Proca-hoeg in one problem by Andreas Thoma

Proca-hoeg in one problem by Andreas Thoma

proca-articla-thoma-exProca und Høeg-Forderung in einem Problem mit der Bedingung Anticirce
von Andreas Thoma (Groß Rönnau)

Angeregt durch das Erstlingsproblem von Günther Weeth (Schwalbe 274 August 2015 Nr. 16427), das leider nebenlösig ist, entstanden die folgenden Probleme.

Fur Unterstützung bedanke ich mich bei Klaus Wenda und Olaf Jenkner herzlich.

Zunächst aber zur Erinnerung die Proca-und Høeg Definitionen im Verteidigungsruckzüger:
→ see the whole article (in German)

Notify of

Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Kjell Widlert
Kjell Widlert
October 4, 2015 23:03

Interesting type of twinning!

Re the last remark in the text: I think a retraction such as K-c5>e1 should be allowed in Høeg AntiCirce, in which case Black has to add some piece on c5. Black cannot say “no, the capture was made on d6 so I add something there”: the rule of Høeg is that one side decides what move was made, the other side decides what was captured. So the retraction Ke2-e1 (not Ke2-e3>e1) is quite all right in Høeg, and because of Cheylan Black can’t add anything on e1.

By the way: does anyone need a translation of the German text, or is it clear enough?

Stephen Emmerson
Stephen Emmerson
October 5, 2015 00:18
Reply to  Kjell Widlert

If you’re offering, I’d be pleased to have a translation! I find Google Translate fairly hopeless for most chess problem articles, definitions, etc., from German to English.

Kjell Widlert
Kjell Widlert
October 6, 2015 00:25

Your wish is my command 🙂 Here is an attempt at translation:

Proca and Høeg stipulations in one problem with the AntiCirce condition
by Andreas Thoma (Groß Rönnau)

Inspired by the first setting by Günther Weeth (Schwalbe 274, August 2015, No 16427), which unfortunately is cooked, the following problems were created. I heartily thank Klaus Wenda and Olaf Jenkner for support. Firrst, however, a reminder of the definitions of Proca and Høeg in defensive retractors.
[I assume a translation of the definitions is not needed KjW]
While all problems are satisfactorily tested with pacemaker for a), there may of course be cooks or duals in b).
While in No 1) the square a1 is occupied none too prettily, the problems get ever more elegant and use fewer pieces as we go along. I am convinced that it is possible to find a five-piece problem with solutions of equal length in the Proca and Høeg parts.
In no 3), the bPc3 is only needed against the cook 2.Qc3-h3 and forwards Qg7# in part b).
The dedication to Günther Weeth is meant as a recognition for being the first to unite Proca and Høeg in one problem.

One more word on the retractions of the king to e1: as the additional condition “Cheylan” applies, it is reasonable to allow the wK to retract to e1 without capture. (This, by the way, occurs in the Schwalbe problem by Günther Weeth too.) White is actually saying that he retracts for example the move Ke2-e1 and not Ke2-e3>e1; I think we should leave it so that after Ke2-e1, Black cannot decide that the wK could also arrive at e1 by an uncapture (e.g. on e3), but the problem exists in my opinion.

Stephen Emmerson
Stephen Emmerson
October 28, 2015 14:13
Reply to  Kjell Widlert

Kjell – thank you. I hadn’t seen until now!

shankar ram
shankar ram
October 8, 2015 06:10

What is the “Pacemaker” referred to here? A new solving program? Very Cardiac sounding… 😉

Joost de Heer
Joost de Heer
October 8, 2015 12:38
Reply to  shankar ram

Pacemaker is a program, written by Thomas Kolkmeyer IIRC, which can test Anticirce Proca-retractors

shankar ram
shankar ram
October 8, 2015 13:43

Availability for others?

Would love your thoughts, please comment.x