No.963 (PT)

ptrittenNo.963 
Pierre Tritten 
(France)

JF-LOGO-1

Original Problems, Julia’s Fairies – 2015 (II): July – December

→Previous ; →Next ; →List 2015(II)

Please send your original fairy problems to: julia@juliasfairies.com


No.963 by Pierre Tritten – A sequence of reciprocal pins and unpins in two phases. (JV)


No.963 Pierre Tritten
France

original – 03.12.2015

Solutions: (click to show/hide)

White Kg1 Rg8 Bc7 Black Kg3 Rd6 Rf2 Bg7 Be2 Se8 Sb5 Pd7 Pc6 Ph6 Pd4 Ph4 Ph3

ser-h#5         2 solutions          (3+13)


15 Responses to No.963 (PT)

  1. Geoff Foster says:

    This is a really beautiful problem, with perfect correspondence between solutions. The “Hesitation Grimshaw” is a delight!

    I quoted some “series-helpmates with self pin & unpin” in the November 2015 issue of The Problemist Supplement. Did that inspire this problem?

  2. Seetharamanseetharaman says:

    Lovely problem!

  3. shankar ram says:

    “Overshoot Grimshaw” seems more appropriate than “Hesitation Grimshaw”!
    Similar mechanism has been used earlier to show full 3×3 cycle:
    PfY0F6QV

  4. Geoff Foster says:

    In the Myllyniemi problem the bSf6 plays to h7, not h5.

    The theme of black self-pin & unpin is much easier to show in stalemate form. Also, in the stalemate problems only the moves of the Q/R are different between solutions. The problems are clever but they are also mechanical.

  5. shankar ram says:

    Thanks for correcting the mistake in the solution of the Myllyniemi problem, Geoff!
    Of course, Pierre’s problem stands apart – as it includes Grimshaw, the overshoot moves, the Pelle selfblocks and ODT. I just quoted the sh=s for the mechanism.
    “…clever but mechanical…”, “…ingenious but mechanical…” : in my experience, many cyclic problems are fated to get this reaction! 😉

  6. Arno Tüngler says:

    Please see the beneath that probably fully anticipates this problem… The 5-mover was a version that was published with the solutions of the 6-mover (that later was selected for the FIDE-Album 1998-2000 as No. G16) in 2001 with my comment “Maybe that is even better?” and the response of the editor (and one of the judges) Hans Gruber: “No.” (both in German obviously…)

    Arno Tüngler
    8025 feenschach 11/12 1999
    2nd Prize
    FEN: B6b/3p4/2rP4/8/q2s2P1/Rb3krP/p3ppp1/K7
    ser-h#6 b)bPf2 to f4
    a) 1.Rxg4 2.Re4 3.Rc3 4.Bd5 5.Rf4 6.Be4 Rxc3#
    b) 1.g1B 2.Be3 3.Bd5 4.Rc3 5.Bf2 6.Re3 Bxd5#

    Arno Tüngler
    8025 (Version) feenschach 07/2001
    FEN: 1b1r4/4pp2/1pP1kp2/8/p5K1/1r3p2/Bp2b3/4R3
    ser-h#5 2 solutions

    1.Rd5 2.Re3 3.Bc4 4.Rd6 5.Bd5 Rxe3#
    1.Be5 2.Bc4 3.Re3 4.Bd6 5.Re5 Bxc4#

  7. Arno Tüngler says:

    Yes, that is missing in the 6-mover (that has some other advantages) but look at the 5-mover that was published in 2001.

  8. Nikola Predrag says:

    There’s no Grimshaw in Arno’s or Pierre’s h#5. That’s probably what Hans has meant by saying “No”.

  9. trittenPierre Tritten says:

    I agree, it’s a clear anticipation.
    Maybe the ‘No’ means that the sh#5 setting is cooked:
    1.Be5 2.Bc4 3.Re3 4.Bd6 5.Re5 B×c4‡
    1.Rd5 2.Bd6 3.Re5 4.Bc4 5.Ra3 B×c4‡
    1.Rd5 2.Re3 3.Bc4 4.Rd6 5.Bd5 R×e3‡
    1.Rd5 2.Re5 3.Bc4 4.Bd6 …
    1.Rd5 2.Re5 3.Bc4 4.Ra3 5.Bd6 …
    1.Rd5 2.Re5 3.Bd6 …

  10. Nikola Predrag says:

    I presume there’s typo in Arno’s FEN, 1 instead of p (+bPa3).

  11. Arno Tüngler says:

    Nikola is right – the bPa3 is missing! The right FEN is 1b1r4/4pp2/1pP1kp2/8/p5K1/pr3p2/Bp2b3/4R3

    When Hans wrote his short comment he did not have in mind the “Grimshaw” as there was no comment not from me not from him about such a thing. Probably it is already understood that such terms like “Grimshaw”, “Umnov”, “Bristol” etc. in helpplay are often used when in reality talk is just about an effect resembling those themes. Personally I usually do not use them in such context, especially if the effects are not “pure” like in the given problem where the mutual interception is connected with blocks of king flights.

    Hans (and bernd ellinghoven and Hanspeter Rehm) just felt that the 6-mover is still better than the 5-mover due to other merits: the unblocking of a king flight in the first move and thus better hidden solutions and the nicer mate positions maybe… Their comment in the awards to the 6-mover was short: “Relay of pin-changes in perfect orthogonal-diagonal unison”.

  12. Nikola Predrag says:

    Yes Arno, there’s the point. The thematic bRg3/bPg2 in your masterpiece make a reciprocally functioning mechanism. And it’s indeed surprising that an obviously needed “simple passive blocker” from one phase, becomes the most active thematic piece in the other phase.

    In the shorter version, each of bRd8/bBb8 is superfluous in one respective phase. The deceptive “Grimshaw” actually just highlights the weasels.

    “Absolute purity” is not necessary in help-genres. “Relatively pure” motivations make a content of the most of help-play masterpieces.
    Of course, “no motivation at all”, doesn’t contribute to a content.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You can add images to your comment by clicking here.