Български (България)English (United Kingdom)
Problem 756: Valdmir Pankov - Helpmate
vladimir pankov(07.09.2016) Welcome to Vladmir Pankov from Russia whose miniature helpmate shows complex play.
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
756. Vladmir Pankov (Russia)
07.09.2016
756
H#6.5                          (2+5)
 
1...Ba7! (1...Bb6?) 2.f2 Kb7 3.f1B Kb6
4.Ba6! (4. Bc4? Kc5 5. Be6?) Kc5
5.Bc8 Kc4 6.d5+ Kd3 7.Be6 Bb8#
 
Anticritical move of white bishop, staircase of white king, black minor promotion, tempo – move of black bishop, ambush of black bishop, two active square – block, ideal mate, minimal, miniature. (Author)
 
 

Comments  

 
+2 #1 Vitaly Medintsev 2016-09-07 08:22
An impressive set of very interesting elements, though quite heterogeneous.
What is the main idea of the problem as a whole?..
Quote
 
 
+1 #2 Seetharaman Kalyan 2016-09-07 18:05
Quoting Vitaly Medintsev:
An impressive set of very interesting elements, though quite heterogeneous.
What is the main idea of the problem as a whole?..

Good question! For me the main idea is the black bishop taking the long blocked route to e6.
Quote
 
 
+2 #3 Nikola Predrag 2016-09-07 20:15
Some pattern itself is usually a trivial feature. A way how the play is determined is what makes the content. A pattern may have a well known name but it's worthless if the play is determined by the most banal motivations.

The nice idea is obvious here, a "nameless pattern", including "ambush", is created by the motivation for a longer route "through" bPd7, instead a shorter one through the empty square d5 (there's no tempo-move, of course).

It's not a "well known name" like "Rundlauf" that makes the content in the following rough example, but 4 moves wasted just to allow only one move 4...Kf4.
White Kg8 Bh3
Black Pg7 Pd6 Kg6 Bh6 Pd5
Stipulation H#6.5
Quote
 
 
+1 #4 Vitaly Medintsev 2016-09-08 12:04
Here is Nikola's rough(?!) example:

h#6.5
1. ... Bd7 2.Kh5 Kf7 3.Bg5 Ke6 4.Be7 Kf5 5.Bf8 Kf4 6.g5+ Kg3 7.Bh6(Rundlauf) Be8#
Quote
 
 
+1 #5 Vitaly Medintsev 2016-09-08 12:14
Helpmate Analizer (online software by Viktoras Paliulionis) has detected no tempo move/maneuver in Vladimir's problem
Quote
 
 
+2 #6 Nikola Predrag 2016-09-08 15:55
Hm, I certainly don't expect any understanding of an idea from a program.
However, missing the most crucial simple fact is a rather strange failure.
Quote
 
 
+3 #7 Vitaly Medintsev 2016-09-08 17:13
The program doesn't understand an author's idea, it just detects some effects and features.
Author wrote: "tempo–move of black bishop", the program detects no such move and this is true
Quote
 
 
+4 #8 Viktoras paliulionis 2016-09-08 17:15
There is no tempo maneuver in the Vladimir’s problem, because the goal for the longer route Ba6-c8-e6 is to allow 5. ... Kc4, but not to lose a tempo. After 4. Bc4? Kc5 5. Be6? the move 5. ... Kc4?? is impossible. If in the try Black choose a better move 5. Bg8? (and later Be6) instead of 5. Be6?, there will be no tempo effect at all.

There is no tempo maneuver in Nikola’s example too (due 5. ... Kf4).
Quote
 
 
+2 #9 Nikola Predrag 2016-09-08 17:58
In post #3 I wrote "there's no tempo-move, of course".
I even made the example showing four moves "wasted" on the maneuver with the only purpose to unguard f4 in the right moment. "Wasting" 4 moves is the consequence and not the purpose.
Tempo play must have the purpose to lose time.

Departure of wBf2 has the vacation effect, crucial for the construction. The complete move 1...Ba7 has the anticritical effect, although with a very impure purpose.
Quote
 
 
+3 #10 Viktoras paliulionis 2016-09-08 19:10
Nikola, I just wanted to explain the logic of the program when detecting a tempo play, and it corresponds with yours.

You are right that W1 has "square vacation" departure effect. I updated the program, and now it is does not have that error. This was due the incorrect definition of term “square vacation” in the “Encyclopedia of chess problems”, that states, that square vacation is related to friendly pieces only. Of course, this definition must be corrected.

I am not sure if W1 has the anticritical effect, that is related to the further play. Move 1... Bb6? has negative square obstruction effect, which is avoided by 1... Ba7. I think that the main purpose of W1 is to reach wB the mating square b8.
Quote
 
 
+1 #11 Nikola Predrag 2016-09-09 14:34
The anticritical effect is a fact here, but is it relevant?
(For instance, "Analizer" mentions 3...Kb6 as the line opening, which is irrelevant but still a fact. Since this is mentioned, 2...Kb7 could be mentioned as the line closing, also an irrelevant fact.)

Anticritical move is about timing. There is some (whatever) arrival purpose but the move must happen before the line will be closed.
The task for wB is indeed to reach b8/c7 in 7th move but White has lot of time (6 moves) to prepare a convenient access.
It's a fact that wB moves to a7 before wK moves to b6. The "visible" strong reason for timing is the need of immediate vacation of f2.
But the "invisible" intrinsic feature is that the anticritical effect is required in ANY case when bB goes to e6 via a6&c8, even if vacation of f2 would not be necessary. For instance, if wB was on e3 or g1 instead of f2.
Unfortunately, wB is on f2 exactly to avoid the cooks with bBf1-g2-d5-e6 which would allow wB to wait until 6th move (if wB was e.g. on g1).

In the original 756, there's a try
1...Ba7 2.f2 Kb7 3.f1B Kb6 4.Bg2? Kc5 5.Bd5 Kc4??? 6.Be6!? Kd3!? 7.d5 Bb8#
Of course, wK can't reach c4 before it gets attacked by 5.Bd5.
wK could play first and reach d3, still having 2 moves for wB but then, black play (2.f2) would be impossible.
The try fails because White can't achieve both requirements in due time (wK reaching c4 & vacation of f2).
The solution works because both the vacation and the anticritical effect are luckily achieved by the same move.
And that is indeed relevant for this position.
Quote
 
 
+2 #12 Vladimir Pankov 2016-09-09 16:09
In a problem it is possible to add the second solution with reciprocal change of white moves and other maneuver of a black bishop, but position of problem will not correspond to the developed requirements.
Version: Kb6/3p4/5p2/4kp2/8/5p2/8/6B1 2 solution
1) 1. ... Ba7! 2.f2 Kb7 3.f1B Kb6 4.Ba6! Kc5 5.Bc8 Kc4 6.d5+ Kd3 7.Be6 B:b8#
2) 1. ... Kb7! 2.f2 Kb6 3.f1B Kc5 4.Bg2! Kc4 5.Bd5+! Kd3 6.Be6 Ba7 7.d5 B:b8#
Quote
 
 
+3 #13 Vitaly Medintsev 2016-09-09 16:37
Vladimir, the problem is good enough, having a single solution. Don't make it worse, please :-)
Quote
 
 
+1 #14 Viktoras paliulionis 2016-09-09 17:25
Quoting Nikola Predrag:
Anticritical move is about timing. There is some (whatever) arrival purpose but the move must happen before the line will be closed.

Maybe we have an anticritical move actually in all cases (even in the case of a critical move) when a linemover crosses a square which later another piece moves to, because in such cases we cannot change the order of moves?
Quote
 
 
+2 #15 Nikola Predrag 2016-09-10 00:00
"...whatever arrival purpose..." lacks the crucial feature of an anticritical move. The purpose of anticritical move is arriving to the "active" side of the relevant critical square.
I was not careful, since in the context of discussion, the active purpose of 1...Ba7 was already mentioned and my focus was on the timing related to the critical square.

The illustrative version (wBg1 and added bBb8) with two ways to reach the same
mate, greatly helps understanding the essential characteristics of the original
(which allow the solution and not the try (3.Bg2?)).
bB can't go shortly to e6 via c4 because the unguard of c4 would never happen. Such unguard may happen only transiently, between 4.Bf1-g2 & 5.Bd5 or 5.Ba6-c8 & 6.d5.

I hope that in the version, the relevance of critical squares b6&c5 is clear, with regards to 4.Ba6!? or 4.Bg2!?. This is hidden but also present in the original.

The beauty of the idea is in the dynamics of mechanism, governed by the transient unguard of c4.
The version presents the mechanism clearly but with considerable flaws.
The original would be sufficient if the try was mentioned. Author should present the version as the author's comment, to help the audience and the judges to perceive the mechanism.
Quote
 
 
+1 #16 Viktoras paliulionis 2016-09-11 23:24
A little different wK route if wK->d8: 1. ... Ba7 2.f2 Kc7...
Also а longer solution is possible: f3->f4 h#7 1. f3 ...
Quote
 
 
+2 #17 Vitaly Medintsev 2016-09-12 08:28
Diagram and solution to comment #16

1.f3 Ba7 2.f2 Kc7 3.f1=B Kb6 4.Ba6 Kc5 5.Bc8 Kc4 6.d5+ Kd3 7.Be6 Bb8#
Quote
 
 
+2 #18 Vladimir Pankov 2016-09-12 14:36
Problem with black king on d8 and a problem with two solutions participated in tourneys but have not been noted. At the king on d8 the geometrical nuance - staircase of white king vanishes. Too a high price for a half-move.
There is my problem with two maneuver black bishop in 4 move: 8/3p4/5p2/2K1kp2/8/8/8/4Bb2
1.Bg2 Kc4 2.Bd5 + Kd3 3.Be6 Ba5 4.d5 Bc7 #
1.Ba6 Ba5 2.Bc8 Kc4 3.d5 + Kd3 4.Be6 Bc7 #
Achievement variants of black positions of mate:
I. Bf1-c4-e6 + d7-d5 ?
II. Bf1-c4-e6 + d7-d6-d5 ?
III. Bf1-c4 (a2,b3,d5,f7,g8)-e6 + d7-d5 ?
IV. Bf1-g2-d5-e6 + d7-d5 !
V. Bf1-a6-c8-e6 + d7-d5 !
Quote
 
 
+1 #19 Shankar Ram 2016-09-14 16:56
Quoting Vladimir Pankov:
....
There is my problem with two maneuver black bishop in 4 move: 8/3p4/5p2/2K1kp2/8/8/8/4Bb2
1.Bg2 Kc4 2.Bd5 + Kd3 3.Be6 Ba5 4.d5 Bc7 #
1.Ba6 Ba5 2.Bc8 Kc4 3.d5 + Kd3 4.Be6 Bc7 #
....

This shows a ABC/CAB cycle of W 1/2/3 moves and a reciprocal change of B 3/4.

In comment #12, the version shows a ABCDEF/BCDEFA cycle of W 1/2/3/4/5/6 moves plus a reciprocal change of B 6/7.
Quoting Vladimir Pankov:
....
Kb6/3p4/5p2/4kp2/8/5p2/8/6B1 2 solution
1) 1. ... Ba7! 2.f2 Kb7 3.f1B Kb6 4.Ba6! Kc5 5.Bc8 Kc4 6.d5+ Kd3 7.Be6 B:b8#
2) 1. ... Kb7! 2.f2 Kb6 3.f1B Kc5 4.Bg2! Kc4 5.Bd5+! Kd3 6.Be6 Ba7 7.d5 B:b8#
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