Български (България)English (United Kingdom)
Problem 321: Balasubramanian & Kostadinov & Rittirsch - Fairy (Anti Take & Make, Madrasi)

balasubramaniandiyanmanfred rittirsch(21.01.2014) After the publication of version 80.1 in the comments in the Award of KoBulChess Fairies 2012 we shared some ideas and opinions and finally managed (most probably) the optimal form of problem n.80 / from 2012. So here is the improved version which will take a part in the Fairy Originals 2014.


321

a) 1.Ra6! Rf3! 2.Kxf3(Rf6) Kxf2(Bb6)# [3.K~??, 3.B~??]

b) 1.Ba7! Be5! 2.Kxe5(Bd4) Kxe6(Rb6)# [3.K~??, 3.B~??]

 

Critical moves, Grimshaw, ODT, change of functions,

active sacrifices, specific fairy play, miniature.

(Authors)

 

Anti Take & Make: every capture ("take") must be complemented by a further step ("make" - not a capture) by the captured piece (Kings excluded), which must move from its square of vanish (according to the wishes of the capturing side in case of options). The capture is forbidden if the captured unit have not possible move. Promotions at the end of the "make" element are normal.

Madrasi Rex Inclusive: Mutually attacking black and white units of the same type (including Kings) paralyse each other, so that they may no longer move or give check. The paralysis may be removed, for example by interference (in the case of line pieces), or by capture of either of the paralysed units.

 

Comments  

 
+1 #1 Nikola Predrag 2014-01-21 13:05
That's great, but is there a reason for not mentioning the (critical) Grimshaw?
Quote
 
 
0 #2 Diyan Kostadinov 2014-01-21 16:58
There is no special reason that the Grimshaw is not mentioned Nikola. Usually the comments of the thematic complex here are not so long and deep. Just the main idea is mentioned. As you know in the fairy genre the most important is not the name of some theme, the most important is the presentation of the specific fairy possibilities of the used condition/s and/or pieces. But you are right that Grimshaw is better to be included, so we do it now. Thanks ;)
Quote
 
 
0 #3 Nikola Predrag 2014-01-21 22:48
When you describe a fairy element to someone who sees it for the first time, it's important to present some example with the specific fairy possibilities of the used condition/s and/or pieces. It explains what are the rules and shows a specific play which is specifically LEGAL by these rules.
But any specific legal fairy play is not automatically thematic, just as any legal play is not automatically thematic in the orthodox problems.
Why should "specific fairy play" be mentioned in the comment? It is stipulated and expected as mandatory in a fairy problem. Trouble is that some authors think that each specific fairy move is thematic by itself. Theme is something else, irrelevantly to its name. Name is only a short way to say what happens in the play.
Quote
 
 
+2 #4 Nikola Predrag 2014-01-21 22:50
In this problem, fairy-specific paralysing and un-paralysing effects are not thematic by themselves, they are a result of the "INTERFERENCES AFTER CRITICAL MOVES", that is thematic. Reciprocity and the same square of interference, significantly intensify the thematic content. The original complex here is "critical black Grimshaw (where the interference is achieved by white AntiT&M capture), resulting with two opposite Madrasi effects". Active sacrifices/AntiT&M captures in W1/B2 are nice but not thematically important or original.
Quote
 
 
0 #5 Diyan Kostadinov 2014-01-22 00:07
Thanks for your comments Nikola! As usual your comments are interesting and educative, but here you are not so correct in what is MAIN thematic idea/content and what are the SIDE EFFECTS which enriched the content in this problem. But let me answer you with some examples tomorrow, because now is 2:00 at night in Bulgaria and I am really sleepy...
Quote
 
 
+2 #6 Kjell Widlert 2014-01-26 21:19
I think the content of the problem is not so much in the list of thematic elements as in the integratedconcept as a whole ("the whole is greater than the sum of its parts") - which is what makes it such a good problem.

* How do we mate? - By Madrasi-paralysing the bK and mating him with R or B.
* How do we stop Black from paralysing the mating piece? - By putting the mating piece and its black counterpart on the same line, with the other black piece in between
* How do we get the other black piece there? - By Anti-T&M transport.
* How do we stop it from moving away? - By paralysing it with its white counterpart.
* How do we prepare this? - By a critical move of the black piece to be interfered.

The unity is enhanced by using b6 as the critical square in both solution.

With Pd5 as the only technical piece - what else could we ask for? A wonderful problem!
Quote
 
 
0 #7 Diyan Kostadinov 2014-01-26 22:04
Thank you Kjell for your detailed comment and kind words!
Nikola, sorry for my delayed reply... I started to write it but realize that it become so long including some example schemes and I am still not able to finish it (as usual I am really busy - I am manager of new working project; judging about 20 tourneys including FIDE Album; trying to update the website every day; receiving and answering on about 10-15 emails every day; working on ChessComposer version 3.0 etc.).

This week I will finish and publish my comment and by the way there will explain also what I mean with the "specific fairy play" which term I used some times.
Sorry again for delay!
Quote
 
 
0 #8 Nikola Predrag 2014-01-26 23:34
Diyan, there's no reason for hurry. And with some examples, it will surely be educative and worth waiting for.
I said exactly the same as Kjell did. "Critical Grimshaw" is just a short expression for the combined play which would certainly not be original just for its own sake. But the the complex motivation for Critical Grimshaw is wonderful and original.
The "whole" is not only greater of the "sum of parts", it MAKES the ORIGINAL CONTENT. The elements are just the bricks which build a house. And a house has a completely different meaning and purpose than just a heap of bricks.
There is probably a misunderstanding, I surely agree that there is beautifully motivated specific fairy play which makes the whole point of that problem. What I say is that this particular specificity should be explained in the comment. Specific fairy play is expected in any fairy problem, why should that be mentioned if the particular specificity is not pointed out? Kjell did it clearer than me.
Quote
 
 
0 #9 Bala 2014-01-29 17:10
Dear Kjell,

Thanks for such a precise but well explained comments.

---Bala
Quote
 

Add comment


Security code
Refresh


Deprecated: Function ereg() is deprecated in /home/youcult/public_html/chessbul/templates/edenrock/s5_tab_show_ER.php on line 5

Deprecated: Function ereg() is deprecated in /home/youcult/public_html/chessbul/templates/edenrock/s5_tab_show_ER.php on line 9

  P1110623

KOBULCHESS.COM

site for chess composition

 General editor:

Diyan Kostadinov

Co-editor:

Seetharaman Kalyan

Recent comments