 |
No.526 by Petko A. Petkov – An excellent Disparate composition, model mates, thematic try-play and instructive detailed comment by the author! The problem is dedicated to me, with author’s comment “in a honor of the two-years anniversary of Julia’sFairies website and successful creative work”.
Thank you so much, dear Petko! (JV)
|
Definitions:
Disparate: If one side makes a move with a piece of type “x” (black, white, neutral, half-neutral, etc., King included), the other side cannot answer immediately by moving a piece of the same type “x”. (For example: white Qc1, black Ka8,Qa7 – mate in 1 move. After 1.Qc8#, Black is mated because 1…Qb8? is illegal. The mate is possible also with the neutral nQc1 – after 1.nQc8#. Black cannot move the same neutral Queen.) Every Pawn’s promotion is a Pawn’s move, therefore after such promotion (into any possible piece) the other side cannot answer immediately with its Pawn. We can say that after the move of the figure of type “x” any enemy figure of type “x” falls under Half-moving paralysis. This paralysis disappears immediately on the next half-move, if the opponent plays with another piece of type “y”. (This way it is implemented in Popeye. Another implementation of Disparate you can find in WinChloe, but it is based on the different rules. )
|
No.526 Petko A. Petkov
Bulgaria
original – 10.04.2014
Dedicated to Julia Vysotska!
 hs#3 b) White Rh7 (7+1+2)
Disparate C+
a) 1.nRg4-g8! (Creation of a special neutral Disparate battery nBh6/nRg8 – now the w.King is not under check because the nRg8 – as a rear battery piece, is paralyzed for Black)
1…nBh6-f4 +! (Play of the battery nBh6/nRg8 with activation of nRg8 for Black – the wK is under check!)
2.nRg8-a8!! ( Critical nR-move with a new half-paralyze of nRa8 for Black)
2…nBf4-b8!! (Creation of an Indian neutral battery nB/nR)
3.Sd7-e5 +! nBb8xe5 #! – Mate to the w.K because the nBe5 is paralyzed for White and 4.nBb8?? is impossible). Pay attention that in a final 4.Bg8?? is illegal because Bh7 is paralyzed by the nBe5!
Thematical tries: 1. nBg7? nRg2+! 2.nBa1!! nRb2!! 3.Sb8+? but here 3…nRxb8?? is no mate, because White has a thematical answer: 4.Bg8!! – now nRa8 is closed and nBa1 is paralyzed from the w.Bishop!!; 1.nBf4? is false because now after 1…nRg8+? the w.King is under check, the nR is paralyzed for White and the move nRa8?? is illegal
b) 1.nBh6 – g7! (Creation of a special neutral Disparate battery nRg4/nBb7 – now the w.King is not under check because the nBg7 – as a rear battery piece, is paralyzed for Black)
1…nRg4- g2 +! (Play of the battery nRg2/nBg7 with activation of nBg7 for Black – the wK is under check!)
2.nBg7 – a1!! (Critical nB-move with a new half-paralyze of nBa1 for Black)
2…nRg2-b2!! (Creation of an Indian neutral battery nR/nB)
3.Sd7-b8 +! nRb2xb8 #! – Mate to the w.K because the nRb8 is paralyzed for White and 4.nRb2?? is impossible). Pay attention that in final 4.Rg7?? is illegal because Rh7 is paralyzed from the nRb8!
Thematical tries: 1. nRg8? nBf4+! 2.nRa8!! nBb8!! 3.Se5+? but here 3…nBxe5?? is no mate, because White has a thematical answer: 4.Rg7!! – now nBe5 is closed and nRa8 is paralyzed from the w. Rook!!; 1.nRg2? is false because now after 1…nBg7+? the w.King is under check, the nB is paralyzed for White and the move nBa1?? is illegal!
At the first glance in this problem is used a well known old mechanism for creation of reciprocal Indian batteries R/B that we can see even in the first helpmates in the history of Chess composition (created only with black or white pieces). But in my opinion, this conclusion is not plausible – it is probably only an optical illusion.
Here the Indian theme with neutral figures is double complicated: The “classic Indian” in this Meredith is realized not with 2 half-moves but with 4 half-moves (!!) combined with double roundabout maneuvers of neutral figures. Moreover – as the introduction of the Indian theme, here is created also another new special Disparate battery. The thematic try-play is of course another fresh element (realized in this problem for the first time!) specifical for this unusual condition! The finals are model mates.
As all my Disparate problems, this composition is composed using Popeye’s implementation of Disparate (C+ with Popeye 4,65). (Author)
|
Double check, but not a double check ! 🙂 Clever use of the Disparate condition. Brilliant !
But I think they really are double checks.
nBe5 in a) and nRg8 in b) are paralysed for White, as the composer notes, but they are not paralysed for Black (under Popeye’s Disparate rules) – and so the wK is in check from both nB and nR. (Or am I mistaken?) This doesn’t change the value of the problem!
I especially like the thematic tries refuted by the piece at h7. They differentiate the two solutions in quite a subtle way.
And congratulations to the wonderful site and our hostess on the anniversary!
Yes Kjell, I also think nBe5 is giving check in a) simply because this is a black move. On the contrary nBg7 in b) is not giving check as it is a white move.
Btw congrats for your Backhome first Prize!
Another interesting fact should be noted: In the diagram position, solution b) doesn’t work because of the defense Bg8! In the twin, solution a) doesn’t work because of the defense Rg7! Both moves closes a line/diagonal and paralyzes the other checking unit…
Congratulations Julia for this wonderful site and your good work! Wishing you many more years to follow!
Congratulations Julia for such a wonderful site and the completion of successful two years flooded with high quality problems!
A highly fitting gift for the 2 Year Anniversary of your site by the Great IGM.
What an imagination by this great composer! It is hard to realize how the nR & nB form the bateery.
I also agree with Kjell & Dupont that both the mating moves (nBe5 & nRb8) must be double check moves as per the definition given by Mr. Petko for Disparate; these moves paralyze the corresponding pieces of only white and not the black as the last moves are by black.
It is interesting to note that the twinning is also fully thematic.
Congratulations for amazing two years and best luck for the future!
Dedicated problem perfectly adorns the anniversary. The mechanism utilizes combined Disparate+Neutral logic in the real play but also with equivalent logic in the virtual play.
Great part of the comment nicely explains the richness and beauty of the content which is quite enough for the masterpiece of O/D transformations.
A part of the comment, about what is (double) check and what is not, is contradictory.
Also, it is indeed important to mention that Disparate+Neutral make different effects depending on who played the last move and by which piece. nRg4-g8/nBh6-f4 can be played both as W1 and B1 with White on the move, but the resulting positions would not be the same, despite their identical appearance.
But, to emphasize that in the try wK is checked directly (1.nBf4? nRg8+) and in the solution indirectly (due to the ended paralysis of nRg8), the author has introduced a concept of “special Disparate battery”. This is not necessary because the check to wK is irrelevant, the point is (un)paralyzed nR and whether White could move it or not.
And actually, such “special concept” undermines the fundamental general concept of battery – “DEPARTURE from the battery-line”.
Check by nRg8 is activated by finishing black move 1…Bh6-f4, which might mean by ARRIVAL.
So, “special Disparate antibattery” might look better but still lacking a convincing concept of an “antibattery-line”.
Many visitors meet the basic concepts in chess composition on the websites. WFCC should do something, at least about the fundamental concepts and their possible interpretations in various genres, especially in fairies. Free interpretations give some benefits to the creativity but the entropy could be very fast, annihilating the highly organized order and distinction of qualities.
Congrats Julia for a successful and eventful two years! It seems that only yesterday you started originals and now 526! Amazing!.
Dear Julia,
You are God’s Gift to us!
I congratulate you on the excellent fairy site!
Wishing you additional successes and masterpieces as Petko’s very beautiful work.
Janos
Yes, I accept the opinion of my dear colleagues that the mates are with double checks ( my solutions are already corrected). A more detailed comments on this question I shall publish later.
Dear friends, thank you so much for your attention, all good words and wishes! What to say more? Just.. I’m happy! And all of you are always very welcomed at JF – with your problems, comments, announcements… and as my guests!
WinChloe shows C+ with 2 solutions with wPh7.
Or with wQh7 and without wPa6.
Well, while enjoying the O/D complexity of virtual change between the twins, we all have overlooked a naive “childish” question: what the piece on h7 does in the real solutions?
Popeye gives the same answer-a mere selfblock. I hate when I fail to ask myself such naive “childish” questions, so thanks Georgy!
On the other side, the twinning form adds a new diagonal/orthogonal effect, with Bg8 to avoid solution b) and Rg7 to avoid solution a). Moreover those defenses are “disparate”. But maybe the prize to pay (twins instead of 2-solutions) is too high, I don’t know.
It’s not only about the twins/multisolution. That “new diagonal/orthogonal effect” is not only completely artificial, but actually it doesn’t exist at all, which wQh7 clearly proves. Paralysis of wB/wR h7 is irrelevant because of double-check.
Evseev`s “improvements” (!?) – with wPh7 or w.Qh7, de facto destroy the contents of my problem and I believe this as absolutely unacceptable! The thematic tries have a very important effect and value in Disparate – genre! Is this not quite clear?
My second remark is that the variants of the condition DISPARATE according to the programs Popeye and WinChloe are quite different! I compose Disparate – problems only of Popeye-type. I perceive this kind of as richer and closest to the definition of Disparate – inventor Romeo Bedoni.
By the way, the big anniversary tournament BEDONI-80 JT (see “Phenix” – №191-192/ 2010) was organized and awarded according to the Popeye-variant of Disparate! In the same number of Phenix (№191-192/2010, раges 8086-8116) is published my detailed article about Disparate – Popeye. New, more detailed version of this article I plan to publish soon as possible and on this site!
Accidentally, in my problem №526 the solutions according to the Popeye and WinChloe are the same. But that does not mean identity between the two programs in general! On this question I’ve written many times!
I don’t know whether the problem is sound with wP/wQh7. I stand on my comment that the twinning is fully thematic with wB/wR on h7 and I agree with the view of Mr. Petko that wP/wQ h7 destroys the contents of the problem. I feel that the possible refutation by the piece on h7 forces the beautiful twinning condition, i.e. which piece should be (B or R) on h7.
Yes. In the 2-solutions setting the white skeleton is Kh8 Ph7, with (Ra8,Be5)# and (Rb8,Ba1)#
In the twin setting with white skeleton Kh8 Bh7, we have (Ra8,Be5)# but (Rb8,Ba1)++ Bg8!
In the twin setting with white skeleton Kh8 Rh7, we have (Rb8,Ba1)# but (Ra8,Be5)++ Rg7!
Hence the twinning form clearly shows another beautiful O/D effect – the refutation of solution b) in diagram position and vice versa.
Yes, my previous comment was too hasty, a very inappropriate way to deal with the tricky virtual logic of these combined fairy elements.
It was actually pretty clearly explained by the author and I had fully understood it after first analysis but nevertheless, I have forgot about it today.
The main question here is about the economy and justification of the material used only for the virtual content.
Trivial reasons might be not a convincing justification but the deep and fundamental principles of chess (and its many variants) surely deserve to be explored and presented.
And this is the case here.
The power of wR/wB is not needed in the solutions, they are static and serving only for virtual play.
Both mates seem the same in the essence. nR checks along the same orthogonal and nB along the same diagonal. But the difference is in WHICH piece plays the last move. wQh7 would not be able to parry the double-check in neither of the phases.
But wB/wR can parry the respective double-check in a specific Disparate way, depending on the piece which moves last.
This looks enough deep and fundamental to make a valuable virtual content, added to the real play as a perfect complementary part of the whole idea.
I fully agree with Nikola’s last statement. When some piece is needed as a block on h7 anyway, the price of making it a R or B (instead of a mere P) to gain a Disparate-specific O-D differentiation of the two solutions is a very small price, and I would pay it any day. If an otherwise useless piece had to be added to get these thematic tries, then we could have reason to discuss whether the result is worth the price. But here – no doubt at all in my mind!
First, I did not want “my” version as “improvement” – I only wanted to show the fact that Nikola emphasized in his first reply.
Second, I do not believe in “tries” in helpplay problems. In such problems you only have your own error – not any kind of countereffect. And for me “beautiful error” is a kind of oxymoron which also unfortunately lies beyond real solution.
So, for me technical improvement almost always has priority over “tries” (we are speaking about helpplay problems only!). At the same time I understand the opposite opinion, even if I do not agree.
Try play in direct mates are also wrong attempts at solving.
General principles must not be dogmatic, but a set of usual criteria for a set of usual ideas. When an idea crosses the border of usual, the criteria might follow it across of usual limits.
Virtual play could be rather artificial and unconvincing in helpplay genres. But h#s ends as s#1 and there is a moment for virtual content (I tried it in my 153.1).
And a solver may find both double-check mates and wonder for a moment: why these both mates do not work in both twins? When he discovers the reason, he would much better and deeper understand the fundamental characteristics of Disparate.
Here the twinning serves for the perfect clarity of presentation.
Perhaps after hundreds of excellent Disparate problems, the virtual play of No.526 would appear as dealing with well known and trivial characteristics of the condition.
But pioneering, particularly in highly artistic form, is worth crossing the usual limits of criteria.
(In today’s world, we take everything for granted, rarely wondering whence it has come. But some people are aware of the pioneers and, for instance, they say: Nikola Tesla was a man who invented 20th century)
h#s is quickly developing, but the criteria specific for the genre are much slower. There are interesting discussions but getting to some common conclusions is an urgent need.
Perhaps the discussion about tries in helpplay problems is mainly a discussion about words?
I think that in this problem, the reason why we must build a battery Ra8/Bb8 when there’s a wB on h7, and a battery Ba1/Rb2 when there’s a wR on h7, and not the other way ’round, is a large part of the appeal of the composition – especially when the reason is fairy-specific as it is here.
Whether we call the attempts to build the batteries the wrong way “tries”, or “differentiation”, or “dual avoidance”, or something else, is secondary – in any case, this feature is important and valuable in the problem.
I agree 100% with Kjell
100% of agreement is perhaps not a good expression here, because some readers might take it as a definite rule, applicable in any case.
Personal impressions are personal, but achieving the generally common values must rely on the the generally common principles.
Georgy does not believe in “tries” in helpplay problems. I agree 100% with that as a PRINCIPLE but 0% as a dogma. Principle arises from the essential relation between the idea and its realization in a particular genre.
Helpselfmate genre is still lacking some clear basic generallly common principles. Compared to helpmates, the economy of realization (and even the economy of the very idea) appears as irrelevant to many composers.
Dogmatically applied Georgy’s (and also mine) treatment of tries in helpplay problems would not accept a white officer as mere passive selfblock in the solution. The complex and artistic complementarity of virtual and real play would probably allow to accept the existence of No.526 but achieved at “heavy” costs.
But for me, the most exciting feature of human creativity is originality, especially the exploring, the discovering and the clear presenting of the fundamental truth.
Here, the PIONEERING ORIGINALITY clearly and beautifully presents the COMPLEX COMPLEMENTARITY OF O/D transformation that arises from the fundamental truth in the special SYSTEM which is COMPOUND of Disparate+Neutral.
Pioneering opens a new world and all principles of the “old” world have to be carefully reconsidered and reformulated as much as neccessary.
It would not be wise to accept hastily that in ANY Disparate+Neutral problems, a virtual content of helpplay could violate the “old” principles of the economy. Future problems with content similar to No.526 will not be so fundamentally original. The meaning and significance of virtual play and economy must be carefully considered and formulated to be generally appliable for all helpplay problems.
But at present, No.526 should be commonly recognized as a flawless masterpiece, if not for anything else, then at least exclusively for the “pioneering originality”.
(I am rather dissapointed by a lack of serious interest about formulating some basic theoretic principles for hs# and generally for the fairies. I had hoped to initiate a couple of theoretic questions by composing No.153, but it went unnoticed. Now I’ve added a new comment there https://juliasfairies.com/problems/jf-2012/page-88/#comment-19154)