates the
secondary threats, and twice corrects both, with self-block.
Note the beginner-composer's love of underpromotion !
179. 1 Pg3 (threat 2 Qf4). 1 . . . dS -- ; 2 B x d3. 1 . . . Sb5 ;
2 Bb7. 1 . . . Sc4 ; 2 Rd4. So-called four-way correction
play ; 1 . . . Sb5, for example, opens b8-f4 to stop the
primary threat, opens d7-d3 to allow the secondary
threat 2 B x d3, corrects by closing a6-d3, but makes the
secondary error of closing b4-b7. Here doubled, with ten
pieces.
1 80. 1 Sc2 (threats 2 Se3/2 Qe4). 1 . . . bS,....+ .. ; 2 dSb4. 1 . . .
bSd5 + ; 2 Sb2. 1 . . . cS --+ ; 2 Sf4. 1 . . . cSd5 + ;
2 Se5. 1 . . . Pd5 ; 2 Sa3. Four cross-checking mates from
the same white S ; the checking black Ss correct by
unpinning the black R but err by self-block. The double
threat is unavoidable in this task ; fortunately both
threats are forced.
1 8 1 . 1 Sd7 (zugzwang). 1 . . . R......., on rank ; 2 Sc5. 1 . . . Re6 ;
2 Rd4. Correction unpin of both Black and White ; the
variation 1 . . . Rc4 ; 2 ReS (not a correction) completes a
dual-avoidance pair. Other relevant by-play includes :
1 . . . s,......, ; 2 Qh l . 1 . . . Sf3 ; 2Qd3 .
1 82. Set : 1 . . . K x c4 ; 2 Q x d3. Key 1 Qc8 (threat 2 Qg8).
1 . . . cS......., ; 2 R x d3. 1 . . . Sb4 ! ; 2 Se3 (2 R x d3 ?).
1 . . . Sd4 ! ! ; 2 Sb6 (2 R X d3 ? ?, 2 Se3 ?). Tertiary correc-
tion unpin in Meredith, with a changed mate for the flight ;
one of those rare settings where luck works with the
composers.
183. 1 Sa3 (threat 2 Sc4). 1 . . . cS ,.._, ; 2 Bd6. 1 . . . Se6 ! ;
2 Sg4. 1 . . . Sd7 ! ! ; 2 Pe8 = Q. If No. 1 79 is four-way,
this is six-way Tertiary play. 1 . . . Sd7 ! ! (a) opens c8--<:4
to stop the primary threat, (b) opens b4-d6 to allow the
secondary threat, (c) closes d8-d6 to stop the secondary
threat, (d) closes c8-g4 to allow a tertiary threat 2 Sg4,
(e) closes d8-d4 to stop the tertiary threat (Java-wise :
2 Sg4 ? Kd4) ; (/) closes a7-e7 (and a seventh "way",
c8-e6) to allow 2 Pe8 = Q mate ! There are excellent
175
Solutions to Problems for Solving
further secondary corrections 1 . . . Sb7 ; 2 Re4 and
1 . . . Se4 ; 2 Pf4.
184. 1 Rei (threat 2 Rf1). 1 . . . bSd4 ; 2 BdS. 1 . . . R x f4 ! ;
2 Qh3 (2 BdS ? aRe4, not 2 . . . fRe4 ? ?). 1 . . . Sd6 ;
2 SeS. 1 . . . B x f4 ! ; 2 QhS (2 Se5 ? Q x e5, not 2 . . .
B X e5 ? ?). Very unusual correction, in that the primary
error is immobilisation of a black piece, maintained in the
correction variation by a technique (self-pin) quite
different from the primary interference. Key and by-play
are adequate, but the Sd7 is lazy.
185. Try 1 Sf3 ? threats (b4) 2 B x d7, (B ,..._,) 2 Be6, (d2) 2 Bf5
and (R,...).., 2 Sd2. 1 . . . Rb2 ! Key 1 Sf5 ! threats (b4)
2 S x d6, (B .-) 2 Bf3, (d2) 2 Be2 and (R -) 2 Bdl . Four­
fold Fleck in virtual and actual play, with dual-avoidance
by obtaining flights. Further tries are 1 Sc6 ? Pb4 !
(2 B x d7 ?) and l Bf3 ? Pd2 ! The white Q is a Bishop.
1 86. 1 Qd8 (threat 2 Qd2). "Q ,..." ., ; 2 Be3 (A), 2 cS x e2 (B),
2 Rf3 (C), 2 Rf5 (D), 2 Sd3 (E), or 2 Rb4 (F). 1 . . .
Q x d l ; 2 A. 1 . . . Qe2 ; 2 B. 1 . . . Qf3 ; 2 C. l . . .
Qf5 ; 2 0. l . . . Q x e6 ; 2 E. 1 . . . Q x g3 ; 2 F. 1 . . .
Q X g5 ! ; 2 Qd4 (2 Q X b8 ?). 1 . . . S X g5 ; 2 Q X b8
(2 Qd4 ?). A fine problem, but can it usefully be called a
six-fold secondary Fleck (as the Hartong-Swane problem,
No. 1 59, clearly can) ? A random black Q removal-say,
by taking her own R on M-would admittedly allow all
six mates, but many moves do not give up and compensate
for controls, but merely retain them (e.g. l . . . Q x d6
does not "avoid" 2 Rf5-it simply omits to let it in).
I 87. Set : l . . . s -- ; 2 Qe5 (A), 2 Qd4 (B) or 2 Qc3 (C).
l . . . S X a4 ; 2 A. 1 . . . Sc4 ; 2 B. 1 . . . S X d3 ; 2 C.
Key l Qbl (zugzwang). l . . . S -- ; 2 Bf2 (D), 2 Qb5 (E)
or 2 Qb6 (F). 1 . . . S x a4 ; 2 0. 1 . . . Sc4 ; 2 E. 1 . . .
S X d3 ; 2 F. Changed secondary Fleck in mutate, a
splendid achievement, though the plug Rook at c l is an
eyesore that cost the problem a higher place in the match.
The winner was Hartong's No. 160.
1 88. I Ba2 (threats 2 RqS (A), 2 Re6 (B), 2 Bf6 (C) and
2 RhS (D)). 1 . . . Sel ; 2 ABCD. 1 . . . Qe8 ; 2 ABC.
1 . . . Qh8 ; 2 ABO. I . . . B x aS ; 2 ACD. 1 . . . Pc6 ;
I 76
Solutions to Problems for Solving
2· BCD. I . . . Qf8 ; 2 AB. I . . Qc8 ; 2 AC. I . . .
.

R x a6 ; 2 AD. I . . . Se3 ; 2 BC. 1 . . . Qd8 ; 2 BD.


1 . . . Rb5 ; 2 CD. 1 . . . S x h4 ; 2 A. 1 . . . Pe3 ; 2 B.
1 . . . Qg8 ; 2 C. 1 . . . Rb6 ; 2 D. 1 . . . B x c3 + ! ;
2 Q X c3. "What man has done, man can do" ; to invest
many hours of constructional effort in this first, pioneer
example of its theme took real courage, as the time
might have been completely wasted. Mr. Gooderson's
skill, however, proved equal to his daring.
1 89. 1 S x f3 (threats 2 Sd2, 2 Q x d4, 2 Qe5 and 2 Sg5). Four­
teen years on, the handling of the theme is more assured
and the result more polished ; solvers should sort out for
themselves how the four threats are first permitted, then
combinatively separated, and finally forced.
1 90. 1 S x d7 (threats 2 ReS, 2 Rf4, 2 Rg5 and 2 Rf6). Com­
plete combinative separation once again, with unity
achieved by having all four threats white R mates adjacent
to the black K. 1 . . . S X g6 ! 2 Be6.
I91. 1 P x e4 (threats 2 Sd3 (A), 2 Qe3 (B), 2 Qf3 (C) and
2 Qg3 (D)). 1 . . . P x e4 ; 2 ABCD. 1 . . . Pe1 = B ;
2 ABC. 1 . . . Pg1 = S ; 2 ABD. 1 . . . Pel = R ; 2 ACD.
1 . . . P x b2 ; 2 BCD. 1 . . . Pg1 = R ; 2 AB. 1 . . .
Pe1 = Q ; 2 AC. 1 . . . Pg1 = B ; 2 AD. 1 . . . P x c4 ;
2 BC. 1 . . . Pe1 = S ; 2 BD. 1 . . . P x f5 ; 2 CD. 1 . . .
Pg1 = Q ; 2 A. 1 . . . Pg4 ; 2 B. 1 . . . Pd4; 2 C. 1 . . .
P x h5 ; 2 D. Every possible combination of one, two,
three or four threats forced by Pawn moves ! In the
process, each of two black Ps promotes on the same
square in four different ways, with eight distinct results ;
only through thematic duals can black to R or B promotion
be thematised in the two-mover. Even those who dislike
the theme can scarcely deny that here it has broken
through to real solver-appeal, beyond mere technical
accomplishment.
1 92. 1 Bg1 (threat 2 Q x d4). 1 . . . Sb5 ; 2 Sb4 (A), 2 Sf4 (B)
or 2 Qg2 (C). 1 . . . Sf3 ; 2 AB. 1 . . . Se6 ; 2 AC. 1 . . .
Sc6 ; 2 BC. 1 . . . Se2 ; 2 A. I . . Sc2 ; 2 B. 1 . . . Sf5 ;
.

2 C. 1 . . . S X b3 ; 2 Q x b3 ! Three-fold secondary
I2
1 77
Solutions to Problems for Solving
combinative separation after black S defences. The old
BS wheel here runs along a multi-lane motorway.
193. 1 Rd6 (zugzwang). 1 . . . Bf6 ; 2 Qe4 (A), 2 Qe3 (B) or
2 Qe2 (C). 1 . . . B x b2 ; 2 AB. 1 . . . Bf4 ; 2 AC.
1 . . . B x d6 ; 2 BC. 1 . . . Bc3 ; 2 A. 1 . . . B x g3 ; 2 B.
1 . . . Bd4 ; 2 C. Seven combinative "variations" from a
black B. Set 1 . . . B ....., ; 2 Re3.
194. 1 Q x c7 (zugzwang). 1 . . . Rh6 ; 2 Qe5 (A), 2 Qf4 (B) or
2 Sg5 (C) . . . and you should complete the list accordingly
for the black R's other moves. The constructional
difficulty in these problems is to stop the thematic Black
piece from duplicating variations and thus confusing the
issue.
I95. 1 S x d6 (threat 2 Q x e5). 1 . . . dR x d4 ; 2 P x c4 (A),
2 Se3 (B) or 2 Qf7 (C). 1 . . . bS x d4 ; 2 AB . 1 . . . B x d4 ;
2 AC. 1 . . . eR X d4 ; 2 BC. 1 . . . P x d4 ; 2 A. 1 . . .
eS x d4 ; 2 B. 1 . . . Q X d4 ; 2 C. The last three variations
show the Stocchi theme, in which three (or more) self­
blocks on a flight-square lead to separation of three mates.
Here this is part of the mechanism of three-fold combin­
ative separation, by arrival on the flight, of those mates.
The flight itself gives a new mate : 1 . . . K x d4 ; 2 R x d2.
196. 1 B X c4 (threat 2 QG5). 1 . . . P x e5 ; 2 Pc3 (A), 2 Se2 (B),
2 Sb5 (C), 2 Rd6 (D), 2 S x f5 (E) or 2 Pd8 =Q (F).
1 . . . 6S x e5 ; 2 ABCDE. 1 . . . 4S x e5 ; 2 ABCD.
1 . . . B X e5 ; 2 ABC. I . . . Q x e5 ; 2 AB. 1 . . . R x e5 ;
2 A. Six mates after the "dummy" block of P x e5 are
progressively reduced to one. In a sense this is Black
Correction-certainly each defence in the above sequence
is better than the last, and one might perhaps regard the
sequence as "sexary" ( ! ?) on the lines of tertiaries, etc.
The Sa3 is a pity. 1 . . . K x e5 ; 2 Qc5.
CHAPTER 8
203 . Try 1 B x b5 ? (threat 2 B x d7). 1 . . . Qe7 ; 2 Sf3.
I . . . R x g7 ; 2 Sd3. 1 . . . Qd6 ; 2 Qg8. 1 . . . P x e5 ;
2 Q X e5. 1 . . . Pd4 ! Key 1 eSf7 ! (threat 2 Sd8). 1 . . .
Qe7 ; 2 Bf3. 1 . . . R x g7 ; 2 Bd3 . 1 . . . Qd6 ; 2 Q x d6.
1 . . . Ke7 ; 2 Sg5. 1 . . . Pd6 ; 2 Qe8. 1 . . . Pd4; 2 Bc4.
1 78
Solutions to Problems for Solving
1 . . . Pf4 ; 2 Bg4. Even with simple unguards of the half­
battery, the theme need not be dull. Here the changed
unguards, in the first two variations of each phase, are
supplemented by a good deal of other play ; the key gives
a flight and is thus unlikely to be tried first.
204. Diagram : Try 1 Ke2 ? Ra4; 2 Sa3 (threat). Rc4 ; 2 Sc3
(threat). 1 . . . R x d2+ ; 2 S x d2. 1 . . . Pe3 ! Key
1 Sc3 ! (threat 2 Ke2). 1 . . . Ra4 ; 2 0-0-0. 1 . . .
R x d2 ; 2 K x d2. 1 . . . Pe3 ; 2 Se2. Twin (board turned
90° anticlockwise) : 1 Sf3 ? Re i ! 1 Kg5 ! The "one­
way" nature of a P move explains why the try fails in the
diagram but works in the twin ; the "one-way" nature
of castling explains why the key in the initial position
fails in the twin. The half-battery enables a quite complex
idea to be presented in Meredith form.
205. Try 1 Rg7 ? (threat 2 Q x d7). 1 . . . Rh8 or Kd6 ; 2 Rf6.
1 . . . Kc7 ; 2 Rc4. 1 . . . B x a4 ! Key 1 Rf7 ! (threat
2 Q x d7). 1 . . . Rh8 or Kd6 ; 2 Rg6. 1 . . . B x a4 or
Kc7 ; 2 Rc3. Indirect half-battery points at black K
flights instead of his initial square. It can open in two
ways : to guard the flight, with check given by the battery­
opening man ; or on to the black K after he takes the
flight, with check given by the rear piece. Here both are
shown. ·

206. Try 1 Se5 ? (threat 2 Qd3). 1 . . . Qa6 ; 2 7Sb6. 1 . . . Qg6 ;


2 7Sf6. 1 . . . Qa3 ; 2 Sb4. 1 . . . Q x e5 ! Try 1 Sc5 ?
Q x g3 ; 2 Sf4. 1 . . . Q x c5 ! Key 1 Sf4 ! (threat 2 Qd3).
1 . . . Qa6 ; 2 5Sb6. 1 . . . Qg6 ; 2 5Sf6. Qa3 ; 2 Sc5.
1 . . . Q X f4 ; 2 Se5. Masked half-battery, in which the
black masker-here the Q-must withdraw as well as both
the White pieces. Here there are 8 critical errors, and
subsequent shut-offs, at various stages of the solution, and
a fair amount of by-play, but the tries are very obviously
defeated.
207. Try 1 7S x b6 ? Sc4 ; 2 5S x f6. 1 . . . Se8 ; 2 Sc3. 1 . . . Sf5,
Rf4 ; 2 Qf4. 1 . . . cS moves ! (2 Qe5 ?). Key 1 5S x b6 !
(zugzwang). 1 . . . Se8 ; 2 Sc5. 1 . . . Sc4 ; 2 7S x f6.
1 . . . Sf5 ; 2 Qg4. 1 . . . Rf4 ; 2 Qd5. Indirect masked
half-battery; d6 must leave the file before the white Ss
1 79
Solutions to Problems for Solving
can open the R's guard of d4. Two more changes and
some extra play. The defence to the try embodies a single
defensive idea and thus counts as one refutation. There
are duals after careless moves of the black Sd6 in both
phases. Some Continental composers, holding that all
Black moves in a block set-up are equally important
because equally intelligent, regard such duals as fatal and
resort to huge additions of force to stop them !
208. Try 1 Qe8 ? (threat 2 Qg6). 1 . . K x f5 ; 2 Se3. 1 . . .
.

R x e8 ; 2 Sf6. 1 . . . Re6 ! Key 1 Sf4 ! (threat 2 Bh3).


1 . . . K x f5 ; 2 Qd7. 1 . . R x e2 ; 2 Q x e2. The Queen
.

can fire a battery, too, but only if it is indirect ; here it is


also masked and half. After the flight, the R's power is
felt by the pin of e5.
209. Try 1 Rf3 ? (threat 2 Rd7). I . . . B x d3 ; 2 Rb7. 1 . . .
P x d3 ; 2 Rg4. 1 . . . S x fl ; 2 Rg2. 1 . . . Sc4 ; 2 Rc7.
1 . . . K x d3 ! Key 1 Rg3 ! (threat 2 Rd6). 1 . . . B x d3 ;
2 Rb6. 1 . . . P X d3 ; 2 Rf4. 1 . . . S X fl ; 2 Rf2. 1 . . .
Sc4 ; 2 Rc6. Virtual change of four line-openings through
half-battery, twice with self-block and once with pin at the
mating move. The superficially obvious 1 . . . K x d3,
though unprovided, needs to be watched carefully : it
defeats the try only because it removes the black K from
the long diagonal, giving meaning to the black B's guard
of d7.
210. Try 1 Sf5 ? K x a5 ; 2 Bc7. 1 . . . Ka3 ; 2 Bel (2 Bd6?).
1 . . . Kc5 ; 2 Be3 (2 Bd6 ?). 1 . . . K x c3 ! Try l Be5 ?
Kc5 ; 2 Se6. 1 . . . K x c3 ; 2 Sf3. 1 . . . K x a5 ! Try
1 Bd2 ? K x a5 ; 2 Sd5. 1 . . . Kc5 ! Try 1 Bel ? Kc5 ;
2 Ba3 or 1 Bg3 ? K x c3 ; 2 Bel or 1 Bd6+ ? K x c3 ;
2 Qc2 but 1 . . . K x a5 ! Key 1 Be3 ! (zugzwang). 1 . . .
K x a5 ; 2 Sc6. 1 . . . Ka3 ; 2 Sc2. 1 . . . Kc5 ; 2 Sf5
(2 dSb5 ?). 1 . . . K x c3 ; 2 Se2. Thirteen different mates
for the star-flights in the various phases-though once the
solver sees 1 Be5 ? K x a5 he is unlikely to try other first
moves defeated in the same way.
21 1 . Try 1 Sc6 ? (threat 2 Se4). 1 . . . bSd2 ; 2 B x f3. 1 . . .
fSd2 ; 2 B x b3. 1 . . . R x d3 ! Key 1 Bc4 ! (threat 2 Se4).
1 . . . bSd2; 2 S x f3. 1 . fSd2 ; 2 S x b3. Half-battery
. .

1 80
Solutions to Problems for Solving
with changed interferences, of an unusual type : each of
two black pieces unguards a battery and immobilises a
line-piece guarding it from the rear, so White can mate by
capturing the other piece that guards the battery. The
need to stop cooks made for ugly construction.
212. Try 1 Sd5 ? (threat 2 Qc3). 1 . . . Qa3 + ; 2 Bd3. 1 . . .
Qf4+ ; 2 S x f4. 1 . . . Qf8 + ; 2 Bf5. 1 . . . Q x d5 ;
2 B x d5. 1 . . . P x d5 ! Key 1 Bd5 ! (threat 2 Qc4).
1 . . . Qa3 + ; 2 Sd3. 1 . . . Q X f4+ ; 2 R X f4. 1 . . .
Q x d5 + ; 2 S x d5. 1 . . . P x d5 ; 2 Se6. 1 . . . Q x g6 ;
2 S x g6. Try and key unpin the Queen to give three
checks, with half-battery play. It is a pity the try is
defeated by the capture of the piece that makes it.
213. (a) 1 Rg3, K x c6 ; 2 fSe5. 1 . . . Kc4 ; 2 Sd2. 1 . . . Ke4 ;
2 Sh4. 1 . . . Ke6 ; 2 S x d4. Not I Sh4 ? P x g2 ! (b)
1 Sh4, K x c6 ; 2 gRg7. 1 . . . Kc4 ; 2 Rc2. 1 . . . Ke4;
2 Rg3. 1 . . . Ke6 ; 2 Rg6. Not 1 Rg3 ? Ph4 ! Without
the twin, the try, with its obvious defence, could easily be
missed. Alternatively, Edgar Holladay suggests : (c)
remove h3-to leave a sound "mate in two, in two ways".
214. Try 1 Pc3 ? S random ; 2 Sal . 1 . . . Sd3 ! ?; 2 Sd4.
1 . . . Sc2 ! Key 1 Sal ! (zugzwang) S random ; 2 Pc3.
1 . . . Sd3 ! ; 2 Pc4. Only after e4-f2 is closed does White
need to guard b5 by unpinning the black Bishop ; but
then he can afford to !
2 1 5. Try 1 Sal ? Pb5 ; 2 Pc3. 1 . . . Q x h4 ; 2 Pc4. 1 . . .
P x a5 ! Key 1 Pc3 ! (zugzwang). 1 . . . Pb5 ; 2 Sal .
1 . . . Q x h4 ; 2 Sd4. Closely related to the last problem,
but this time the unpinning move is allowed by unguard,
not interference.
216. Try I S x g5 ? B x c4; 2 Rf5. 1 . . . B x e6 ; 2 Rd3.
1 . . . PaS ! (2 Pb5 ?). Key 1 Ra3 ! (threat 2 R x a6).
1 . . . B x c4 ; 2 Sd6 (2 Sc3 ?). 1 . . . B x e6 ; 2 Sc5 (2 Sf6 ?).
A combination of two Mansfield ideas. In the try the
black B opens lines as it unmasks the battery for the white
R ; in the actual play the white S must avoid unpinning
the self-pinned black B to guard the flight.
217. Try 1 dS x e3 ? (threat 2 Qc4). 1 . . . B x e5 ; 2 Sd4.
1 . . . Q x e5 ; 2 Sd6. 1 . . . R x a3 ! (2 Qb4 ?, 2 Sd4 ?).
1 81
Solutions to Problems for Solving
Key 1 fS x e3 ! {threat 2 Qc4). 1 . . . B x eS ; 2 Sc3.
1 . . . Q x eS ; 2 Sd6. Another way to show the half­
battery combined with self-pin-the mates unmask the
pin-line itself instead of the mating piece as in No. 2 1 6.
Here this is combined with defence by pin of White and
incomplete half-pin, active again after 1 . . . Bd4 ; 2 Qfl .
2 1 8 . Try 1 S x f6 ? (threat 2 Sf any). 1 . . . dR x d3 ; 2 ReS.
1 . . . fR x d3 ; 2 Rf2. 1 . . . R x h3 ! Key 1 Rg2 ! {threat
2 RgS). 1 . . . dR x d3 ; 2 Sd6. 1 . . . fR x d3 ; 2 Sg3.
Same theme as the last problem, in a simpler version.
The key permits 1 . . . Rf2+ and we thus hope you saw
the try first !
219. Try 1 Sc3 ? (threat 2 Q x dS). 1 . . . R x d4 ; 2 Be6.
1 . . . Q x d4 ; 2 B x e2. 1 . . . K x d4 ; 2 BfS. 1 . . .
R x eS ! Key 1 Bd7 ! {threat 2 Q x dS). 1 . . . R x d4 ;
2 S x d6. 1 . . . Q x d4 ; 2 Sd2. 1 . . . K x d4 ; 2 Sf6.
This time, because the self-pins on the half-battery line
occur next to the black K, it was possible to work in an
indirect-half-battery mate after the flight-but at a huge
cost of force and space.
220. Tries : 1 bS random ? Ra8 ! 1 Sa4 ! ? PdS ! (2 Qa6 ? ?).
1 dS random ? Rh2 ! 1 Sc2 ! ? Bf7 ! (2 gR x f7 ?). Key
1 Se2 ! White Correction (see chapter 1 1) by both half­
battery pieces, which close black and white lines.
221 . Tries : 1 bR random ? Bf6 ! 1 Rd4 ! ? Bel (2 Qd8 ?). 1 eR
random ? Be7 ! 1 ReS ! This very simple setting is con­
sidered a bore by one of the authors who did not compose
it, and a gem by the other.
222. Tries : 1 Sd3 ? Ka3 ; 2 BcS. 1 . . . KaS ! 1 BcS ? Ka3 ;
2 Sd3. (KaS ; 2 Sc6). 1 . . . KbS ! 1 SdS ? KaS ; 2 Bc3.
(PaS ; 2 BcS). 1 . . . Ka3 ! Key 1 Bc3 ! (threat-PaS,
Ka3 ;-2 Sc2). KaS ; 2 SdS. (KbS ; 2 Sd3. P x bS ;
2 a8 = Q). Between the first two tries, and between the
third try and the actual play, double sequence reversal is
carried out : in this theme, the first move in each phase
becomes the second move in the other phase. There are
several incidental changes, and one more in the try 1 Be3 ?
K x bS ; 2 Sc6 (but 1 . . . Ka3).
1 82
Solutions to Problems for Solving
223. (a) 1 Ba3 (threat 2 Ke2). 1 . . . Rb4; 2 0-0-0. 1 . . .
R x d2 ; 2 K x d2. Not 1 Ke2 ? Q x g2 ! (2 Se2 ? ?). (b)
1 Ke2 (threat 2 B any). 1 . . . Rb4 ; 2 Bb2. 1 . . . R x d2 + ;
2 B x d2. 1 . . . Qa8 ; 2 Ba3. NoT 1 Ba3 ! ! ? Rb4 ! ! ! and
2 0-0-0 is illegal ! How did the black R reach h 1
without checking the white K , making him move and thus
removing his right to castle ? Only by promotion from
h7-and there are not enough White pieces missing to
provide the captures that would permit this way out, if
the black g-pawn is once added. The promoting journey
would be from the e-file-and, what with Ph2 as well, too
many captures are needed.
224. 1 Sb2 ?, Qg2 ! ; 2 0-0-0 ? ? ? ?. 1 dSf2 ? Q x g6 ! ; 2
0-0-0 ? ? ? ?. 1 Kd2 !. To get those Pawns on the a-file,
White must have captured a promoted black Pawn, which
checked at d2. So White can't castle.
225. 1 S x a6 ?, Q x a6 !. 1 bSc6 ?, P x b5 !. 1 Sb7 ! ! which,
despite all appearances, does NOT fail to 1 . . . 0-0, since
this can be proved illegal !
226. Try 1 Sd8 ?, R x c5 ; 2 R x c5. 1 . . . Rd6 ; 2 R x d6.
(R x e5 ; 2 R x e6). 1 . . . R x d4 ! Try 1 Rd6 ?, R x c5 ;
2 S x c5. 1 . . . R x d6 ; 2 S x d6. (R x d4; 2 R6 x d4).
1 . . . R x e5 ! Key 1 Qa4 ! (zugzwang). 1 . . . R x c5 ;
2 P x c5. 1 . . . Rd6 ; 2 Pd5. (R x d4 ; 2 Q x d4). Life is
not always real and earnest. This is a Zagoruyko, heavily
(very heavily) disguised as a half-battery. The white
Rc6 and Sb7 are pure spoof after the key-and it is
essential to the point of both the problem and the joke
that they should be.

CHAPTER 9
236. 1 Pc8 =S (zugzwang). 1 . . . Bg5 ; 2 Qf5. 1 . . . Rg5 ;
2 R x f4. 1 . . . Pf5 ; 2 Q x e5. 1 . . . Pf3 ; 2 Sg3. 1 . . .
Pd3 ; 2 Rel . 1 . . . Bb3 ; 2 Re2. 1 . . . Bc4 ; 2 R x d4.
1 . . . Rb4 ; 2 Sd6. 1 . . . Rc4 ; 2 Q x d5. For years
composers thought that no more than eight black inter­
ferences could be achieved in a single-phase orthodox two­
mover, but this brilliant problem raised the total to
1 83
Solutions to Problems for Solving
nine, in a setting whose only real weakness-and a relat­
ively small one at that, since this is a task problem-is a
key which slightly increases White's strength. Since this
problem was composed, others have equalled this record
task achievement (see No. 247).
237. Set : Rc4 ; 2 Pc3. 1 . . . ReS ; 2 Pc4. 1 . . . Rb3 ; 2 P x b3.
1 . . . Rd3 ; 2 P x d3 . Key 1 Qh l (threat 2 Qh7). I . . .
ReS ; 2 Pg4. 1 . . . Rc7 ; 2 Pg3. I . . . Rf3 ; 2 P x f3.
I . . . Rh3 ; 2 P x h3. Compare No. 23S ; here the double
Albino is spread over two phases, and interest is added
by the black R's defences to the threat. The changed mate
after 1 . . . ReS shows an odd sort of reciprocal effect : in
the set play, the P guards dS and the Q guards fS, and in
the actual play the roles are reversed. A. C. White's
pioneer was published in the American Chess Bulletin in
I 94 I : 2K3BS/B7/3pp l Sl / I p1 P3R/4K3/RSq 1/S1 P3Pp/7Q.
I Qbl .
238. Set : 1 . . . Qh8 ; 2 P x h8 =S. 1 . . . Qd6/Qe7 ; 2 Pg8 =Q.
I . . . Kg8 ; 2 P x f8 = Q. 1 . . . Q x g7+ ; 2 R x g7. Key
I Q x h7 (threat 2 P x f8 = Q). 1 . . . Qh8 ; 2 P x h8 =Q.
I . . . Qd6/Qe7 ; 2 Pg8 = S. 1 . . . R x dS ; 2 P x f8 = S.
I . . . Q x g7+ ; 2 Q x g7. 1 . . . K x f6 ; 2 R x f3. 1 . . .
Qg8 ; 2 Qg6. Two �hanged unpins of a promoting Pawn,
which makes all its possible promotions in either set or
actual play. The changed check, black K self-pin and
black Q self-block all add interest to this fine example of
transatlantic co-operation.
239. 1 Qd6 ?, R x a4 ; 2 Qd2 (threat). 1 . . Sd3 + ; 2 Q x d3.
.

1 . . . Rd8 ! 1 Qf6 ?, R x a4 ; 2 Sc4 (threat). 1 . . . Sd3 + ;


2 eS X d3 (threat), and all the eight threatened mates by
eS are forced by different defences ; but 1 . . . Re8 ! So
1 Qc7 !, R x a4 ; 2 Sc x a4. 1 . . . Sd3 + ; 2 cS x d3 .
Again all eight mates are forced, from the other white S
this time. 1 . . . Rc8 ; 2 QaS (that is why 1 Qc6 ? fails to
1 . . . Rc8 !). Two complete white S tours, and three pairs
of mates for the black S check and 1 . . . R x a4. Since
some of these mates are threats, it is a matter of taste
whether this qualifies as a Zagoruyko.
240. 1 Rc8 ? with eight threats from the Sc6, each forced, fails
1 84
Solutions to Problems for Solving
.to 1 . . . b5 ! So 1 Rh3 ! with eight threats from f3, each
forced. The symmetry makes the effect rather less inter­
esting than in No. 239, and the try is more obviously
defeated ; but the white force is smaller.
241 . Set : 1 . . . aS any ; 2 Kc5. 1 . . . fS any ; 2 Ke3. 1 . . .
PeS + ; 2 Kd5. 1 . . . R x e4+ ; 2 K x e4. Key 1 Kc3,
waiting. 1 . . . aS any ; 2 Kb4. 1 . . fS any ; 2 Kd2.
.

1 . . . Ba2 ; 2 Kc2. 1 . . . Pa3 ; 2 Kb3. 1 . . . Pb4+ ;


2 Kc4 (as set). 1 . . . B x d3 ; 2 K x d3 (as set). 1 . . . Pc4 ;
2 Rb6. 1 . . . R x e4 ; 2 Qg5. Six white K mates in set
and actual play ; the waiting key and the extra changes
complete a remarkable problem. It still remains for some
genius to show (a) twelve different forced white K mates
in two phases, e.g. a set-up like No. 241 but with the
white K initially on c3, moving to d4 in the try and b2 in
the key ; and (b) three-phase white K play (e.g. from c3,
b2 and d4 in No. 241).
242. 1 Rd6 (threat 2 R x d4). 1 . . . Se2 ; 2 S x f2. 1 . . . Sc2 ! ;
2 Sd2 (2 S x f2 ?). 1 . . . Sb3 ; 2 Qd5. l . . . Sb5 ; 2 B X d3.
1 . . . Sc6 ; 2 Sc3. 1 . . . Se6 ; 2 Qe5. 1 . . . Sf5 ; 2 Qg2.
1 . . . Sf3 ; 2 Sg3. Apart from Heathcote's masterpiece
(CPIA No. 9), probably the only black S wheel where
none of the eight thematic mates captures the S. The key
is poor, but the first six variations are interferences (five
are usual for the task, but six are rare) and the problem
is full of interesting play.
243. 1 Rc5 (threat 2 R X e5). "eS random" ; 2 Q x a6. In fact
the eS cannot move "at random", but must visit one of
eight particular squares ; each move corrects the primary
error but allows a different new mate instead. 1 . . . Sc4 ;
2 Qd5, 1 . . . Sc6 ; 2 Qd6, 1 . . . Sd7 ; 2 Sc7 and 1 . . . Sf7 ;
2 S x g7 are interferences ; the other four corrections
allow simple recapture mates, three times with distinct
openings of the masked battery line e1-e6. Almost a
satire on Correction, but an extension of the black S­
wheel to nine mates . . . ?
244. 1 Sg5 (zugzwang), hB.- ; 2 R x h8. 1 . . . P X g3 ; 2 Re4.
1 . . . P x g6 ; 2 Qg8. 1 . . . Pd2 ; 2 Qe2. 1 . . . dP x c3 ;
185
Solutions to Problems for Solving
2 Qe4. 1 . . . B X d6 ; 2 Qc8. 1 . . . B X b6 ; 2 Qc6. 1 . . .
bP x c3 ; 2 Qa4. 1 . . . Pb2 ; 2 Ba4. The black error of
line-opening is seldom interesting, unless it is intensively
thematised, as in this example with nine such variations.
Sometimes called the "open-gate" theme, line-opening is
one of the beginner's favourite devices : budding com­
posers studying this problem can learn tricks of the trade
like the way the Bc5 is made to give two different mates
by its moves.
245. 1 Bd3 (zugzwang). 1 . . . R x c6 ; 2 Qe5. 1 . . . Rd6 ;
2 Qe4. 1 . . . Re6 ; 2 Qc5. 1 . . . Rc4 ; 2 Be4. 1 . . .
R x d4 ; 2 Se3. 1 . . . aR elsefK x c6 ; 2 Sb4. 1 . . . fR on
file ; 2 Qd7. Five self-blocks by Rooks, never previously
shown with remotely comparable elegance. The flight is
provided, and variations and interest are fairly shared by
the two star performers.
246. (a) 1 Qf3 (zugzwang), P x d6 ; 2 S x d6. 1 . . . Pe6 ;
2 Be5. 1 . . . Pe5 ; 2 Qb3. 1 . . . P x f6 ; 2 Q x f6. (b) 6
Qa2 (zugzwang), P x d6 ; 2 R x d6. 1 . . . Pe6 ; 2 Qa7.
1 . . . Pe5 ; 2 R x e5. 1 . . . P x f6 ; 2 Rg5. Complete
change of the four mates following the moves of the
Pe7, achieved with an ingenious twinning mechanism.
247. 1 Rfl (zugzwang),_ Bb3 ; 2 Sc3. 1 . . . Rb3 ; 2 Q x c4.
1 . . . Pc3 ; 2 Q x d3. 1 . . . Sf2 ; 2 Rel . 1 . . . Sg3 ;
2 Sf2. 1 . . . Pg4; 2 Rf4. 1 . . . Ph5 ; 2 Kh6. 1 . . .
Be7 ; 2 Kf7. 1 . . . Re7 ; 2 Kf6. As in No. 236, nine
black interferences, in a setting as different from Driver's
as could be imagined. The key is good, and the B + K
battery gives two more mates.

CHAPTER 10
260. Try 1 R x fS ? (threat 2 QdS). 1 . . . K x f5 ; 2 Qe6.
1 . . . Kd4 ; 2 Qc4. 1 . . . Se5 ; 2 Rf4. 1 . . . Be5 ! Key
1 R x d3 ! (threat 2 Qd5). 1 . . . KeS ; 2 Qe6. 1 . . . K x d3 ;
2 Qc4. 1 . . . Sd4 ; 2 Re3. The try and the key give
different pairs of flights, but the two mates following the
flights remain the same. An attractive example of mate
transference.
1 86
Solutions to Problems for Solving
2�1 . Set : 1 . . . dSe5 ; 2 Sg5. 1 . . gSe5 ; 2 Sd2. Key 1 B x d4
.

(threat 2 Qe3). 1 . . . dSf4 ; 2 Sg5. 1 . . . gSf4 ; 2 Sd2.


The set mates for the self-blocks on e5 reappear after the
key when the S f3 is unpinned on f4 : not only changed
defences, but also change of theme (self-blocks to unpins).
This problem was awarded first prize in a composing
tourney held during the World Problemists' Congress at
Piran (Yugoslavia) during the summer of 1958. One of
its composers, Hermann Albrecht, formerly two-move
editor of the German problem magazine Die Schwa/be,
is famous throughout the problem world for his expert
knowledge of problems and for his vast collection of two­
movers, housed in boxes in his flat in Frankfurt-am-Main.
262. Set : 1 . . . cS .-� ; 2 Sf2. 1 . . . cSd4 ; 2 Sc3. 1 . . . K x e4 ;
2 Qg2. Key 1 Qa8 (threat 2 Q x c6). 1 . . . eS ; 2 Sf2.
.-�

1 . . . eSd4 ; 2 Sc3. 1 . . K x e4 ; 2 Q x c6. 1 . . . R x e4 + ;


.

2 Sb4. The pendulum key makes the two black Ss inter­


change roles. ·

263. Try 1 Qd8 ? (threat 2 Qf6). 1 . . . Q x d6 ; 2 B x c5.


1 . . . B x d6 ; 2 B x b6. 1 . . . Sc6 ! Key 1 Qa4 ! (threat
2 Qa1). 1 . . . Q x b4 ; 2 B x c5. 1 . . . B x b4 ; 2 B x b6.
1 . . . Sc4 ; 2 Rd5. 1 . . . Ba2; 2 Qdl . Self-pin by the
black Q and B on different squares in the two phases.
The try serves merely to emphasise the set play. Compare
No. 259, in which two extra phases, with further transfer­
ence and changes, have been introduced in a similar
matrix, at the cost of some lack of unity and some force
superfluous in the post-key play.
264. Try 1 P x c5 ?, P x c5 ; 2 Qd8. 1 . . . K x c5 ; 2 Ra5.
1 . . Pe4; 2 Qg5. 1 . . . S .-� ; 2 Qc4. 1 . . . Se4 ! Key
.

1 P x e5 ! (zugzwang). 1 . . . P x e5 ; 2 Qd8. 1 . . . Pc4;


2 Ra5. 1 . . . K x e5 ; 2 Qg5. 1 . . . S .-� ; 2 Qe4. Three
mates are transferred between virtual and actual play, and
a fourth is changed.
265. Set : 1 . . . Q x e5fe6 ; 2 Rb4. Try 1 Sc4 ? (threat 2 Sg5).
1 . . . Q x e6 ; 2 R x e7. 1 . . . Q x c4 ; 2 Rb4. 1 . . . S x e3 ;
2 Rf4. 1 . . . Q x f5 ! Key 1 Sd4 ! (threat 2 Q x g2).
1 . . . Q x e5 ; 2 R x e7. 1 . . . Q x d4 ; 2 Rb4. 1 . . .
S x e3 ; 2 Qf4. 1 . . . Bd1 ; 2 Qd3. The thematic mates
1 87
Solutions to Problems for Solving
all involve pin of the black Q to prevent her from inter­
posing on the diagonal a8-e4. So the mates cannot be
played until she has captured one of the Ss.
266. Set : 1 . . . R ......, on rank ; 2 Sd5. 1 . . . R......, on file ;
2 S x g4. Try 1 Qb1 ? (threats 2 Qf5/g6). 1 . . . Re4 ;
2 Sd5. 1 . . . Be4 ; 2 S x g4. 1 . . . Rd3 ! Key 1 Qal !
(zugzwang). 1 . . . B ,_,SW; 2 Sd5. 1 . . . B ,_,NW/SE ;
2 S x g4. The set and actual play illustrate the Focal
theme (see chapter 6), while the try introduces a Grimshaw
on e4, with the same two S-mates recurring in each phase.
Notice that the key sets up a block position, and that the
Q also gives two mates, after the P-moves.
267. Try 1 Bf6 ? (threat 2 eR/gRf8). 1 . . . dR x f6 ; 2 Pd8 = S.
1 . . . hR x f6 ; 2 Ph8 =S. 1 . . . K x f6 ; 2 Q x f5. 1 . . .
R x d4 ! Try 1 Sg6 ? (threat 2 Sh8). 1 . . . dR x g6 ;
2 Pd8 =S. 1 . . . hR x g6 ; 2 Ph8 = S. 1 . . . K x g6 ;
2 Q x f5. 1 . . . R x h7 ! Key 1 Se6 ! (threats 2 Sd8/Sg5).
1 . . . dR x e6 ; 2 Pd8= S. 1 . . . h R x e6 ; 2 Ph8=S.
1 . . . K x e6 ; 2 Q x f5. A different flight-square is granted
by each white first move, so that the three thematic mates
following the self-blocks and the flight are transferred in
the three phases.
268. Try 1 Qa7+ ?, Rd4 ; 2 Sc4. 1 . . . Sc5 ; 2 P x b4. 1 . . .
Rc5 ; 2 Sf5. 1 . . . Qd4 ; 2 Sg4. 1 . . . Rb6 ! Try 1 Qe7+ ?,
Re4 ; 2 Sc4. 1 . . . dSe5 ; 2 P x b4. 1 . . . Re5 ; 2 Sf5.
1 . . . Qe4 ; 2 Sg4. 1 . . . gSe5 ; 2 R x d3. 1 . . . Be4 !
Key 1 Qh6+ !, Rf4 ; 2 Sc4. 1 . . . dSf4 ; 2 P x b4. 1 . . .
Rg5 ; 2 Sf5. 1 . . . Qf4 ; 2 Sg4. 1 . . . gSf4 ; 2 R x d3.
The checking tries and key effect the transference of four
mates in all three phases, and of a fifth in two phases.
Notice that all the thematic defences are self-pins, and
that the black Q and R b4 interfere with each other's
powers as they move along the rank.
269. Set : 1 . . . Bg5 ; 2 Qg4. 1 . . . Rg5 ; 2 Rf7. Key 1 Sg5
(threats 2 Qd6/Rd8). ( 1 . . . B x g5 ; 2 Qd6. 1 . . . R x g5 ;
2 Rd8.) 1 . . . Rf3 ; 2 Qg4. 1 . . . Bf3 ; 2 Rf7. The set
position has a Grimshaw on g5. The key, like many
Nowotny keys, carries two threats, but these are not the
set mates, since the key-S opens the lines fl-f4 and d1-g4.
1 88
Solutions to Problems for Solving
The Grimshaw is now transferred to f3, and the mates of
the set play appear once again. A similar arrangement of
threats and mates is to be found in Szwedowski's No. 104.
270. Set : 1 . . . Bd2 ; 2 Pe3. 1 . . . Rd2 ; 2 Rf4. Key 1 Sd2
(threats 2 Pe4/R X g6). (1 . . . B X d2 ; 2 Pe4. 1 . . . R X d2 ;
2 R x g6.) 1 . . . Re4; 2 Pe3. 1 . . . Be4 ; 2 Rf4. There
is considerable similarity between this problem and the
previous one. Again the key shifts the Grirnshaw, from
d2 to e4.
27 1 . Set : 1 . . . R x c3 ; 2 Bb6. 1 . . . R x e3 ; 2 Be5. 1 . . .
K x c3 ; 2 Be5. Try 1 Se5 ?, R x c3 ; 2 R x e4. 1 . . .
R x e3 ; 2 R x c4. 1 . . . K x c3 ! Key 1 Sd6 ! (zugzwang).
1 . . . R x c3 ; 2 Sf5. 1 . . . R x e3 ; 2 Sb5. 1 . . . Ke5 ;
2 R x e4. 1 . . . Kc5 ; 2 R x c4. 1 . . . K x c3 ; 2 Qf6.
1 . . . K x e3 ; 2 Bb6. A combination of the Rukhlis and
Zagoruyko themes, in which the interest centres on the
transference of the mates 2 R x e4 and 2 R x c4, and the
mates after 1 � . . R x c3 and 1 . . . R x e3 in the three
phases of play. The changed pin-mate after 1 . . . K x c3,
and the star-flights, are quite incidental to the theme.

CHAPTER 11
279. Try 1 6B random ? (threat 2 Be6), Rd7 ! Try 1 Be7 ! ?
(threat 2 Rf6), Rd6 ! Try 1 Bd4 ! ? (threat 2 Rf6), Re2 !
Key 1 Bg7 ! (threat 2 Rf6), Rd6 ; 2 Se7. 1 . . . Re2 ;
2 Sd4. An extremely clear rendering of Secondary White
Correction in which the corrections by the B involve
neatly related square-blocking secondary errors.
280. Try 1 R random ? (threat 2 Bb5), Be4 ! Try 1 Re5 ! ?
(threat 2 Bb5), Be4 ; 2 R x e4. 1 . . . Sd6 ! Try 1 Rd3 ! ?
(threat 2 Bb5), B x a4 ! Key 1 Rb5 ! (zugzwang), B moves ;
2 Qb3 or 2 Qd3( x d3). 1 . . . fS any ; 2 Se5. 1 . . . bS
any ; 2 Qc3. 1 . . . Pe5 ; 2 Bd5. A curious form of
Secondary White Correction in which White can cope
with the pinning general defence 1 . . . Be4 only by
creating a block position.
281 . Try 1 K random(b5) ? (threat 2 Sc4), Pf4 ! Try 1 Kc5 ! ?
(threat 2 Sc4), Pf4 ; 2 Re8. 1 . . . Pg1 = Q ! Try 1 Kd3 ! ?
1 89
Solutions to Problems for Solving
(threat 2 Sc4), Pf4 ; 2 Rd5. 1 . . . Rh3 ! Try 1 K x b3 ! ?
(threat 2 Sc4), Pf4 ; 2 Qal . 1 . . . Rh3 ! Key 1 K x b4 !
(threat 2 Sc4), Pf4 ; 2 Bc3. 1 . . . Kf4 ; 2 Q x h2. The
white K is perhaps the least likely piece for an intensive
rendering of Secondary White Correction. Four correc­
tions by the K, giving four different mates after the
general defence 1 . . . Pf4, may be a task record
282. Set : 1 . . . B x e6 ; 2 Sc3. (1 . . . K x e6 ; 2 Q x c4.) Try
1 K random (b8) ? (threat 2 Sc7), B x e6 ! Try 1 K x b7 ! ?
(threat 2 Sc7), B x e6 ; 2 Bc6. 1 . . . Rbl ! Key 1 Kb6 ! !
(threat 2 Sc7), B x e6 ; 2 Sb4. 1 . . Rb1 ; 2 Sf4. 1 . . .
.

K x e6 ; 2 Q x c4. 1 . . Pc3 ; 2 Qa2. 1 . . . Se5 ; 2 R x e5.


.

This Tertiary White Correction by the white K may well


be unique. The general error of K random ? is to unguard
d6, abandoning the mate set for 1 . . . B x e6. The correc­
tion 1 K x b7 ! ? provides a new mate for 1 . . . B x e6
but commits the secondary error of allowing Sb5 to be
pinned. The correction key commits the same secondary
error but carries a tertiary element (a guard on c5) to
provide for the secondary defence 1 . . . Rbl . The mate
for 1 . . . B x e6 is again changed.
283. Try 1 Be5 ? (threat 2 Rd4), Bf2 ; 2 Sd2. 1 . . . Sc2 ! Try
1 cSe5 ! ? (threat 2 Rd4), Sc2 ; 2 B x d3. 1 . . . Bf2 ! Key
1 gSe5 ! (threat 2 Rd4), Bf2 ; 2 Qg4. 1 . . . Sc2 ; 2 Q x f3 .
1 . . . B x e5 ; 2 Q x e5. 1 . . . Pc5 ; 2 Bb7. A random
arrival at e5 (1 Be5 ?) unpins Rd6 to threaten 2 Rd4 mate
-but the general error is failure to provide for the general
defence of 1 . . . Sc2 ! An arrival correction by another
unit, 1 cSe5 ! ?, provides for 1 . . . Sc2, but commits the
secondary error of giving up the mate set for 1 . . . Bf2 !
The arrival correction key 1 gSe5 ! provides again for
1 . . . Sc2 and has the tertiary element (clearance of g4)
to yield a new mate for 1 . . . Bf2. A profound and rare
example of Tertiary White Arrival Correction.
284. Try 1 dS random ? (threat 2 Sf6), Pc5 ; 2 Qb5. 1 . . . Pe5 ;
2 Qf5. 1 . . . Sg3 ! Try 1 Sb5 ! ? (threat 2 Sf6), PeS ! Try
1 Sf5 ! ? (threat 2 Sf6), Pe5 ! Try 1 S X c6 ! ? (threat 2 Se5),
K x c6 ; 2 Qb5. 1 . . . P x c6 ; 2 Sf6. 1 . . . Pe5 ; 2 Q x d5.
1 90
Solutions to Problems for Solving
1 . . . Pf6 ! Key 1 S x e6 ! ! (threat 2 Sc5), K x e6 ; 2 Qf5.
1 . . P x e6 ; 2 Sf6. 1 . . . Pc5 ; 2 Q x d5. A natural
.

transition from Secondary White Correction to Threat


Correction. White cannot maintain 2 Sf6 as an adequate
threat even after two corrections-so the original threat
is corrected. Note the mate transference which causes
2 Sf6, 2 Qb5, 2 Qf5 and 2 Q x d5 to recur.
285. Try 1 Re3 ? (threat 2 Se7), Rh8 ! Try 1 Re4 ! ? (threat
2 Q x c4), K x e4 ; 2 Qc6. 1 . . eSd4 ; 2 Se7. 1 . . . Pc5 !
.

Key 1 Re6 ! (threat 2 Qc6), K x e6 ; 2 Q x c4. 1 . . . eSd4 ;


2 Se7. 1 . . . Se5 ; 2 R x e5. Threat Correction by ReS,
with mate transference which causes threats 2 Se7 and
2 Q x c4 to occur as mates.
286. Try 1 dR random (b4) ? (threat 2 Bd4), Se6 ; 2 dSc6.
1 . .. Sf5 ; 2 eSc6. 1 . . . cS any; 2 Re4. 1 . . . Pr4 ;
2 Bh2. 1 . . . Pd5 ; 2 Q x c7. 1 . . Pc5 ! Try 1 R x d6 ! ?
.

(threat 2 Sf7}, P x d6 ; 2 Bd4. 1 . . . K x d6 ; 2 Q x c7.


1 . . gS any ; 2 Re6. 1 . . . Pr4 ; 2 Bh2. 1 . . R x f8 !
. .

Key 1 R x f4 ! (threat 2 Sg6), P x f4 ; 2 Bd4. 1 . . K x f4 ;


.

2 Bh2. 1 . . . gS any ; 2 Rf5. 1 . . . Pd5 ; 2 Q x c7.


1 . . . Se4 ; 2 R X e4. The wealth of piay given by Sg7 is
a valuable addition to this example of Threat Correction,
with the initial threat 2 Bd4 corrected twice. Mate trans­
ference repeatedly brings in 2 Bd4, 2 Q x c7 and 2 Bh2.
287. Try 1 dP random ( x c5) ? (threat 2 fSd4), S x f1 ; 2 Be4.
1 . . . B x f3 ; 2 R x f3 . 1 . . Pe4; 2 Qf6. 1
. . Rc6 !
. .

Try 1 Pd5 ! ? (threat 2 Q x g5), Se4 ; 2 fSd4. 1 . . . Pc4 !


Key 1 P x e5 ! (threat 2 Qf6), B x e5 ; 2 fSd4. 1 . . . R x e6 ;
2 Q x g5. 1 . . . Se4 ; 2 B x e4. 1 . . . Rf8 ; 2 Sg7. 1 . . .
Sf7 + ; 2 Q x f7. Threat Correction, with an initial threat
corrected twice, and complete mate transference effects
from the white P. Note also how 2 fSd4 is transferred.
288. Try 1 R x d2 ? (threat 2 Sd6), Be5 ; 2 R x e5. 1 . . . Ra7 !
Try 1 Rd3 ! ? (threat 2 Re3), P x d3 ; 2 Sd6. 1 . . . K x d3 ;
2 Sc5. 1 . . . Bd4 ; 2 R x d4. 1 . . . Be5 ! Try 1 R x g5 ?
(threat 2 Sc5), Bd4 ; 2 R x d4. 1 . . . Ra5 ! Key 1 Rf5 !
(threat 2 Bc2), P x f5 ; 2 Sc5. 1 . . . K X f5 ; 2 Sd6.
Threat Correction-doubled ! The corrected threat of the
191
Solutions to Problems for Solving
dR is still not adequate, so attention turns to the bR.
Mate transference brings in again the original threats
2 Sd6 and 2 Sc5 after K and P captures at d3 and f5.
289. Try 1 Bg8 ? (threat 2 Sc4), Pe6 ! Try 1 Rf3 (threat 2 Sf7),
Sf4 ! Key 1 Pe4 ! (zugzwang), Pe6 ; 2 Sc4. 1 . . . Sf4 ;
2 Sf7. 1 . . . 2S else ; 2 Pf4. 1 . . . P X d6 ; 2 B X d6.
1 . . . P x e4 e.p. ; 2 Bc3. 1 . . . 3S any ; 2 Rf5. One of the
clearest examples of the Dombrovskis theme. The
sweeping anti-critical tries and their refutations are likely
to be seen by the solver-an essential requirement not
always fulfilled in problems with this theme.
290. Try 1 Pa4 ? (threat 2 Rc3), S X d4 ; 2 Q X d5. 1 . . . R X c6 !
Try 1 Q x g4 ? (threat 2 S x aS), R x c6 ; 2 B x d5. 1 . . .
S x d4 ! Key 1 R x d5 ! (threat 2 ReS), K x dS ; 2 B x e6.
1 . . . R x c6 ; 2 Rc3. 1 . . . S x d4 ; 2 S x aS. A complex
elaboration of the Dombrovskis theme. After each try,
there is a mate provided for the thematic defence which
defeats the other try. The key changes both these mates.

CHAPTER 12
3 1 4. Key 1 Be6 ! (zugzwang), 1 . . . Q random ; 2 Rg4 (A).
1 . . . Qf4 ! ; 2 Rd5 (B). 1 . . . B random ; 2 Rd5 (B).
1 . . . Bd6 ! ; 2 Rg4 (A). 1 . . . Sh4 ; 2 Q x h4. 1 . . . Sf4 ;
2 Ph4. Reciprocal correction in actual play with the
combination of withdrawal and interference unpin errors.
It is a pity that the white K cannot be on d8, with the
variation 1 . . . BaS + ; 2 R x aS ; but the white B must
be prevented from playing beyond e6.
3 1 S. Key 1 Bg7 ! (zugzwang), 1 . . . fR random ; 2 Qg4 (A).
1 . . . fRfS ! ; 2 Bh6 (B). 1 . . . dR random on file ; 2 Bh6
(B). 1 . . . Rd3 + ! ; 2 S X d3 (C). 1 . . . dR random on
rank; 2 Sd3 (C). 1 . . . ReS ! ; 2 Qg4 (A). 1 . . . PeS ;
2 S x dS. 3-fold cyclic black correction by two black
pieces.
3 1 6. Key 1 Pf4 ! (zugzwang), 1 . . . R random ; 2 B x e6 (A).
1 . . . Rf6 ! ; 2 RgS (B). 1 . . . Pe4 ; 2 RgS (B). 1 . . .
P x f4 ! ; 2 Sh4 (C). 1 . . bB random ; 2 Sh4 (C). 1 . . .
.

Be7 ! ; 2 B X e6 (A). 3-fold cyclic black correction. The


1 92
Solutions to Problems for Solving
combination of withdrawal and interference unpin errors
of 1 . . . R random and 1 . . . Be7 ! was novel in a 3-piece
ring when this problem was published.
317. Key 1 Sc2 ! (zugzwang), 1 . . Kd5 ; 2 Sf6. 1 . . . K x f4 ;
.

2 Qe3. 1 . . . gB random ; 2 Q x e5 (A). 1 . . . B x f4 ! ;


2 Sf6. 1 . . . R random ; 2 Sf6 (B). 1 . . . Rd5 ! ; 2 Qe3 (C).
1 . . bB random ; 2 Qe3 (C). 1 . . . Bd3 ! ; 2 Q x e5 (A).
.

1 . . . bS any ; 2 Qd4. 1 . . . hS any ; 2 Qf3. 3-fold cyclic


black correction made a little more interesting by the two
flights and the mates after black S moves.
3 1 8. Key 1 Qh5 ! (zugzwang), 1 . . . S random ; 2 Qhl (A).
1 . . Sd4 ! ; 2 Rf4 (B). 1 . . . cB random NW/SE ;
.

2 Rf4 (B). 1 . . . Bd2 ! ; 2 S x d2 (C). I . . cB random


.

NE/SW ; 2 Sd2 (C). 1 . . . Be5 ! ; 2 Qhl (A). 3-fold


cyclic black correction which has the unusual feature that
each mate is produced by a different pair of errors-line­
opening + self-block, withdrawal + interference unpin,
and play onto guarded square + unguard.
319. Key 1 Qf8 ! (zugzwang), 7S random ; 2 Bc3 (A). 1 . . .
Sd5 ! ; 2 S x e6 (B). 1 . . . B random SE ; 2 S x e6 (B).
1 . . . Bdl + ! ; 2 R x dl (C). 1 . . . B random NE/SW ;
2 Rd1 (C). I . . . Bc4 ! ; 2 Sf3 (D). 1 . . . 6S random ;
2 Sf3 (D). I . . . S X c5 ! ; 2 Bc3 (A). With this historic
problem, Jeremy Morse showed for the first time that
4-fold cyclic black correction was possible without a
promotion key or additional force. Not only is the
problem a notable "first", but it is dual-free !
320. Key I R x d2 ! (zugzwang), I . . . gS random ; 2 Re2 (A).
1 . . Sf5 ! ; 2 Bd5 (B). 1 . . R random on file ; 2 Bd5 (B).
. .

1 . . . Rg4 ! ; 2 Q x g4 (C). 1 . . . R random on rank ;


2 Qg4 (C). 1 . . Rf5 ! ; 2 Qe3 (D). 1 . . . Pc4 ; 2 Qe3 (D).
.

1 . . . P x d4 ! ; 2 Re2 (A). A further example of 4-fold


cyclic black correction with a key much inferior to that of
the previous problem.
321 . Try 1 Qd7 ? (threat 2 Qc6), 1 . . . dS random ; 2 Sa2 (A) .
1 . . . S x b4 ! ; 2 Bb2 (B). 1 . . Se6 ! Key 1 Qh4 ! (threat
.

2 Qe1), 1 . . . fS random ; 2 Bb2 (B). 1 . . S x d3 ! ;


.

2 Sa2 (A). Reciprocal correction split from virtual to


actual play. Compare this problem and the AB/BA
13 1 93
Solutions to Problems for Solving
pattern of the reciprocally changed mates after the random
and correction moves of just one black piece in No. 299.
322. Set : I . . . S random ; 2 Sd4 (A). 1 . . . Se6 ! ; 2 Q x d3 (B).
Key 1 Kh7 ! (threat 2 Q x c5), 1 . . . S random ; 2 Q x d3
(B). 1 . . . Se4 ! ; 2 Sd4 (A). The attractive change-of-pin
key is the means of determining which piece is free to
mate after a random move of Sc5 and which piece is
unpinned after a correction. The AB/BA pattern is split
over set and actual play.
323. Set : 1 . . S random ; 2 Sf4 (A). 1 . . . Sd5 ! ; 2 Sg5 (B).
.

Key 1 Pe5 ! (threat 2 Qf5), S random ; 2 Sg5 (B). 1 . . .


Se4 ! ; 2 Sf4 (A). Again, reciprocal correction split over
set and actual play, but this time it is the line-opening and
closing complex of the key which effects the reciprocal
change of mates.
324. Try 1 Sa7 ?, Q random ; 2 Qd4 (A). 1 . . . Qd5 ! ; 24Sd6 (B).
1 . . . B random ; 2 4Sd6 (B). 1 . . . Be7 ! ; 2 Qd4 (A).
1 . . . Se6 ! Key 1 Sf2 ! (zilgzwang), Q random ; 2 Qd3 (C).
1 . . . Qd5 ! ; 2 8Sd6 (D). 1 . . . B random ; 2 Sd6 (D).
I . . . Be7 ! ; 2 Q x d3 (A). I . . . Kb5 ; 2 8Sd6. The
flight-taking try is a small defect in this extremely difficult
example of changed reciprocal correction from virtual to
actual play. Very few composers have the ability to set
·

this theme.
325. Key 1 Bc5 (threat 2 5Sb6), P x c5 ; 2 7Sb6 (A). 1 . . .
B X c5 ! ; 2 Bfl (B). I . . . P X d5 ; 2 Bfl (B). 1 . . B X d5 ! ;
.

2 7Sb6. Reciprocal arrival correction. The general errors


are self-blocks and the secondary errors are line-openings
-the reverse of the usual mechanism for achieving
reciprocal correction (compare Kidson's No. 29 1).
326. Try 1 Be6 ? (threat 2 fR x f7). 1 . . . Pf5 ; 2 S X g6. 1 . . .
Sd6 ; 2 S x d7. 1 . . . Bf5 ! Key 1 Bd3 ! (threat 2 fR x f7).
1 . . . Pf5 ; 2 S x d7. 1 . . . Sd6 ; 2 S x g6. Two black lines
are cut by the try, and two others by the key, with resulting
reciprocal change. The strong refutation of the try is
regrettable. Notice the two mates by the white Q :
1 . . . Qf5 ; 2 Q x h6. 1 . . . Rf6 ; 2 Qa8.
327. Set : 1 . . K x f5 ; 2 R x e3. I . . Ke4 ; 2 R x d5. Key
. .

1 Qb6 (threat 2 Qe6). 1 . . . K x f5 ; 2 R x d5. 1 . . . Ke4 ;


1 94
Solutions to Problems for Solving
2 R X e3. Reciprocal change after flights in a very light
setting-but with a severe danger of anticipation.
328. Set : 1 . . . R x e6 + ; 2 Rf3. 1 . . . R x g4+ ; 2 Rd5.
Key 1 Bg3 (zugzwang). 1 . . . R X e6+ ; 2 Rd5. 1 . . .
R x g4+ ; 2 Rf3. The pendulum key by the B alters the
guards on potential flights, and in so doing introduces
reciprocal change after the captures with check by the
black R. Some by-play from the S h7 : 1 . . Sg5 ; 2 Sg7.
.

1 . . . Sf6 ; 2 Sh6. 1 . . . Sf8 ; 2 P x f8 = Q.


329. Set : 1 . . . B x f7 + ; 2 Bd3. 1 . . . B x f3 + ; 2 Bd7. Key
1 Rg1 (threat 2 Rg5). 1 . . . B x f7 + ; 2 Bd7. 1 . . .
B x f3 + ; 2 Bd3. The same idea as in the previous
problem, but with R+B batteries instead of B + R
batteries. The key gives a flight, leading to a n interference :
1 . . . Ke5 ; 2 Q X f6.
330. Try 1 S x f4 ? (threat 2 Re3). 1 . . . Sb3 ; 2 Qc6. 1 . . . Sb5 ;
2 Q x g6. 1 . . . Sf5 ! Key 1 gSh4 ! (threat 2 Pd3). 1 . . .
Sb3 ; 2 Q x g6. 1 . . . Sb5 ; 2 Qc6. In try and key the S
puts additional guards on a different pair of potential
flights, so that White's mates, in which the unpinned Q
must regain control of certain squares, are reciprocally
changed between virtual and actual play.
3 3 1 . Set : 1 . . . Rb5 ; 2 Qf5. 1 . . . Rb3 ; 2 Qf3. Key 1 Sc4
(threat 2 Re3). 1 . . . Rb5 ; 2 Qf3. 1 . . . Rb3 ; 2 Qf5.
Reciprocal change after unpin of the Q once again, but
here the unpins are by withdrawal.
332. Try 1 Sc4 ? (threat 2 Bb2). 1 . . . Q X d2 ; 2 Q x f6. 1 . . .
Q x d3 ; 2 Qb6. 1 . . . Q x e2 ! Key 1 Sa4 ! (threat 2 Bb2).
1 . . . Q x d2 ; 2 Qb6. 1 . . . Q x d3 ; 2 Q x f6. Again it
is a question of reguarding different flights in the two
phases, the white Q being unpinned by withdrawal. The
try fails through white self-interference.
333. Check ! So not 1 Rd6 mate, or 1 Re6 mate. Try 1 Rd7 ?
(zugzwang). 1 . . . Bg7 ; 2 Rd6. 1 . . . Pf5 ; 2 Re6.
1 . . P x b6 ! Key 1 Re7 ! (zugzwang). 1 . . . Bg7 ; 2 Re6.
.

1 . . . Pf5 ; 2 Rd6. Reciprocal change, with the unpins on


two different lines ! Problems with the white K in check
still rank as unconventional, and are not everyone's cup
195
Solutions to Problems for Solving
of tea, but they have the merit of allowing plenty of scope
for unusual effects.
334. Set : 1 . . . Se4 ; 2 R x c5. 1 . . . Q x b8 ; 2 Rb6. Key
1 Qe6 (threat 2 Qc4). 1 . . . Se4 ; 2 Rb6. 1 . . . Q x b8 ;
2 R x c5. The white Q leaves the battery line and adds
extra guards on a6 and c4, so that the R need no longer
guard these squares after it is unpinned.
335. Set : 1 . . . Q x b7 ; 2 Bd2. 1 . . . Q x b1 ; 2 Bd6. Key
1 Ra8 (threat 2 Ra4). 1 . . . Q x b7 ; 2 Bd6. 1 . . . Q x b1 ;
2 Bd2. Compare this pendulum key with that of No. 329,
where the thematic variations are cross-checks. The white
Q here is extremely lazy, giving only one forced mate.
336. Try 1 Sf3 ? (threat 2 Qg5). 1 . . . Re7 ; 2 Bd2. 1 . . . Rg7 ;
2 Bd6. 1 . . . ReS ! Key 1 S X f5 ! (threat 2 Qg4). 1 . . .
Re7 ; 2 Bd6. 1 . . . Rg7 ; 2 Bd2. A similar arrangement
to that found in No. 330. Here it is the unpinned B which
must regain control of the squares which the S has not
guarded after the shut-offs by the black R b7.
337. Try 1 Bd8 ? (threat 2 Rf6). 1 . . . Pf5 ; 2 Sg5. 1 . . . Sd3 ;
2 Sc5. 1 . . . Bh7 ! Key 1 Qa7 ! (threat 2 Rf6). 1 . . . Pf5 ;
2 Sc5. 1 . . . Sd3 ; 2 Sg5. In the virtual play the Se4
must reguard f7 (after 1 . . . Pf5) and d7 (after 1 . . . Sd3),
and, as the mates are double-checks, can ignore the fact
that the mating-squares are guarded. Not so after the
key, which reguards f7 and d7.
338. Set : 1 . . . Q x d8 ; 2 Se7. 1 . . . Q x a5 ; 2 Se5. Key
1 Qg1 (threat 2 gS .-.). 1 . . . Q x d8 ; 2 Se5. 1 . . . Q x a5 ;
2 Se7. Dual avoidance in each phase : with pseudo-Java
effects in the set play, and direct guard after the key.
339. Set : 1 . . . Q x b2 ; 2 Se3. 1 . . . Q x g5 ; 2 Sb6. Key
1 Qe6 (threat 2 Qa6). 1 . . . Q x b2 ; 2 Sb6. 1 . . . Q x g5 ;
2 Se3. A similar idea to that of the previous problem, but
here the more interesting dual avoidance (White must
avoid closing his own lines) occurs in the post-key play.
340. Set : 1 . . . Q x a5 ; 2 P x c8 =Q. 1 . . . Q x g4 ; 2 P x c8
= S. Key 1 Se6 (threat 2 Qc7). 1 . . . Q x a5 ; 2 P x c8 =S.
1 . . . Q x g4 ; 2 P x c8 = Q. A novel form of reciprocal
change, in which the actual move remains the same but
196
Solutions to Problems for Solving
the choice of promotion is interchanged between the two
phases.
341 . Set : 1 . . . cR x c6 ; 2 Rd3. 1 . . . cR x e4 ; 2 Rb5.
1 . . . eR x c6 ; 2 Rd7. 1 . . . eR x e4 ; 2 RfS. Key 1 Be3
(zugzwang). 1 . . . cR x c6 ; 2 RbS. 1 . . . cR x e4 ;
2 Rd3. 1 . . . eR x c6 ; 2 RfS. 1 . . . eR x e4 ; 2 Rd7.
Double reciprocal change, in which mates ABCD are
replaced by mates BADC. Compare the matrix of this
problem with that of No. 328, with its single reciprocal
change. The try 1 Bg3 ? (preserving the set play) fails to
1 . . . S x e4 !
342. Try 1 Qe3 ? (threat 2 Q x e4). 1 . . . B ,....., ; 2 Q x e6
(secondary threat). 1 . . . BdS ; 2 QeS. 1 . . . ScS ; 2 ReS.
1 . . . S x h6 ; 2 Se7. 1 . . . Rf4 ! Key 1 Qe7 ! (threat
2 Q x e6). 1 . . . eS ,....., ; 2 Q X e4 (secondary threat).
1 . . . ScS ; 2 QeS. 1 . . . BdS ; 2 ReS. 1 . . . S x h6 ;
2 Qf6. Reciprocal change of primary and secondary
threats, with other changes and mate transference. The
key-and even more the try-are very strong, but the
unusual change effects are perhaps some compensation.
343. Set : 1 . . . Bc6 ; 2 Sb6. 1 . . . Qc4 ; 2 QeS. 1 . . . R x d4 ;
2 ReS. Key 1 Sc6 (threat 2 Sb4). 1 . . . B x c6 ; 2 QeS.
1 . . . Qc4 ;- 2 ReS. 1 . . . Rd4 ; 2 Sb6. Macleod was
among the first to discover the cyclic shift, of which this
is an early example. This same matrix, in which the key
opens and closes various lines, has been used several
times since in other settings of this theme.
344. Try 1 Sb7 ? (threat 2 RcS). 1 . . . Be3 ; 2 Sc7. 1 . . . Bd6 ;
2 Rd2. 1 . . . Rc8 ! Try 1 Sd3 ? (threat 2 ReS). 1 . . . Bd6 ;
2 Sc3. 1 . . . Rc8 ; 2 S x f4. 1 . . . Be3 ! Try 1 Se4 ?
(threat 2 ReS). 1 . . . Rc8 ; 2 Sf6. 1 . . . Be3 ; 2 Sc7.
1 . . . Bd6 ! Key 1 Se6 ! (threat 2 ReS). 1 . . . Be3 ; 2 eSc7.
1 . . . Bd6 ; 2 Rd2. 1 . . . Rc8 ; 2 S X f4. Cyclic refuta­
tion : each try provides for two of Black's defences to the
threat, but fails to the third, the refutation being different
in each case. The key, of course, deals with all three.
This example of the theme was composed without know­
ledge of its existence-and it won a first prize !
34S. Try 1 Qb1 ?, Pd4 ; 2 Qe4. 1 . . . P x fS ; 2 Q x fS. 1 . . .
1 97
Solutions to Problems for Solving
Pc4 ! Try 1 Qd1 ?, P x f5 ; 2 Q x d5. 1 . . . Pc4 ; 2 Qd4.
1 . . . Pd4 ! Try 1 Qa5 ?, Pc4 ; 2 S x c4. 1 . . . Pd4 ;
2 Q x c5. 1 . . P x f5 ! Key 1 Qa7 ! (zugzwang). 1 . . .
.

Pd4 ; 2 Q x c5. 1 . . . P x f5 ; 2 Qe7. 1 . . . Pc4 ; 2 Qd4.


The same theme as in the previous problem. This example
was unplaced in a strong tourney because the judge felt
that the many non-thematic tries by the Q militated
against the clarity of the idea. Perhaps his decision was a
little unjust ; this version of a difficult theme deserves
some commendation.
346. Try 1 Qa3 ? (threat 2 Sd6). 1 . . . Qf8 ; 2 R X g4. 1 . . .
Sc4 ; 2 Qd3. 1 . . . Bc5 ! Try 1 Q x f6 ? (threat 2 Sd6).
1 . . . Bc5 ; 2 Sc3. 1 . . . Qf8 ; 2 Q x g6. 1 . . . Sc4 ! Try
1 Q x b6 ? (threat 2 Sd6). 1 . . . Sc4 ; 2 Qbl . 1 . . . Bc5 ;
2 S x c5. 1 . . . Qf8 ! Key 1 Qe6 ! (threat 2 Sd6). 1 . . .
Qf8 ; 2 Q x g4. 1 . . . Sc4; 2 R x d4. 1 . . . Bc5 ; 2 Q x d5.
Cyclic refutation again, but with new mates in every
phase-two after each try, and three following the key.
This is thought to be the only example of the theme with
the maximum of nine distinct mates.
347. Try 1 Rc8 ? (threat 2 Bc5). 1 . . . Bf2 ; 2 Pd8 =Q. 1 . . .
R x d4 ; 2 dP x e8 = S. 1 . . . R x a5 ! Try 1 Rg5 ? (threat
2 Bc5). 1 . . . R x d4 ; 2 Ff8 =Q. 1 . . . R x a5 ; 2 Pd8 =Q.
1 . . . Bf2 ! Key 1 ReS ! (threat 2 Bc5). 1 . . . R x a5 ;
2 dP x e8 = S. 1 . . . Bf2 ; 2 Ff8 =Q. 1 . . . R x d4 ;
2 Re6. Cyclic mating permutation, with the white R
cutting three black guard-lines in turn. A novel feature of
this setting is that the thematic mates are given by pro­
moting pawns.
348. Try 1 Bb2 ? (threat 2 Sd4). 1 . . . eR x e6 ; 2 S x e l .
1 . . . eR x e6 ; 2 Sc5. 1 . . . Q x e6 ! Try 1 Bc5 ? (threat
2 Sd4). 1 . . . eR x e6 ; 2 Sb2. 1 . . . Q x e6 ; 2 S x el .
1 . . . cR x e6 ! Key 1 Be3 ! (threat 2 Sd4). 1 . . . Q x e6 ;
2 Sc5. 1 . . . eR x e6 ; 2 Sb2. Another example of cyclic
mating permutation, but here the black pieces lose control
of a white battery as a result of self-pin. The key works
because it shuts off the R e1 from e6 as well as from e4,
so that White does not have to provide a new mate for
1 . . . eR x e6. Notice 1 . . . P x e6 ; 2 Qf8.
1 98
Solutions to Problems for Solving
349. Try 1 Bc3 ? (threat 2 Q x f7). 1 . . . Q x g8 ; 2 Kf3. 1 . . .
B x b6 ; 2 K x g3. 1 . . . R x b6 ! Try 1 Be5 ? (threats
2 Q x f7/Sg7). 1 . . . R x b6 ; 2 K x g3. 1 . . . Q x g8 ; 2
Kf4. 1 . . . B x b6 ! Key 1 Bf6 ! (threat 2 Q x f7). 1 . . .
B x b6 ; 2 Kf4. 1 . . . R x b6 ; 2 Kf3. 1 . . . Q x g8 ; 2
R x e7. The permutation here is among the three mates
by the Royal battery. Black loses control of squares in the
white K's field after the thematic shut-offs by the B g7.
350. Try 1 fRf1 + ?, Q x b2 ! Try 1 Rf2+ ?, Re5 ! Try 1 Rf4+ ?,
Rd4 ! Try 1 Ra6 + ?, Q x b2 ! Try 1 Rb6+ ?, Rd4. Key
1 Re6+ ! Double cyclic mating permutation, achieved at
the expense of checks in try and key, and very obvious
refutations. Those who have studied the three preceding
problems will have no difficulty in working out the two
cycles.
3 5 1 . Set : 1 . . . Pe6 ; 2 S x f6. 1 . . . Pc6 ; 2 S x b6. Try
1 Q x e7 ?, Pc6 ; 2 Qd6. 1 . . . 7S ......., ; 2 S x f6. 1 . . . S x f5 !
Key 1 Q x c7 ! (zugzwang). 1 . . . 7S ......., ; 2 S x b6. 1 . . .
Pe6 ; 2 Qd6. In this example of cyclic mating permuta­
tion, one of Black's thematic pieces is immobilised in the
set position, while the other two are captured in turn in
the try and. key. Note the by-play produced by the other
black pieces, and the changes after moves of the S d4.
352. Try 1 Pd6 ?, P x d3 ; 2 B x g5. 1 . . . P x f3 ; 2 Bf6.
1 . . . Pb5 ! Try 1 Pf6 ?, P x d3 ; 2 Bd6. 1 . . . P x f3 ;
2 Bc5. 1 . . . B,...._, ! Key 1 Rb4 ! (zugzwang). 1 . . .
P x d3 ; 2 Bc5. 1 . . . P x f3 ; 2 B x g5. A reduced
Zagoruyko, in which one of the mates from each virtual­
play phase reappears in the post-key play-but after the
other thematic defence. Duals set for captures are
thematic !
353. Set : 1 . . . K x d5 ; 2 Bc6. 1 . . . K x f5 ; 2 Bg6. Try
1 Sf3 ?, K x d5 ; 2 Pe4. 1 . . . K x f5 ; 2 Q x e6. 1 . . .
R x e3 ! Key 1 Sd3 !, K x d5 ; 2 Q x e6. 1 . . . K x f5 ;
2 Pe4. In this reduced Zagoruyko the set mates are
abandoned altogether, but the virtual mates appear,
reciprocally changed, after the key. A serious weakness is
that the thematic mate 2 Q x e6 is also a threat.
199
Solutions to Problems for Solving
354. First solution : 1 Bd7 + , Kb6 ; 2 Rb8. 1 . . . Kb4; 2 Rbl .
Second solution : 1 Bc4 + , Kb6 ; 2 Rbl . 1 . . . Kb4 ;
2 Qc5. Third solution : 1 Bc6+, Kb6 ; 2 Qc5. 1 . . . Kb4 ;
2 Rb8. Cyclic change-Zagoruyko reduced to three
thematic mating moves.
355. Try 1 Qh2+ ?, Kc5 ; 2 Se6. 1 . . . K x e7 ; 2 Sd5. 1 . . .
Be5 ! Try 1 Rb6 + ?, Kc5 ; 2 Sd5. 1 . . . K x e7 ; 2 Qa3.
1 . . . P x b6 ! Key 1 Rd8 + !, Kc5 ; 2 Qa3. 1 . . . K x e7 ;
2 Se6. Notice also the non-thematic set play : 1 . . . Kc5 ;
2 Se8 (not 2 Sb5 ?) ; and 1 . . . K x e7 ; 2 Sb5 (not 2 Se8 ?).
This setting of the cyclic change suffers from the defect
that the try 1 Rb6+ ? is so obviously defeated. It might
perhaps be preferable to reset the problem with three
solutions. At least that would ensure that the solver
found everything the position had to offer.

200
General Index
Certain problem themes and effects, such as Batteries, Black Checks, Dual
avoidance, Line-opening, etc., occur too frequently as incidental features
to warrant a comprehensive list in this index. Readers are therefore
referred only to problems where these themes or effects occur as the prin­
cipal feature.

Active dual avoidance, p. 76, no. Common aim (to relate tries),
1 38 p. 1 6 ; no. 273
Actual play, p. 1 8 error (to relate tries), p. 1 6
Added mate, p . 5 1 Complete block, p . 1 4
Albino, no. 235, 237 Concurrent mates, p . 8 8
Anticipation, p. 20 Cook, p . 1 4
Arrival correction, pp. 82, 1 4 1 ; Cook-tries, p. 8 2
nos. 1 1 5, 283, 301 ; (Black) Critical move, p. 1 60, n o . 33
no. 301 ; (White) nos. 1 1 5, 283 square, p. 1 60, no. 3 3
Arrival Fleck, p. 9 1 , nos. 1 63, 195 Cross-check, pp. 15, 40 ; nos. 44-64
and passim ; tasks, p. 40n
Battery, p. 1 6 Cyclic change, p. 1 50, nos. 3 1 3, 354,
Bivalve, p . 3 6 355
Black Correction, p . 80, no. 146 and Black correction, p. 1 3 7 ; nos.
passim 295-297, 3 1 5-320
Interference, p. 1 5 (see Inter­ Interferences, p. 6 1 ; nos. 99, 1 10,
ference) 111
S-Wheel, p. 108 ; nos. 1 92, 227, mating permutation, p. 147, nos.
242, 243 3 1 0, 3 1 1 , 347-3 5 1
Block problems, p. 1 4 refutation, p. 1 46 ; nos. 309,
British Chess Magazine, p. 1 3 8 344-346
British Chess Problem Society, p. shift, p. 1 44 ; nos. 308, 343
116 virtual Java, p. 1 74 ; no. 1 74
By-play, p. 1 9
Defence, p. 14
Castling, nos. 64 , 204, 223 Dombrovskis theme, p. 1 30 ; nos.
Change of theme, no. 261 278, 289, 290
Changed mates (changes), p. 15 Double sequence reversal, p. 103,
Check, p. 1 5 no. 202
Checking key, p . 27 ; nos. 10, 1 1 , Dual, p. 24
2 1 , 22, 268 Dual avoidance, p. 75 ; nos. 1 38-
Combinative separation, p. 89 ; 145 and passim
nos. 1 6 1 , 1 62, 1 88-195
Commendation, p. 1 6 Economy, p . 20

201
General Index
Fleck theme, p. 8 7 ; nos. 1 58-166, Java, p. 77 ; nos. 1 4 1 , 1 42, 1 70, 1 7 1 ,
1 87-196 1 73, 1 74
Flight (= Flight-square), pp. 1 5,
22 and passim Key, p. 1 4
Focal effects, p. 67; nos. 53, 1 1 7-
1 36, 266 Line-opening, p . 1 5 ; thematised,
Focus, p. 67 no. 244
Four-hands-round, p. 58 ; no. 292 Line-piece, p. 1 5
Linear shift, p. 93

Gamage unpin, no. 75 Mansfield couplet, p. 1 0 1


Give-and-take key, p. 22 Mari theme, p. 76 ; nos. 1 3 8-140
Goethart unpin, p. 3 3 ; nos. 24, 2 1 4, Masked half-battery, nos. 1 25, 206,
215 216
Good Companion Chess Problem half-pin, p . 1 6 1 ; no. 40
Club, p. 28 Mate in two moves (Harley), p. 58
Good Companion Two-Mover, The, Mate transference, pp. 52, 1 1 6, 1 3 0 ;
p. 34n nos. 7 1 , 20 1 , 248-271 and
Grimshaw, pp. 3 1 , 57 ; nos. 54, passim
93-98, 1 03, 1 05-109, 269, 270 Mutate, pp. 1 4, 50
Guard, p. 1 5
Notation, pp. 1 1 , 1 3
Nowotny, p. 63 ; nos. 1 00--1 04,
Half-battery, p . 99 ; nos. 42, 43, 63,
1 1 2-1 1 6
1 97-226
Half-pin, p. 3 1 ; nos. 23-43 and
Observer, The, p . 1 6 1
passim ; + cross-check, nos. 46,
Open-gate, no. 244
47, 48, 52, 56, 57 ; + unpin of
Organ-pipes, p. 63 ; no. 1 1 3
White, nos. 26, 8 8 ; + White
Originality, p. 20
interference, no. 25
Herpai, p. 79 ; nos. 143-1 45, 1 67-
Partial Fleck, p. 93 ; no. 1 66
1 69
Passive dual avoidance, p. 7 6 ; no.
Honourable mention, p. 1 6
1 39
Pawn-Grimshaw, p. 57
Ideal Rukhlis, p . 1 1 9 ; no. 255 Pawn-promotion, p. 24
Incomplete block, p. 1 4 Pawn-switch, p. 36
Indirect battery, p . 22, no. 2 and
passim Pendulum key, p. 25 ; no. 7 and
half-battery, no. 205 passim
masked half-battery, nos. 207, Permutation effects, p. 146
208 Phase, p. 1 7
Interference, Black, p. 1 5 ; White, Pickaninny, no. 246
p. 1 5 Pin, p. 1 5
Interference cycle, p . 6 1 , no. 99 Pin-mate, p. 25 ; no. 6 and passim
S-wheel, p. 109 Pin-unpin restoration, p. 49 ; no. 67
task, nos. 236, 247 Piran Problemists' Congress 1 958,
unpin, p. 48 ; no. 65 and passim p. 1 87
202
General Index
Plus-flights, p. 23 Switchback, p. 1 60 ; no. 36
Pole-of-line mate, p. 58 Task problems, p. 108
Primary defence, p. 80 Tertiary Black correction, p. 8 5 ;
error, p. 80 nos. 1 54, 1 82, 1 83
Fleck, p. 88 defence, p. 85
Prize, p. 16 error, p. 85
Problem Art, The (Rowland), p. 108 threat, p. 85
Progressive separation, p. 9 1 ; nos. White correction, p. 1 27 ; nos.
1 63, 1 96 274, 275
Promoted pieces, p. 1 4 Thematic try, p. 1 6
Provided flight, p . 22 Theme, p . 1 5
Theme B, p. 1 1 1
Themen in Zyklusform, (Selb), p. 6 1
Radical change, p. 23 ; nos. 4, 76
Threat correction, p . 1 30 ; nos.
Random move, p. 80
276, 277, 284-288
Reciprocal Black correction, p. 1 34 ;
Threat-problems, p. 14
nos. 291-294, 298-301 ; 3 14,
Total change, p . 61 ; nos. 3 1 , 59,
321-324; by arrival, nos. 301 ,
98
325
Tourney, composing, p. 1 6
Reciprocal change, p. 141 ; nos.
Tours de Force, Les, p . 108
1 3, 302-307, 326-342 .
Triple avoidance, p. 78; no. 142
Reduced ZagoruyK:o, p. 148 ; nos.
Tuxen theme, p. 34 ; no. 27
3 1 2, 3 1 3, 352, 353
Retrograde analysis, nos. 223, 225
Rook-Grimshaw, p. 57 Unity, p. 20
Royal battery, p. 1 58, no. 1 1 Unpin, p. 1 5 ; of White by Black,
Rukhlis, p. 1 1 8 ; nos. 104, 252-255, p. 48 ; nos. 65-92 and passim
269-271 ; + Zagoruyko. no Unprovided flights, p. 22
271
Valve, p. 37
Sahs, p. 143 Variation, p. 14
Schwa/be, Die, pp. 61, 71, 99 Virtual play, p. 18
Secondary defence, p. 81
error, p. 8 1
Waiting move, p. 14
Fleck, p . 88
White correction, p. 1 26 ; nos. 63,
Self-blocks (thematic) nos. 1, 3, 4,
220, 272, 274, 275, 279-284
229, 230, 245
half-pin, p. 82 ; nos. 72, 82, 83,
Self-pin, p. 25 ; no. 6 and passim
148
Separation, nos. 1 38-196
interference, p. 1 5
Set mates, p. 14
S-tour, nos. 239, 240; of tries, nos.
play, p. 14
272, 273
Shut-off, pp. 1 8, 58
Withdrawal unpin, p. 48
Somoff theme, p. 1 1 1
Star-flights, p. 23 ; nos. 5, 9, 10, 1 8-
22, 213, 271 Zagoruyko (theme), p. 19 and
Stocchi theme, p. 178; no. 195 passim

203
Index of Names
Problem nwnbers in brackets indicate either that the named composer
is responsible only for the version, or that substantial changes have been
made in his original position.

Adabaschev, M., no. (171) Dawson, L., no. 345


Ahues, H., p . 99 ; no. 199 Dawson, T. R., p. 36; no. 292
Albarda, J., no. 1 20 Dijk, N. G. G. van, p. 7 1 ; no. 121
Albrecht, H., p. 187; no. 261 D ombrovskis, A., nos. 278, 304
Alvey, G., p. 1 1 3 ; no. 234 Drese, G. H . , no. 230
Anderson, G. F., p. 3 1 ; nos. 23, 60 Driver, J. E., nos. 14, 236, 260, 286,
Asbury-Smith, P. C., no. 279 353

Barnes, B. P., nos. 4 1 , 5 1 , 53, 57, Ekstrom, S., no. 144


59, 79, 129, 130, 1 32, 1 33, 1 36, Ellerman, A., pp. 32, 41, 126; nos.
1 70, 1 77, 204, 206, 208, 2 1 5, 26, 27, 28
220, 221 , 223, 224, 225, 28 1,
Faulkner, W. J., no. 302
282, 285, 287, 290, 3 1 7, 321,
Feldmann, T. E., p. 1 36
325, 327, 330, 332, 334, (336),
Fink, A. J., no. 94
338, 339, 340, 344, 346, 347
Fleck, F., no. 4
Bartolovic, V . , p. 87; nos . . I 22, 275
Beale, J. L., no. 1 19
Gaidarov, G., nos. 140, 149
Bernstein, V., nos. 140, 149
Gamage, F., pp. 43, 1 74 ; nos. 48,
Beszczynski, J., no. 8
65, 67, (1 76)
Bettmann, H. W., pp. 1 1 1 , 1 1 2n
Gooderson, A. R., pp. 90, 1 77 ;
Bilner, A. S., no. 66
nos. 54, 83, 107, 1 34, 135, 1 86,
Birbrager, 1., no. 306
1 88, 1 89, 289
Blake, P. F., pp. 32, 40
Grant, H. W., no. 247
Bohm, F., no. 138
Grasemann, H., no. 309
Bottacchi, A., n o . 233
Grevatt, J., no. 280
Brehrner, S., nos. 274, 303
Groeneveld, C., no. 258
Buchwald, J., nos. 68, 147
Guidelli, G., p. 42 ; nos. 47, 150,
Bukne, R., no. 143
(1 80)
Bukofzer, M., no. 228

Hannelius, J., no. 277


Castellari, U., no. 163 Haring, J., p. 99
Cate, P. ten, no. 276 Harley, B., pp. 50, 82n, 100
Ceriani, L., p. 3 7 ; no. 3 1 Hartong, J., pp. 40, 90 ; nos. 5, 45,
159, 160, 161, 1 62
Davey, D . M., no. (241) Hasenzahl, K., no. 30

204
Index of Names
Heathcote, G., p. 40; no. (59) Mansfield, C., pp. 32, 33, 40, 101,
Hermanson, H., nos. 200, 248, 300 1 1 3 ; nos. 3, 24, 25, 39, 44,
Hesselgren, A., p. 1 12 ; no. 232 82, 1 1 3, 1 25, 197, 201, (244),
Holladay, E., nos. 70, 148, 1 52, 1 76, 249
238 Mari, A., p. 35 ; nos. 29, 1 37, 1 5 1
Hoole, J. R., no. (179) Matthews, R . C. 0., nos. 1 5, 1 83,
1 87
Janet, F., p. 63 Michel, F., no. 6
J0rgensen, W., no. lOO Millins, L., no. 146
Morse, C. J., pp. 1 36-1 38; nos. 1 8,
Kardos, T., no. 1 24 1 10, 237, 238, 241, 244, 245,
Kempe, A., p. 3 1 3 1 5, 3 18, 3 1 9
Kidson, H. E., no. 291 Moseley, A., no. (229)
King-Farlow, C. P., no. 345 Musante, H. L., nos. 74, (126)
Kiss, J., p. 60
Kiss, L., no. 1 55 Nanning, F. W., no. 3 1 2
Klett, P., no. 1 17 Neukomm, J . R., no. 229
Knoppel, J., nos. 144, (292) Novejarque, F., no. 46
Knuppert, H., no. 202
Kofman, R. M., no. 142 O'Keefe, J. J., no. 1 19
Kuznetsov, A. G., no. 2 Ovchinnikov, V., no. 69
Overkamp, P., no. 301
Larsen, K. A. K., p. 40; no. 141
Latzel, G., no. (1 74) Paalanen, E., no. 7 1
Lebedev, A. N., no. (1 19) Packer, G . F . H., p . 1 9
Lertoria, E., no. 242 Parthasarathy, M., pp. 60, 1 3 8 ;
Ling, J. F., p. 161 ; no. 38 nos. 97, 254, 296, 297, 3 1 1
Lipton, M., p. 99 ; nos. · 1 1 , 1 3, 35, Pedersen, E., no. 145
36, 37, 40, 42, 43, 52, 61, 62, 64, Penrose, L. S., p. 59 ; no. 96
75, 76, 86, 88, 89, 91, 106, 128, Petrovic, N., no. 166
1 67, 1 69, 171, 1 72, 1 73, 1 74, Piatesi, A., no. 1 1 8
1 76, 1 78, 1 79, 1 80, 1 82, 1 84, Pimenov, W. & S., p. 58
1 85, 206, 207, 208, 209, 210,
2 1 1 , 216, 217, 218, 219, 222, Rayner, J., p. 135
224, 226, 240, 261 , 263, 264, Reeves, A. C., nos. 19, 81, 87, (107),
265, 266, 267, 271, 288, 328, 109, 1 12, 1 14, 1 16, 1 77, 1 9 1 ,
329, 333, 335, 341 , 342, 348, 2 1 3 , 246, 265, 269, 270, 282,
349, 352 283, 322, 324, 337
Livshits, E., nos. 250, 252, 256, 257, Rice, J. M., nos. 12, 1 6, 1 7, 20, 2 1 ,
259, 299 22, 32, 33, 34, 40, 50, 55, 56,
Loshinski, L. I., pp. 59, 87; nos. 63, 77, 78, 80, 84, 85, 90, 91,
156, 231 , 307 92, 105, 108, 1 1 1, 1 1 5, 1 68, 1 8 1 ,
Loyd, S., pp. 22, 28, 63 1 82, 190, 193, 1 94, 1 95, 196,
203, 205, 206, 212, 214, 239,
Mackenzie, A. F., pp. 32, 40 243, 262, 263, 268, 284, 3 14,
Macleod, N. A., nos. 58, 126, 127, 3 1 6, 320, 331, 336, 350, 351 ,
1 3 1 ' 1 75, 192, 323, 326, 343 354, 355
205
Index of Names
Rudenko, y. F., nos. 1, 9, 1 57, 251 , Trilling, A., no. 273
257, 305, 308 Tump, R., no. 1 54
Rukhlis, E., p. 1 18 ; no. 102 Tura, W., no. 103
Tuxen, H. V., pp. 77, 108 ; �o. 227
Salai, L., no. 298
Savalle, A., no. 73 Vaughan, C., no. (336)
Schiffmann, J. A., no. 93 Visserman, E., p. 136; nos. 198,
Segers, M., no. 49 293, 294, 295, 310
Selb, N., p. 61 ; no. 98 Vukcevic, M. R., no. 235
Simkhovich, F. L., p. 59 ; no. 95
Stocchi, 0., nos. 1 39, 1 58, 1 64, 1 65 Weenink, H., no. 99
Subrahrnanyam, S., nos. 97, 3 1 1 White, A. C., pp. 32, 34, 99, 1 84 ;
Swane, J. A. W., no. 1 59 no. (237)
Szoghy, J., no. 272 Wrobel, M., nos. (85), 1 53
Szwedowski, L., nos. 104, 255
Zagoruyko, L., p. 1 9 ; no. 253
Tchepizhni, V. 1., nos. 7, 305, 3 1 3 Zappas, B., no. 72
Touw Hian Bwee, nos. 1 0 1 , 123 Zarur, A., no. 1 0

206
CHESS PROBLEM S :
Introduction to an Art

MICHAEL LIPTON
R. C. 0. MATTHEWS
JOHN RICE

'This is, in my view, the best book ever


written on the problem side of chess, bril­
liantly combining technical information
and general discussion for the layman. It is
essential reading for problem composers
and keen solvers.' Leonard Barden in The
Guardian

' . . . a book which puts the case for prob­


lems in a readable and comprehensive form
. . . is so clearly better than anything else
on the subject that I have no doubt that
it will remain the standard book on chess
problems for decades to come. . . . For
anyone who has ever tried to compose a
chess problem, this book is a "must" : and
it will help the keen solver enjoy his two­
movers.' The Field

' . . . a well-written book on every aspect of


the art of the chess problem with, naturally
enough, especial emphasis on the two- and
three-movers. The explanations are lucid
and authoritative as one might expect from
three of the leading younger composers of
the day.' The Times Literary Supplement

42s net

If you would like to receive


our announcement catalogues regularly
please write to
Faber and Faber Limited
24 Russell Square London WCJ

Вам также может понравиться