|
|
Original Problems, Julia’s Fairies – 2015 (I): January – June →Previous ; →Next ; →List 2015(I) Please send your original fairy problems to: julia@juliasfairies.com |
No.788 by Aleksey Oganesjan – Valladao theme with tempo-moves! (JV)
|
No.788 Aleksey Oganesjan |
Solution: (click to show/hide) |
|
White Ke1 Ra1 Pb7 Pb2
Black Ka5 Rc5 Sa4 Pa6 Pc4 Pe3 Pc2
hs#4,5 (4+7) |
|
Valladao and black minor promotion are nice but showing nothing especially new.
However, the white underpromotion is quite complex.
White allows himself a unique tempo move which will allow a tempo move to Black.
Beautiful!
Both (matching) underpromotions could be motivated only by the need for (single) white tempo move.
W: Pb2,Ra1,Ke1; B: Pa6,Ka5,Pe5,Sa4,Pc4,Se4,Pa2,Ph2; hs#4
1.0-0-0 h1Q? 2.b8R Qh7(Qh6+?) 3.??? Qc7?! etc.
Nikola, your version
[img]http://i.imgur.com/szIb3M0.png[/img]
is beautiful too because black battery R+P is created during solution. But I liked my version more because of interconnected white and black tempo moves.
Yes, of course Aleksey, one tempo move depending on another tempo move is rare. And the underpromotion caused by such dependence looks pretty original in modern problems, particularly in hs#.
It is 2 tempo moves causing 1 dual avoidance, 2.b8R(Q?).
I just wondered about two underpromotions, both exclusively caused by the single tempo move.
It is 1 tempo move causing 2 dual avoidances, 1…h1Q(R?)&2.b8R(Q?)
Black underpromotion is required due to the lack of tempo move in the try 2…Qh7? and due to the check 2…Qh6+? in the “corrected play”.
I like such dynamics of virtual/real logic but it requires writing down the non-existing play.
(Although, a “true solver” should ask himself why not Qh1-h7-c7?, which already requires 2.b8R but not the tempo move.)
Your original is powerful because the full content is perfectly clear from the real play.
Beautiful! Great content with underpromotions, tempo moves and vallado. Everything works nicely. Personally I would also prefer your version with W/B tempo. Nikola’s version with matching underpromotions is of course very interesting.
What is the “tempo-move” definition used in this problem?
Traditionally ih h# and hs# “tempo-move” is the same as that of “waiting move”.
Thanks for the explanation. Indeed I do prefer “waiting move” than “tempo move”, as this latter means, in its general acceptance, that a given piece is reaching a given square in two moves, although reaching it in only one move would have been possible.
Hm, “waiting move” is used for a move without threat. Such move could strengthen the position, while a pure “tempo-losing(wasting) move” has no effect on the play (except transferring the moving right to the other side).
I wonder about that “general acceptance” since there are various interpretations (if my memory doesn’t deceive me).
More precisely I referred to what is commonly called an “individual tempo move”, at least in the proof game genre.
It’s quite logical for PG genre, the final diagram position is given and all moves are motivated by reaching that exact position because it is stipulated so.
A move in a PG has a “tempo-losing” meaning only if it’s not visible on the diagram. Such move and its (pure) purpose is revealed by playing the solution.
I liked both versions. There is connectivity in both. In a help genre, isn’t that always true for any unique solution line? I do give a slight nod to the original, because it came first. Aesthetically, either different or matched underpromotions feel about the same to me….two underpromotions, one each by black and white, being the point.
There’s nothing to be “improved” in the original, it perfectly shows the beautiful idea.
I just wondered about a bit altered idea where both W&B queening fail for the same (single) tempo-reason.
I’ve seen many beautiful tempo-problems composed in the past but I fail to recall a full anticipation of both Aleksey’s or my idea.
I’m not much interested in Valladao task because the 3 required elements are usually inbuilt separately in a line, without any deeper interdependence.
And each of these elements alone is often artificially constructed, just for the sake of the pattern which is known by a “name”.
For instance, in this No.788, 5.b4+ c5xb4 would also mate if bP was on c5. But bP must be on c4 to enable that tempo-play, that’s nice.
However, bK could stand on a4 and 5.b3+ c4xb3# would make the same real content but wouldn’t present ep. capture.
I sent Julia the original which might (hopefully) illustrate what I’m trying to say.