Mat Plus


20  YEARS  OF  THEME  VLADIMIROV

by Milan Velimirovic

(From Mat Plus No.15, Autumn 1997, p.83) 
(see also: "More about theme Vladimirov") 


The first realization of this perhaps the most difficult pattern theme was published exactly 20 years ago by one of the World leading composers Yakov Vladimirov, who by this claimed the right to call the theme by his name. The history of theme, as far as I am (indirectly) involved, started several years earlier, when Marjan Kovacevic, at that time just a teenage boy, asked me about my opinion about the pattern which was exactly the same paradox. I was also very young then, but having already been the editor of the magazine "Mat", gave him an authoritative answer that it certainly was extremely difficult, if possible at all. The answer was correct, but there must have been something in my pronunciation that discouraged the young composer even to attempt to realize it. Few years later, in Varna 1976, Yakov Vladimirov asked two of us about the same pattern. Our answer was negative, but I remember that at that very moment Marjan looked at me with kind of reproach. Yes, Yasha's question was whether we had seen any example with this pattern, not about our opinion of its possibility, but, anyway, I still have the feeling that indirectly I might, but only might, have influenced the name for one item in the chess problem terminology.

THE PATTERN

Theme is based on the paradoxical relation between one white and one black move. If white tries move A, black defeats by move x. However, after the key if black defends with move x, white mates with move A. Of course, to get the status of theme the pattern should appear at least twice:
    1. A? x!, 1. B? y! [ , 1.C? z!. ... ]
    1. key! x, y [ , z... ] 2. A, B [ , C... ] #

So far, there is not any acceptable example with more than two variations.

"PSEUDO-VLADIMIROV" AND "NON-VLADIMIROV" THEME

As with all (paradoxical) themes based on relation of white and black moves in two or more phases, it must be stressed that there should be made distinction between the move which is physically same in both instances (which means same departure and arrival square) and the move which is not (different departure squares). The later one is at least thematically inferior, if thematical at all, and usually implies the prefix "pseudo-".
[A] N. G. G. van Dijk
3.hm Hlas l'udu 1986







#2 15+9
For instance, excellent twomover [A] triples the pattern but only as far as only arrival squares for white are counted, because the departure square of WR is e2 in tries, and e6 after the key. So, this is only a "pseudo-Vladimirov" theme. 1.Ree3? Qg3!, 1.Re4? Qg2:!, 1.Re5? Qg5!; 1.Re6:! ~ 2.Qd5#, 1... Qg5,Qg3,Qg2: 2.Re5,Re3,Re4#.
Even with physically identical moves, there is a case when the pattern becomes trivial. This is, of course, mutual capture of white and black thematic pieces, implying the prefix "non-" (since "anti-" is already reserved word in the terminology).
[B] M. Banaszek
1.hm Die Schwalbe 1987







#2 5+2
Miniature [B] has often been quoted as an miraculous example, but although it is a good problem with pointed tries by WSg8 threatening 2.Qg8# and a good key allowing a flight to that square and leading to four different mates, the impression is much better if two Vladimirov tries are not mentioned at all! 1.Se7? ~ 2.Qg8#, 1... Be7:!, 1.Sh6? ~ 2.Qg8#, 1... Bh6:!; 1.Qd8! (~), 1... Be7,Bh6 2.Se7:,Sh6:#.
As a matter of fact, such "non-Vladimirov" theme can be shown in at least 10 variations (i.e.: Kf2 Qh1 Ra1 h8 Sd6 - Ka8 Ra7 b8 Pe4 f5, #2, 1.Ke2! and two sets of 5 tries/mates by WRs).

Beside this drastic case, there are mechanisms with "built-in" flaws, such as the presence of thematic mate(s) in (double or multiple) threat, or the flight-taking tries.

THE REAL VLADIMIROV THEME

The main question which composer asks himself when he searches for the "Vladimirov" mechanism is: how to prevent the key move to appear as mating move in tries? Typically, the key move builds the battery and is made by line-mover (Q, R or B), so the best way to disable is to close its line. It can be done either in black defensive or in white try move. Since two variations are the minimum (and so far the only fulfilled) request, there are three typical groups of mechanisms based on the side which closes the key-piece line: (BB) two closures by black defences, (WW) two closures by white try-moves, and (BW) one closure by black and one by white. Further classification could be made according to the kind of thematic black and/or white thematic pieces, or by the character of white key move (i.e. battery building either by ambush move or from halfbattery opening), but with so limited number of examples it seems to be superfluous. Perhaps it is enough only to distinguish in first and second group whether two defences or tries are made by different or by the same thematic piece.

Group "BB"

This group of mechanisms features double interference of white key piece by black defences.

Examples 1-4 show mechanisms with key-piece line closures by different black pieces.
1. Y. Vladimirov
Shakhmaty 1977







#2 10+8
The prototype problem 1 is not among the most successful thematic examples because after the key white threatens with random battery opening which includes both thematic mates. This flaw is partially compensated by the fact that each possible black move leads to the unique mate, but there are still lacking few defences to make the complete Fleck. 1.Rdd6? ~ 2.Ra6/Qg1#, 1... Sg6!; 1.Rd8? ~ 2.Ra8/Qg1#, 1... Bg2!; 1.Qg1! ~ 2.Rd~#, 1... Bg2,Sg6 2.Rd8,Rd6#.
2. A. Dombrovskis
64 1977







#2 12+6
Problem 2 is the one which provoked my real interest in theme and made me start exploring its possibilities. Unusual arrangement of prospective white P-batteries anticipatory opened in tries for threats by non-key pieces and attractive R-sacrificial key which leads to dual-free post-key block make this excellent problem the first real affirmation of the "Vladimirov theme". 1.e5? ~ 2.Qf3:#, 1... f2!; 1.cb6? ~ 2.Rc1#, 1... d2!; 1.Rc2! (~), 1... d2,f2 2.cb6,e5#.
3. W. Kwjatowskij
2.hm Hlas l'udu 1982







#2 7+3
4. A. Zidek
Schach-Aktiv 1994







#2 8+3
3 is extremely light rendering, mostly thanks to the flight-taking tries. Nevertheless, it has changed mates for non-defeating black defences in both tries completing so-called "Ideal Vladimirov", plus additional changes after BK moves distributed between two tries and actual play with dual-free play in all phases. 1.Rc5? (~), 1... e3!, 1... S~ 2.Rc8#; 1.Ra5? (~), 1... Se3!, 1... S~,e3 2.Bf4,Ra8#; 1.Bf4! (~), 1... S~,e3 2.Ra5,Rc5#.

The addition of one WPd3 in 4 to introduced the BP random move possibility thus completing the "Zagoruyko 3x2" is only a formal improvement. 1.Rc5? (~), 1... e3!, 1... S~,ed3 2.Rc8,Bf4#; 1.Ra5? (~), 1... Se3!, 1... S~,ed3 2.Bf4,Ra8#; 1.Bf4! (~), 1... Se3(S~),e3(ed3) 2.Ra5,Rc5#.
5. A. Boitmanis
Shakhmaty 1978







#2 9+10
5, the only example featuring one black piece, is not quite successful because of the mate by an undefined battery opening after 1... Sc3, which is a very noticeable detail in the block problems. 1.Ree4? ~ 2.Rc4:#, 1... Sf4!; 1.Re3:? (~), 1... Sf6!; 1.Qf8! (~), 1... Sf4,Sf6 2.Re4,Re3:#.

Group "WW"

This group of mechanisms features double interference of white key piece in white try moves.
6. M. Velimirovic
1.pr Diagrammes 1979







#2 13+3
7. A. Zidek
5.hm Schach-Aktiv 1987







#2 16+4
Like in 2, the mechanism of 6 involves one prospective and one "halved" white battery. The difference is that here the key-piece line is closed in white try-moves. Tries and mates are made by different white units. 1.Rde5? ~ 2.d5#, 1... Qf7!; 1.Be5? ~ 2.Rd6#, 1... Ra8:!; 1.Re6! ~ 2.Be7#, 1... Qf7,Ra8: 2.Rde5,Be5#.

Exactly the same mechanism is repeated in obviously less successful example 7. 1.d6? ~ 2.Qd5#, 1... Rb3:!; 1.Bd6? ~ 2.Re5#, 1... Bh5:!; 1.Re6! (~), 1... Rb3:,Bh5: 2.d6,Bd6#.
8. M. Velimirovic
cm Pedagogusok Lapja 1979







#2 8+6
9. V. Kopayev
4.cm Za kommunizm 1990







#2 8+8
Two white self-interferences in 8 involve half-battery. The majority of technical problems is resolved by the double threat. 1.Sb5? ~ 2.Sc7#, 1... Qe5!; 1.Sc4? ~ 2.Sb6:#, 1... Qd4!; 1.Be2! ~ 2.Qa4/Qe8#, 1... Qd4,Qe5 2.Sc4,Sb5#.

Again, exactly the same mechanism is repeated in 9 with introduction of a non-thematic (and to my opinion unnecessary) try 1.Qf4?. 1.Sd4? ~ 2.Se6:#, 1... Qc4!; 1.Se5? ~ 2.Sd7#, 1... Qb5!; (1.Qf4? ~ 2.B~#, 1... Qd3!, 1... Qc4,Qb5 2.Bd4,Be5#); 1.Bb2! ~ 2.Qb8/Qf4#, 1... Qc4,Qb5 2.Sd4,Se5#.
10. V. Gladkih
3.cm Shakhmaty v SSSR 1978







#2 9+10
11. M. Velimirovic
5.hm The Problemist 1978/II







#2 11+5
10 also shows two self-interference tries, but now with an ambush key. 1.Se5? ~ 2.Rf3#, 1... Qc5!; 1.Sf6? ~ 2.Se4#, 1... Qe7!; 1.Qg7! ~ 2.d4#, 1... Qe7,Qc5 2.Sf6,Se5#.

The very similar position I had sent for a theme tourney in Baku, the result of which I never had a chance to see! Nevertheless, meanwhile I succeeded to make the modification in the mechanism which turned the threat into thematically close shut-off by-variation after the Q-sacrifice is accepted (1... Qh7: 2.d4#) in 11, but the problem was still criticized by the judge for the under-employed Ra3!? 1.Se5? ~ 2.Rf3#, 1... Qc5!; 1.Sf6? ~ 2.Se4#, 1... Qe7!; 1.Qg7! ~ 2.d4#, 1... Qe7,Qc5 2.Sf6,Se5#.

Group "BW"

This group of mechanisms features one interference of white key piece in white try move and another in black defence.
12. R. Fedorovic &
E. Gavrilov

Krasnoya znamya 1978







#2 10+10
 
13. V. Cepiznjij

Probleemblad 1981







#2 9+7
 
14. Z. Janevski

2.cm The Problemist 1984







#2 7+9
15. R. Fedorovic &
E. Gavrilov

4.Pr Seneca MT 1978







#2 10+10
Examples 12-15 feature the relatively simple combination of interferences and battery shut-offs of two black lines controlling the white battery created by the key move. Incidentally, one defence and one try take place on the square located on the key-move line. All four are block problems with black pawns being thematic pieces and black line-movers in focal position. The heavier positions (12 and 15) are completely dual-free, while the lighter ones (13 and 14) have sm all "focal" duals.

12: 1.Bb6? ~ 2.Rc5#, 1... d6!; 1.Bd6? ~ 2.Rc5#, 1... b6!; 1.Qc7! (~), 1... b6,d6 2.Bd6,Bb6#.
13: 1.Bc5? ~ 2.Qd4#, 1... e5!; 1.Be5? ~ 2.Qd4#, 1... c5!; 1.Qd6! (~), 1... c5,c5 2.Be5,Bc5#.
14: 1.Bd5? (~), 1... f5!; 1.Bf5? (~), 1... d5!; 1.Qe6! (~), 1... d5,f5 2.Bf5,Bd5#.
15: 1.Sc4? (~), 1... f5!; 1.Sf5? (~), 1... c4!; 1.Qe2! (~), 1... f5,c4 2.Sc4,Sf5#.

16. J. Vladimirov &
M. Vagidov &
I. Liukimovic &
R. Aliovsadzade

Shakhmaty 1977







#2 10+7
Very similar method is in 16 combined with half-battery. There is a threat in each phase which dictates the movement of black pieces in order to avoid dualled defences. 1.Sc4? ~ 2.S4e3#, 1... e4!; 1.Se4? ~ 2.Sc3/Sf6#, 1... c4!; 1.Bb5! ~ 2.Bc6#, 1... c4,e4 2.Se4,Sc4#.
 
17. A. Boitmanis

1.hm Birnov MT 1977







#2 11+8
18. A. Boitmanis &
A. Dombrovskis

Bulletin CShK 1977







#2 10+8
In examples 17 and 18 one focal line is substituted by the BK's flight square, which is, unpleasantly, taken by one of two try moves. Interestingly, in both flight-taking tries there is a changed mate after the non-defeating thematic defence - a "half-ideal" form of theme.
17: 1.Bf2? ~ 2.Bd4#, 1... dc5!; 1.Bh4? (~), 1... d2!, 1... dc5 2.Bf6#; 1.Rg2! (~), 1... dc5,d2 2.Bf2,Bh4#.
18: 1.Sd3? (~), 1... e6!, 1... b4 2.Sb2:#; 1.Se6? ~ 2.Rd4#, 1... b4!; 1.Rc6! (~), 1... b4,e6 2.Se6,Sd3#.
19. H. Prins
7.Com Probleemblad 1987







#2 10+13
Without black pawns as the thematic pieces the mechanism with alternate closures by black and white looks in 19 less mechanic. However, here it is not rendered quite successfully due to the unused Rh5 in actual play. Triple mate after King's flight can be excused because one of them is already the threat. 1.Sde2? ~ 2.Bd3#, 1... Se5!; 1.Sde6? ~ 2.Rc5#, 1... Sa5:!; 1.Qe4! ~ 2.Sc6:#, 1... Sa5:,Se5 2.Sde6,Sde2#.
20. M. Kovacevic &
M. Subotic

3.pr Israel RT 1992/93







#2 10+8
In 20 there is a changed thematic mate in one try, again a half-ideal form of theme. In spite of non-aesthetic plug (pinned BR on c4) the position has its charm which authors probably didn't want to spoil by addition of WPg4 to prevent the obscuring tries for thematic 1.Rf4? (1.Rg4?/1.Rh4?). 1.Re3? ~ 2.Rd3#, 1... Sf5!, 1... Be5: 2.Qe5:#; 1.Rf4? ~ 2.e4#, 1... Be5:!; 1.Qf3! ~ 2.Qd3#, 1... Sf5,Be5: 2.Re3,Rf4#.
21. M. Stojnic
Mat Plus 1997







#2 11+8
With 21, finally, there is an "Ideal Vladimirov" in indeed ideal rendering. It shows again one prospective and one "halved" white battery, now denied in tries once by black and once by white (self)interference, unlike in 2 (double black) and in 6 (double white). Interestingly, the author of this perfect problem is approximately of the same age as the theme itself! 1.ef4? ~ 2.Sg4:#, 1... Sc3!, 1... Se3 2.Qe3:#; 1.c3? (~), 1... Se3:!, 1... Sc3: 2.Bc3: #; 1.Bd4! (~), 1... Sc3,Se3: 2.ef4,c3#.

NON-STANDARD METHODS

Apart from three presented methods, it is not easy to imagine any other way to prevent the white key move to be effective in the try.
22. H. Zajic
cm S.A.X.A. 1988







#2 13+3
Thus, 22 is placed between non-standard forms only because of its checking tries which are in fact self-interferecnes by two white pieces. However, these interferences only prevented WR to use the 6th rank, leaving the c-line open for the completion of "Ideal Vladimirov" by changed mates after the non-defending BK flights. (1.Sd8? Be8!); 1.Sfd6+? Kf3!, 1... Kd5 2.Rc5#; 1.Sbd6+? Kd5!, 1... Kf3 2.Rc2#; 1.Rf6! ~ 2.Sc5/Sbd6/Sd8#, 1... Kf3,Kd5 2.Sfd6,Sbd6#.
23. M. Kovacevic
Schach-Echo 1979







#2 11+7
The only square on which pawn has the line-piece character is its initial square. This is cleverly utilized in 23 for two unusual interferences of WP by stronger units. Original thinking! 1.Re3? ~ 2.d3#, 1... Qa5!; 1.Qe3? ~ 2.Qg1:#, 1... Rf1!; 1.e4! (~), 1... Qa5,Rf1 2.Re3,Qe3#.

24. M. Velimirovic
1.pr Schach-Echo 1979







#2 14+9
The last example, 24, utilizes another unusual feature of the pawn: the en passant capture. The prevention of mate by white key move in that case lies in the rules of the game: the capture cannot be postponed. Of cause, in chess problem it calls for a small retro-proof for the last black move. This was obviously not so big complication, since there was enough space for the ideal form of theme, and moreover for an extra try with two completely new mates. (1.Qa7? (~), 1... Kc3:!, 1... bc3,bae 2.Qa4,Qa3:#); 1.Sa4? (~), 1... ba3!, 1... bc3 2.Sc5:#; 1.Sc4:? (~), 1... bc3!, 1... ba3 2.Ra3:#; 1.bc6(ep)! (~), 1... bc3,ba3 2.Sc4:,Sa4#.

CONCLUSION

It may sound strange, but this article is perhaps the complete overview of the "Vladimirov theme". Only 24 problems in 20 years speaks enough about its difficulty and technical demands. It would be wrong to say that this makes the average of 1.2 problem per year because 14 of the examples were published before the 1980! Nevertheless, I don't think that in the future there will not be at least one more masterpiece like the most recent No.21. Maybe you will be the lucky one to find it!

Home | Texts