Chessville - Chess Problems and Compositions in Peter's Problem World with FIDE Master of Chess Composition Peter Wong

Chessville
...by Chessplayers, for Chessplayers!

Today is

Site Map

If you have disabled Java for your browser, use the Site Map (linked in the header and footer).

Chessville
logo by
ChessPrints

Advertise
with
Chessville!!

Advertise to
thousands
of chess
fans for
as little
as $25.

Single insert:
$35
x4 insert:
@ $25 each.

From the
Chessville
Chess Store

More-Movers
Peter's Problem World with FIDE Master of Chess Composition Peter Wong

New terms introduced here are also added to Peter's Glossary of Chess Problem Terms.

Longer directmate problems, in which White forces mate in four or more moves, are grouped under the term more-mover. The length of play in such compositions allows themes of greater depth to be realised, such as those involving elaborate manoeuvres.

Nevertheless, long directmates are not necessarily more difficult to solve than two- and three-mover. Often White’s choices are limited to making short mating threats, to keep the black force under control.

Also, lengthier problems tend to possess fewer variations – one full-length variation is typical in very long more-movers – hence they don’t become unduly complex.

A. Moozhoor
The Problemist Supplement 1993

Mate in 4

19. Johannes Kohtz & Carl Kockelkorn
Schachaufgaben 1875

Mate in 5

In the classic 19, White apparently needs only four moves to mate, e.g. 1.Bb2 2.Ba3 3.Bf8 and 4.Bg7 mate. The black bishop, confined to white squares, cannot attack any of White’s pieces and seems helpless against this threat.

However, Black has a surprising resource: 1.Bb2? Bh1! 2.Ba3 g2 3.Bf8 results in stalemate. Such a self-immobilisation manoeuvre by Black to bring about stalemate is called a Kling combination. White’s key, then, must take this defence into account:

1.Be5! Bh1 2.Bxg3 B-any 3.Bd6 B-any 4.Bf8 B-any 5.Bg7.

Problem 20 depicts a duel between a white and a black rook, i.e. multiple occurrences of two pieces acting against each other.

The rook on g8 prevents Nxg3 mate, but 1.Rxg8? gives stalemate. So the white rook instead seeks to mate on d1. However, each of its attempts to reach the d-file is intercepted by the black rook, 1.Rh7? Rg7!, 1.Rh6? Rg6!, 1.Rh5? Rg5!, and 1.Rh4? Rg4!

To get past the rook defences, White plays 1.Rh3! and waits for the black rook to commit itself, e.g. 1…Rg7, after which White makes further use of zugzwang: 2.Rh7 Rg8 (etc.) 3.Rd7 and 4.Rd1 (if 3…Rd8 4.Nxg3).

The other variations are similar in requiring the white rook to repeat this “ambush” tactic, 1…Rg6 2.Rh6 Rg8 3.Rd6, 1…Rg5 2.Rh5 Rg8 3.Rd5, and 1…Rg4 2.Rh4 Rg8 3.Rd4.

20. Miroslav Stosic
Probleemblad 1972

Mate in 4

21. Friedrich Chlubna
Thèmes-64 1971
1st Prize

Mate in 4

White has two significant tries in Problem 21 that threaten immediate mates. 1.Nf4? intending 2.Nd3 is refuted by 1…dxc4!, and 1.Re3? intending 2.Rxe2 is stopped by 1…exf5!; in both cases Black’s pawn capture opens a rook’s defensive line.

The actual play sees White disabling these defences in an intriguing way. 1.Rg3! is the fine key, which unpins the black queen but threatens 2.Rg1 mate.

The first main variation starts with a cross-check, 1…Qxc5+ 2.Rc3+ Qf2, and now that the c5-pawn has vanished, White can go ahead with 3.Nf4 and 4.Nd3, as the …dxc5 defence isn’t available anymore.

The second main variation matches the first closely, 1…Qxf5+ 2.Rd3+ Qf2, and without the option of …exf5, Black cannot stop 3.Re3 and 4.Rxe2. There is also by-play, 1…h2 2.Rg2 (3.Bxf2) Qg3/Qxh4 3.Rxe2, or 2…h1(N) 3.Rg1.

An oft-seen tactic in more-movers is the decoy, where White manipulates a black piece into a less favourable position. Problem 22 illustrates an elaboration of the decoy idea known as the Roman theme...

22. Peter Kahl
Die Welt 1961

Mate in 5

In this position, White naturally aims to mate on the h-file, and the thematic try 1.Rg5? threatens 2.Rh5+. Black defeats this with 1…Be8!, since 2.Rg4 (3.Rh4+) can be met by 2…Ng6.

The key 1.Rg7! (2.Rh7+) provokes 1…Bf5, decoying the bishop. Now the try-move 2.Rg5 becomes viable because Black no longer has the …Be8 defence.

Instead Black must play 2…Bg6, which obstructs a square needed by the knight. White continues with 3.Rg4, as 3…Ng6 is unavailable, forcing 3…Bf5 4.Rh4+ Bh3 5.Rxh3.

The Roman theme featured here involves the following strategy: White has a plan (Rg5-h5+) that is refuted by a particular defence (…Be8). White decoys the defending black piece so that its successful defence has to be replaced by an inferior one (…Bg6), which entails a weakness (obstructing …Ng6). This weakness enables White to activate the initial plan (Rg5-h5+).

The previous work, in showing the Roman theme, exemplifies the logical school of three- and more-movers. A logical problem is so named because solving it entails reasoning out a series of plans and their right order of execution. What occurs is that White wants to play certain moves that would lead to mate – these moves constitute the mainplan – but Black defends adequately. So White first carries out a foreplan, with the sole purpose of neutralising that black defence. Once that goal has been accomplished, White proceeds with the unhindered mainplan. The next example provides a more intricate demonstration of this type of more-mover.

23. Thorsten Zirkwitz & Jörg Kuhlmann
Theodor Siers Memorial Tourney 1992
2nd Commendation

Mate in 6

White’s mainplan in Problem 23 is to play 1.Bd2 and 2.Ba5 mate, and if 1…c4 2.Be3 mate. But Black refutes this by decoying the white bishop: 1…e1(Q)! 2.Bxe1 c4 and now 3.Bf2+ simply fails to 3…Rxf2.

White therefore executes a foreplan whose aim is purely to foil that refutation. The plan commences with 1.Kf8! (threat: 2.b8(Q)), which compels 1…Bh3+ (because neither 1…Kxa7 nor 1…Bxc6 deals with 2.b8(Q)+).

White then decoys the black bishop – amusingly in the same way that the white bishop was decoyed in the try – with 2.g4 (3.b8(Q)) Bxg4+ 3.Kb8 (4.Ka8 and 5.b8(Q)), and Black has to play 3…Bf3, to answer 4.Ka8? with the pinning 4…Bxc6!

Now the objective of cutting off the rook on f7 has been achieved, so White is able to launch the mainplan, 4.Bd2 e1(Q) 5.Bxe1 c4 6.Bf2.

Have a go at solving the four-mover 24, which combines two thematic ideas. The solution will appear next month.

24. A. Moozhoor
The Problemist Supplement 1993

Mate in 4

18. Sigurd Clausén
Eskilstuna Kuriren 1931

White to Mate in 3

Solution to Problem 18
in the previous column.

1.f8(Q)? or 1.h8(Q)? stalemates, so White should wait for the black bishop to move before queening with check. Only 1.Kf5! works as the waiting move.

Most bishop replies, e.g. 1…Bd6, allow 2.h8(Q)+ Bb8 3.Qh1 (or 2..Bf8 3.Qxf8). If 1…Be5, White deflects the bishop by 2.h8(Q)+ Bxh8 3.f8(Q).

Other initial king moves are defeated because they interfere with a queen mate (or allow Black to check), e.g. 1.Kh5? Bd6! 2.h8(Q)+ Bb8, and White cannot mate on h1.

Return to Peter's Problem World