Note also that in the third solution of 655, we cannot guard e5+e7 with a nR on e3 or e4,…
On No.653,654,655 (CJF)
Note that 1.a1=nQ?? is an illegal selfcheck.
On No.658 (GF)
Very ingenious ! To produce something totally different from a known position takes great imagination and skill. Peter Harris works…
On No.656 (PH)
Agreed: the famous Many Fathers problem (Vielväter) has already shown that content can be totally different even when the position…
On No.656 (PH)
Congratulations Peter, it is a great problem ! SL
On No.656 (PH)
Well, I'm definitely not a co-author of this problem! I like the unity of the twinning and the unusual battery…
On No.656 (PH)
With regard the question implying that Tritten should perhaps be named as co-author: The following changes were made to Tritten’s…
On No.656 (PH)
In the mate in No.654(a), the nQ gives check via d1. Note that the wK is not in check, because…
On No.653,654,655 (CJF)
In No.653(a), 2...nRf1 allows 3.Ka6, because the bKa6 is not in check from the nBa8 (which can no longer move…
On No.653,654,655 (CJF)
These three problems with "phamtom" checks or "phamtom" control of squares, realised in a very economical way, are really beautiful…
On No.653,654,655 (CJF)
