THE PROBLEMISI*SUPPLEMENT fi"#Nt{

*l nutr^

- All originals printed here. A : lroblemist tournaments, so- gupplement is equivalenl to

take part in the normalthal publication in thispublication in the main

i magazlne.Forthis supplement, I am looking tor straightforward

originals ol all types. lderllly, they should be pointed,well constructed, and have entertainment value. It youthink that you have anything suitable, please submit itto me at the address above. I would appreciate it ilcomposers would submit problems clearly drawn orstamped on diagrams, please. I would also be happyif composers could somehow hide the solution, so thatI may have a chance of solving their originals. Manythanks!

The supplement has its own unified solving ladderand all are eligible to enter it. Prizes are in line withthe main magazine.

We start off this issue with an analysis by JohnCoward ol a famous task problem, and finish wilh afascinating, and very welcome, article by Mark Ridleyon Supemlns.

&lr='** BDsSELECTIONS

When a bR and B interfere with each other,producing separate w replies, the interlerences aretermed Grlmshaw interferences. This 1930 problemby the great Loshinski looks like a task problem (inwhich the composer seeks to achieve the maximumpossible number ot variations on a theme). He obtains2 Grimshaws lrom a single R & B pair (at e6 and g4).This has been done before, but Loshinski adds a thirdGrimshaw using the other R & B pair. lf anyone knowsot a 4-Grimshaw problem (#2), I shall be gtad to hearof it.

As a problem to tax the solver it has drawbacks.The composer had to render 2.Sd7 unsound after1 ...R94 but sound after 1 ...Re6. Consequently 1...R94and 1...894 become very strong moves, both creating2 bK llights, and the solver should soon see that hemust to something about them. (see my remarks atthe start of p. 2 in the 1st issue ol the Supplement.lsaac Loyd's ingenious 3-mover, set in the recentsofving championship and to be reproduced in TheProblemist in due course is an excellent examole.

Those who have not already seen it should - beforelhey look at the solution! - try to discover how W copeswith B's threatened 1...K94.)

Also, the wRfl looks undenarorked and therefore aprime suspecl as the key piece. lt provides a matealter 1...8t5, but why should B need to play that move?Whal possible threal could it defeat?

L LOSHINSKI1st HM., L'ltalia Scacchistica, 1930(ll)

However, task problems are not primarily intendedto tax solvers. Six thematic b defences, each torcinga distinct w reply, is no mean achievement, and any@mposer would be fortunate to find a really good keyto such a task. Indeed, tasks are on record where thekey is the promotion of an otheMise useless pawn,and even the capture of a bishop!

Full solution -

1.Rb1 | (2.d4 #l1...894 2.F91- #1...R94 2.Se6 #1...Re6 2.Sd7 #1...Be6 2.8d5 #1. . .Rb2 2.Qxc3 #1,. . .Bb? 2.Qfz #

EDITOR:SOLUTIONS EDITOR:SELECTIONS EDITOR:

,tur .'-

{r &r' ., lssuE 5- JANUARY 1993

B D Stephenson, 9 Roydfield Drive, Waterrhorpe, SHEFFTELD, S19 6NDM McDowell, 32 Park Road, WESTCLTFF-ON-SEA, Essex, SSO 7PEJ R Ooward, 25 Elmwood Avenue, HARROW, Middtesex, HA3 8AJ

34

2.Bxd6 #

JRC

SOLUTIONS (SEPTEMBER. 1 992)PS37 (Pollard) 1.Rt2! (2.Rd4 #)1...c5/b5/Kxe4/Rxd5+/Rc4 2.Sc7/Sb6iQh7/Qxd5/Re3# 'Following an excellent flight-giving key, the 2 pawnmainplays illustrate the bi-valve theme, in which amove simullaneously opens the line o{ one piece whileclosing the line oI another. Here the unpinned S shutsoff the newly opened Q line. 1.f5? Bd2! caught some.'(MM) 'Excellent t'^/o-mover

'n classic style.' (S

Rothwell)

PS38 (Schiffmann) 1.Qe8! (2.Qxe5 #)1 . . . R e 6 / S e 6 , S t 7 / B e 6 , R c 5l B g 3 / R g 3 / S g 32.Qa4/Qxc6/S{6/Sxg5/Re1 /Sf2 #'A rather colourlesskey, but rich variations with the Grimshaws (mutualinterferences between R and B) on e6 and 93enhanced by further S interferences on the samesquares!' (MM) '2 triple occupalions of a cutting point.'(R Smook) 'Wide-ranging wQ. 1.Qe7? deJeated by1...Se6!'(J Gill)PS39 (Eriksson) 1.Ke8! (2.Qxg7 #)1 ...bxc4+/Rxe4+/b4+lBh5+ltxe4 2. Bc6/Be6/c6l817/Be6# 'A fine old{ashioned cross-checker with variedstrategy shown in the deJences, namely selfblocks onc4 and e4, an interference on b4 and line-opening inthe 1...8h5+ variation.' (MM) 'wK key carefullychosen.' (.lG)'Altractive cross-checks.' (RS)PS40 (Quah) 1.Se3! [2.Sds (3.Sf4 #) e5 3.Sf6 #];1...8e6 2.S92 & 3.Sf4#; 1...e6 2.594 & 3.Sf6#;1...8f5,8b7 2.S(x)fs & 3.S97 # 'The lirst 2 variationsshow a pawn-Grimshaw, with mutual interferencessimilarto the more usual rook and bishop type. Neatlydone in minialure.' (MM) 'Highly active wS against anoverloaded B.' (JG) 'Elegant illustralion of the theme.'(RS). 'Simple and neat.' (AW Bowen)PS41 (Mayhew) 1.896! () 1...Kd5 2.Qc7 0 Ke63.Qd6#; 1...Kc5 2.Qb7 0 Kc4 3.Qc6#; 1...Kb52.Oc7 0 Ka6,Ka4 3.Bd3,Be8#; 1...Kc3 2.Oh1 0Kc4,Kdz,Kbz 3.Qc6,Qel ,Qa1 # 'The flight-giving keyleads to quiet (ie. non-checking) continuations in allvarialions and 3 model mates {all squares around thebK are blocked or guarded in one way only and all ofthe w force with the possible exception of king andpawns takes part in the checkmate) alter Qa1,Qc6 andBe8. After 3...Qc6 we have a mirror-model, since allol the squares adiacent to lhe king are vacant; whilethe position afler the switchback 3.BeB is, tor obviousreasons, a sideboard model, again with mirrorelements.' (MM) 'Superlr miniature with a tar fromobvious key.' (RS) 'Attractive continuations.' (JG)'Fine models.' (E Petite)

PS42 (Makarenko) 1.d7! (2.d8=Q(R)+ SxdB 3.Rc5# or 2...Sd6 3,Rc5,Q(R)xd6 #); 1...S{5 2.Sf6+Qxf6 3.e4 #; t...Be3 2.Sec3+ Rxc3 3.8e4 # 'A

3-move theme called check-prevention. B's lirstmove blocks a line to the wK, allowing W lo play acontinuation that would otheMise allow B to check Won his second move.' (BDS) 'Unexpected secondmove olfers of the wS' (J Quah)

PS43 (Speckmann) 1.S{5! e.Ae7 & 3.Re8+ Kd74.c8=Q # or 2.Rf8+ Kd7 3.c8=Q #); 1...Se6 2.Sd4(3.Sxe6 & 4.d7#); 2...Sxd4,Sg7 3.Kxb6 & 4.d7#',2...5xc7 3.d7+ KdB 4.Sc6 #; 2...Sd8 3.RfB &4.Rxd8,cxd8=R(Q) #; 2...S else 3.Rxf8+ Kd7 4.Rd8# 'An unexpected second move ofter ot the wS.' (JQ)'with a variety of continuations on W's third move andan unusual model afler 3...Kd7 4.Rdg #' (MM)'Overloaded bS nicely deflected.' (JG)

PS44 (Shire) 1.Se5 Sf4+ 2.Kd4 Rc4 #; 1.8c5 Ka42.Kc4 Se3 # 'Neat matching strategy with both b andw pieces swapping tunctions. The mate in the 1.8c5solution is a pin-model, with the blocking bishopessentially pinned (strictly speaking c5 is both blockedand guarded, bul the Bohemians considered suchmates to be acceptable as models; solvers thoughtson the subiect are welcomed!) The other mate is nota pin-model, as c3 is doubly guarded.' (MM) 'Allpieces participate in both solutions"' (JG)

PS45 (Roland) 1.Rad4 Rc6+ 2.Ke5 Sc4 #; 1.Rhd4Sb7 2.Ke5 Re2 # 'An economical examole inhelpmate form of lhe anti-Bristol theme, in which like-moving b pieces interfere along the same line.' (MM)'Mutual eclipse and exchange of functions between thewR and S.' (A Ettinged 'Eleganl problem.' (L Vitale)PS46 (Drazkowski) 1.Kd3 Sxe3 2.Kc3+ Sf5 #; 1.Kb3Bxe3 2.Kc3+ Bb6 # 'Four switchbacks incorporatingunpinning and cross-checks. An entertaining idea.'(MM) 'Double switchbacks with cross-checks. Athrilling spectacle.' (RS) 'Simple bul ettective doubleswitchback.' (JG)

PS47 (Vaulin) (a) 1.Qf4 Sd4 2.Rxc4+ Kxc4 3Ke3Re2 #; (b) 1.Qxc4+ Kb6 2.Qe6 Rc4+ 3 KdS Rd4 #;'Chameleon echo model mates, with the essentialpieces in similar positions relative to the mated king,but on squares of a different colour in each solution.The wP turns out to be a hindrance!' (MM) 'lngenious.'(JG) 'Very challenging and rewarding.' (RS)PS48 (Mikan) 1.Qf2! 0 1...Qxfl 2.Qf5+ Qxf5 #;1...9xt2 2.94 Qxf 1 #; 'Not terrible dif{icull solving, asatter 1...Qxj1 the need to guard 94 suggests Ql5+ asa continualion, nevertheless a neat sacrificial key andquiet continuation 2.94.' (MM) 'Pretty O mates.' (EP)'Beautiful construction, but key self-evident.' (AE)

PS49 (Mikan) 1.Rh7! 0 1...Bxg5,Bf8 2.Rxe7+Bxe7+3.Kc3 b4 #; 1...897 2.Rxe3+ Be5 3.Qc6+ Sxc6 #;'The key frees the Q from the job of guarding f7, afterwhich the bishop is gently guided to the appropriatesquares for performing guard duties in the mates.'(MM) '1.96 (2.597+ & 3.Qc6+) looked so plausible,but 1...8f4 refutes. The quiet 3.Kc3 proved elusive.'

(JQ) 'Clever zugzwang.' (AWB)PSsO (Neborov) (a) 1.Kc8 Kxd6 2.Kd8 Rg8 #; (b)1.KaB KxdO 2.Rb8 Ra7 #; 'A lucid demonstration olthe ditferences between orthodox and Circe chess.The solution to (a) tails in (b) because the reborn bRguards 98, while in (b) 3.1

PS73 J GEMMELL(Glasgow)

PS76 s RUMYANTSEv & E FoMrcHEv(Russra)

JO

PS74 R FEDOROVICH(Ukraine)

PS77 N SIKDAR(lndial

PS75 R DRAGOESCU(Romania)

PS78 L GROLMAN(Fuss,a)

#2 (set/try)

PS79 A MOOZHOOR(lndia\

#3

PS80 W V SOKOLOW(Germanh

#3

PS81 S KLEBES(GermanA

:,a_ .i,i.,

l::::::,::::: :lilii::rl:!:il'.'.''

-4\ ::-:t-::

::::::lii:::!

::::l:::::::l E

:H,\: .:.: :.

:. ...vlfu. ,., i':' ':t= :

,*',|-::::r}::i:rAi:rIE

::ir::::.::::I

:,::::.1 /\

ti:iiiii:ii

T::i:::ii]ii:il

fi,-

|/VY|_

,aa:,:::,r:::: l:tit\i: l:::::::: ,i2 I

I. rr::::::i:::::r A:-:r rr:::::rr:::::

-

l

lA-

EJ

A

::i: tl:::::i:: ::iel:ltit:tlll::::::

A..'.i......i.i' .$A.i ,:,::::::::i,

itt!:!itljttti!

i..l.i'ill::i: A

Ar:J1:!1=

cnnut=.ntgA:::l:r:::::.l

E

H#2 3 solutions

PS82 VZHELTONOZHKO(Russia)

PS85 A VIRTMANIS(Latvia\

S#2 (Try)

PS88 J MAYHEW(Plymouth)

37

PS83 C BLANDEN(Chedell

PS84 K FUNK(Germany)

H#5

PS87 CGSNARAYANANUNial

PSgO A J SOBEY(Hinclhead]

PS89 C CROUCH(Hanow Weadt

H#2 Cice2 solutions

H#2 (b) bscs

H=3 SH#g Circe

SUPERPINS

by

Mark Ridley & Brian Stephenson

Fairy Chess is the general term used to cover anyplay which does not conform with the conventions oforthodox problems. There are four main ways in whicha fairy problem may differ from an orthodox one.

a) The stipulation may be non-orthodox.b) New pieces may be introduced, these having

diflerent Dowers and movements lrom orthodoxmen.

c) The size and/or shape ot the board may bechanged.

d) New rules in addition to. or in place of theorlhodox ones may be inlroduced.

Although Fairy Chess may seem a vasl, complexand possibly limitless offshoot of the orthodox game,there is no reason why newcomers should be reluctantto study it. The introduction ol this supplement lo IheProblemist, and its inclusion of explanatory material forthose new to chess problems, gives us an idealopportunity to write articles lrom time to time toencourage newcomers to Fairy Chess. We slart ourinvestigations with Superplns.

A piece is said to be pinned when it cannot moveon pain ol a more valuable piece being exposed tocapture as a result. ln chess problems the term pin isused only when the king is on lhe end ot the pin line.A[hough a piece which is pinned cannot rnove olt thepin line, it still retains power to check the opposingking.

ln Superpins, pinned pieces cannol cneck.Although this is only a small change in the rules, theresults can be quite substantial.

This new condition may be applied in problems olany stipulation, but directmate 2-movers dominate theexamples composed so far. Thus all but the last oJ theouotes in this article are 2-ers.

The exact inventor is unknown, but one ol theearliest exponents was T R Dawson. As he was theman who really brought about the interest in FairyChess, it is appropriate to start with a problem by him.

1 is the earliest example of Superpins we have tohand, but it will not necessarily be the first to becomposeo.

In the diagram position the bk is not in check fromthe wScT - the bRd4 pins wRd6, which therefore doesnot pin bBb6, which therefore does pin wsc7. The key1.J3 threatens 2.Qxe2 # after which the seltpin 2...Rd3would be illegal as it would unpin wRd6, which wouldthen pin bBb6, which would then not pin wsc7, whichwould check. For the same reason neither 1...Rd3 nor1...Rc4 deJeatthelhreat. The bBb6, not being pinned,is free to move and after 1...8xa5, 2.Kc8 # worksbecause it unpins both wScT and wRd6, giving rise todouble check. Somewhat convoluted - as all the bestsuperpins problems are - but very rewarding.

(1) T R DAWSONChemnitzer Tageblatt, 1925

I.IJ:

r- -.bxa)1...Bxc7t. - -bxed1. . .Qxe7r - .RazL - - -KXdb

1.-1..1..

(2.Qxe2 #)2.Kc8 #2 . Sxc?2 . KxeSz -Kxe Iz

- bxoz

2 . Qxd6

2 is another setling of the same idea, and again wehave a wS that's not checking the bK. bBbS pinswBc4. which doesn't pin bRbs whbh does pin wsc5.The need to provide tor 1...8xc4+! explains the key1.Qc1 , which threatens 2.Qa3 #, efter which 2...8a4and 2... Ra5 would both be illegal. 2...8a4 unpins wBc4which then pins bRbs, which then doesn't pin wsc5.2...Ra5 self-pins the bR which then doesn't pin wscs.The defences allow white to unpin wS to give male.Note that 1...Ra5 is no defence against the threat as2.Qc3 pins bR which then doesn't pin wSc5.

(2) T R DAWSONFairv Chess Review. 1939

#2 Superpins

1.Qc1!.Raz,

RDZ. Qxcl. Se?,sb6

.Bxc7

. Bxc4+

.Rxc5-dxe6

(2.Qa3 #)

2.Kxe4 #2.Kxd4 #2.Kd6 #2. SxcT #2

-Qxc4 #2. Sxc5 #2 -Kc6 #

*,,,,,,',,,,,,,

:iiri;::i'i::i

',,;;.4n ::::r:::ii::

El:::::::,:::i;

t

tt:.dEirJ

i:i,i:!: an4\Arfltt ,ffir

i:l:irl:::ift: ::,::::j,:::::

f.i.t...t ilA...A'

#2 Superpins

aEl

A::,atrl|:-

l......,l....:::: ?^\a*1::,,rt:::: :r::t-f ,:::i:::::,]::l::*i:l

i':i::: ::iI

tA:.E

A.,.,,',,'i

I{lA

3, by another great of British Chess Composition,has two non-checking wPs! The key 1.Ke3 keepsthese two pinned, self-pins wRd3, which hence doesn'tcheck, grants two flights and threatens 2.K14 #,unpinning everything for a triple check! After 1...8xe5w can afford to play 2.Ke2 as e5 no longer needs to beguarded. After 1...Kxes, 2.Kf2 is mate as c5 no longerneeds covering.

(3) G F ANDERSONFairy Chess Review, 1937

#2 Superpins

1.Ke3! (2.Kf4 #\1. . .Bxe5 2.Ke2 #1. . .Kxc5 2.Bze'] #1. , .Kxe5 2.Kfz #

Another British composer who has worked withSuperpins is Colin Sydenham. In 4, it seems thatWhite only has to protect wsb3 with his K to threaten2-Be2# Yet White must be careful. After 1.Ka2? Blackdeleats by 1...Qe6! since it 2.B,e2+? Kcs! as wsb3 isnow pinned. Similady it 1.Kc2?, Black deteats by1...Qc5! since il 2.B,e2+? Kb4! as wPc3 is not pinned.Both these tries ambush the bQ behind the bK atonoa potential pin line.

(4) C P SYDENHAMBCM, 1983

1...Qbq 2.cz.b4 *1...Bd4 2.cxd4 #1...0d6 2.Sxd6 #1...Qa3+,

Qd7,Qd8,Qf6 2.S (x) a3 *

1. . .Q95,Qh4 2.5d6,

Sa3 #

In 5 we have 3 pinned, and therefore not checking,w pieces - Qe5, Sfs and Bg5. After the key, t.Sbs(2.Qxd6 #) the maiority of the play consists of checksto the wK leading to double and lriple checks. Buithat's not all; in the by-play 1...Qe6, unpinning wQ,leads to 2.Q97 #, pinning bRfT so that wStS mates, abeautiful addition to this prizewinner.

(5) C P SYDENHAM2ndPtize, The Problemist. 19Bg

#2 Superpins

1. Sb5 ! (2.Qxd6111

I

. . .Rxfs+

. . .Rxg4+5nJ+

sd3+. . .Qxe5

. . .dxe3- - -Krb...Se4

2.K'xfs2.Kxg4z.KI5 +

2.Ke4 #2.Kxe5 #, kv^q *2.xxe3 #2.K93 #2.Sfxd6 #2.Qs7 #2.Kxe4,

Sbxd6 *

ln 6 any move by wK threatens 2.fu6 #, but Whitemust be careful which move is made. 1.Kh5? lails to1...Rb5! which would give flights on e3 and 93 il thethreat were carried out. All other wK lirst moves lail forsimilar reasons. Only 1.Kf6! works because it avoidsall polential pins. Colin set a similar problem in iheFairy Solving Competition at the Bournemouth PCCCin 1989, and very tricky it was to solve!

f)

#2 Superpins

I.Ka2? (2.Be2 #) Qe6l7.Kc2? (2.8e2 #) Qc5 ! (2.8e2+? Kc5 ! )(2 .Be2+? Kb4 | |1 . Kb2 ! 12 .Be2 *)

ii:::i::

''...'.,,' .,i.:',i.'.,..,'''.'..'..:',..:'i

*,,"

'',',.,, ''' c?;':;;'"

''''';.,, fi4'. ,,,':.' i ,',.'..., 1'a 4:.*

gl

#2 Superpins

40

(6) C P SYDENHAM(v) Phenix,1990

1. Kh5? (2 . Sg6#)1-Kh6? (2.sq6#)7.Kf'7? (2.59|6#)L -Kg1? (2 . sg6#)1.Kh7? (2. sg6#)1.Kf6! (2.596#)1...Rf1 2.QxfI{1...e3 2.Qd4+

7 is perhaps the most subtle problem in this article.wRcS is oinned and thus doesn't check. bBl6 pinswBe7, which doesn't pin bRd6, which does pin wSd7,which therelore doesn't check. 1.Bb3 threatens 2.Rhs#, a mate not stopped by the illegal move of the bB tothe 5th rank as that would unpin wBe7, which wouldpin bRd6, which wouldn't pin wsd7. Similarly lhe self-pin 1...Rd5 is illegal because then wSdT would beunoinned. Most ol the variations are ol a sort thal wehave seen belore but 1 .OS8 allows 2.RxJ6unpinning wBe7, thus pinning bRd6, thus unpinningwsd7, which checks. 1...895,Bh4 leads to 2.Qb6 #' asalterthis 2...Kxb6would be illegal because bRd6wouldthen be pinned, and therelore not pinning wsd7. Notethe tries and the reason why the key is the only bishopmove that works.

(7) C P SYDENHAMPhenix, 199t

Alter the complexities of the previous problem, I -our only helpmate - may come as welcome relief.Black's first rnove pins wRf3 and White's firsl movepins wBd3, so allowing Black's second rnove, (pinningwRes), to a square that is not guarded by 3 w pieces.The mating move is an unpin of all three units by thewK to give a triple check.

(8) Y CHEYLANDiagrammes, 1988

H#2 Superpins

1.Q94 Re5t 2.Kf5 Kd2 4

1.Bb3 |

t...Ko)1. -.e981...e971...Rxd7+1. . .Bxe7+I . . KXCU+1...S-+a_ - -EXDJ1-..Bxd3

Bh4

(2.Rhs *)2.Bxd5 #2.Rxf6 #2.Kxe8 *2.Kxd7 #2.Kxe7 *2.Kxc8 #2.K(x)c7 *2.Sxb3 #2. Sxd3 #2.Qb6 #

. .rc):

...Rd1l

...Rf1!

...R91!

...Rh1!

#2 Superpins

1.B9f8,1.8a2? (2 . Rh5 #)

.,:, f;.... ,l .:,TTlli'': h :' :fl

' /-\ ::::.: fr: 'l-1-.1: : ,i--+

- a*-r

-': u:: :

2.Kxe8? Ba4 !