No.792 (NP)
No.792 by Nikola Predrag – HS# with logical motives! (JV)
|
No.792 Nikola Predrag
Croatia
original – 07.05.2015
Dedicated to Aleksey Oganesjan
|
Solution: (click to show/hide)
|
|
White kh1 rg1 bd5g7 sh8 pd3g2
Black ke5 rf6 pf3g5h5
hs#3,5 v(v) (7+5)
|
{A corrective logic mechanism, featuring a w/b pair of Pawns,
"reveals and explains" the background of an ep. capture.
Plan A: 1...Kf4 2.Be4? Rh6 3.Bd4 h4 4.g3+?(g4?!) Kg4!=X(flight g4)
Now 4.g4?! would correct X but is pointless in Plan A
Corrections* in the tries introduce the respective defects on 2 diagonals
A*: 1...Kf4? 2.Be6?! Rh6 3.Bd4 h4 4.g3+(g4?!) hxg3+ 5.Bh3!=Y(e6-h3)
Now 4.g4?! would corect Y but (again) is pointless in Plan A
Plan B corrects Y (the line-defect of A*) and X by altering the interpretation
of the same key move (as unpin&tempo) and by the changed guard of g4,
but introduces a new line-defect
B: 1...Kf4?! 2.d4 Rh6 3.Be5+ Kf5 4.g4+?!(g3?!) hxg4+ 5.Bh2!=Z(e5-h2)
Now 4.g3??! would correct Z but not X and looks completely meaningless in plan B.
Nevertheless, the solution avoids all 3 defects (X,Y,Z), correcting plan B exactly
by the combined effects of 4.g3&4.g4 which were already tried with separate effects.
The corrective strategy requires a bi-valve effect in the very mating move
B*: } 1...Ke5-f5{!!} 2.d3-d4 Rf6-h6 3.Bg7-e5 h5-h4{!(?)} 4.g2-g4 +{!!!(g3!??)} h4*g3 ep. # {
(4... h4*g3 ep. #)
The virtual/real phases present 3 different checks to White,
4.hxg3+,hxg4+,hxg3ep.# and 3 positions of wB's, e4/d4,e6/d4,d5/e5.
The construction of the mechanism has a logic core in the changed guard of g4,
by wB or by "extending" the line for wRg1(4.g4).
(After 4...hxg3ep.#, the wR`s line is closed again, but "too late".)
If the final destination for bK is f4, White must attack by 4.g3+, requiring guard
of g4 (X) by 2.Be6(Be4?) with the thematic line defect Y.
With bKf5, the attack 4.g4+ also guards g4 but now f4 must be guarded by 3.Be5
while the line e5-h2 remains open (Z). (Author)
(C+ by Popeye 4.69)}
|
Very nice! The problem has very difficult and subtle solution with very deep content. I am pleased that my No 788 indirectly inspired you to this artwork.
Thanks Aleksey, I have completely forgot about my intention.
I wished to dedicate the problem to you and then I thought that perhaps it should be published “after A.Oganesjan”.
Since the content is very different, I chose the dedication.
But I was pretty dizzy after writing the comment and my intention slipped my mined.
Now I’m angry at myself for not recalling my intention today, when I have already tortured Julia with some corrections.
I will humbly beg her to add the dedication.
Your problem has very directly inspired me.
In your idea, the mate c4xb3ep.# can not be “replaced” by c5xb4#, because bR needs the space for tempo move.
Then I wondered how to show the 3rd potential battery mate c4xb3# as “almost” possible in a try.
The tries in the help-genres might look meaningless, since Black is not opposing.
But I hope that the two line-defects and the thematic flightguard are clear and balanced enough. The solution unites various thematic elements of the virtual phases.
I like such processes, building the solution out of the virtual content.
Perhaps someone would prefer 3 real phases with these 3 different battery mates. But a decent realization would require 3 completely different plays.
For instance, with wKh2, plan A would work uniquely due to 4….hxg3#, doublecheck so 5.Bh3??
I could have added it as a twin instead of the try A*, but the repeated B2 and B3 moves spoil it.
Nikola, thanks for the dedication! Yes, the content of your problem is very different from mine – so, label “after Oganesjan” is undoubtedly not needed at all.
As for tries in h#… Some last helpmates of Kovačević (and maybe some another composers) shows very interesting nuances with tries (and set play). For instance:
So, maybe tries in h# will become a popular content in the future…
Of course, I misprinted in previous comment: not “Gravure-2014”, but “JT Chepizhny-80, 2014”.
Yes I know about Marjan’s recent research which introduces the complex twomover dynamics of logic and mechanisms into helpmates.
It is certainly marvelous but I wonder how “popular” it might become. There are not many composers with comparable skills and imagination for such dynamics.
I hope it will become popular at least to watch Marjan’s wizardry, if not to follow his steps.
Anyway, my personal curiosity looks after various bizarre features. And that will surely not become popular 🙁
I am reminded of Feather’s funny and memorable write-up about try play in helpmates in his book on helpmates!