My first meeting with Robin Matthews was nearly forty years ago. This was in October 1956, when he was a Lecturer in the Economics Faculty at Cambridge University and I an undergraduate freshman. It so happened that Michael Lipton, with whom I had been friendly for a couple of years, was based in Cambridge during his National Service, and he and I visited Robin on several occasions during that academic year in his flat a few minutes' walk from the centre of the city. Naturally, the talk was of chess p
roblems, mainly two- and three-movers. Michael was an enthusiastic adherent of the modern style (at the time this meant try-play and changes), and I was learning fast, but Robin was already an established and highly respected composer with a number of well-deserved prizes to his credit, such as I, which had gained the coveted Brian Harley Award, after taking 1st prize in the British Chess Federation Tourney in 1953. The potential mating squares c4 and d4 are each held by two of the black units
making up the organ-pipes along the 7th rank.
|
The key 1.Qb5 sets up the threat 2.Rf3+ Ke4 3.d3#, and Black defends by playing a piece to c5 or d5 to cut the WQ's guard of e5. These moves, of course, are interferences, and White's response is to shut off the guarding unit that has not been interfered with: 1... Bc5 2.Re6+ 3.Qc4:; 1... Rc5 2.Rd6+ 3.Rd4:; 1... Rd5 2.Rc6+ 3.Qc4:; 1... Bd5 2.Rb6+ 3.Rd4:. A further battery-opening occurs after 1... Qf6 2.Rh6+ Qg6 3.Rh3; and a pin-mate after 1... Qe5: 2.Rf3+ Qe3 3.Qf5. |
I R. C. O. Matthews 1st prize, BCF Ty. 1953 Brian Harley Award
|
Robin Matthews spent his childhood in Edinburgh, and was an undergraduate at Oxford from 1944 to 1947. The Cambridge Lecturership was followed, after some years, by a move back to Oxford, as Professor of Political Economy. Clearly, however, the lure of Cambridge was too strong to resist, for Robin eventually moved once again to become Master of Clare College and later to occupy the Cambridge Chair of Political Economy. Members of the British Chess Problem Society benefited from his Mastership at Clare
, in that an invitation to Saturday lunch in his rooms at the College was generously extended on three occasions to those attending the Society's Weekend Gatherings when they were held in Cambridge during the 1980s. In his time Robin has also been President of the Royal Economic Society, and is a Fellow of the British Academy. He retired from Clare College two years ago, and he and his wife Joyce now live in a village in Suffolk, though a room has been retained at Clare for occasional use. Much of Ro
bin's recent spare time has been spent in writing Mostly Three-Movers, a wonderful book which appeared in May 1995 as no.4 in the Editions feenschach-phenix. This beautifully produced volume contains all Robin's published problems arranged by theme, with a clear and highly readable commentary that makes an immediate appeal.
When Professor Matthews agreed to be interviewed for Mat Plus, we arranged that I should send him a number of questions which he would first answer in a letter, and that we should then meet to talk about his answers, to expand on them, and to discuss any other subjects that we thought might be of interest to readers. What follows, therefore, is made up partly of Robin's own words and partly of a paraphrase of notes I made during our meeting (which took place, incidentally, at the Reform Club in
London, where Robin is a member and where I was treated to a splendid lunch!).
- You relate in Mostly Three-Movers that your introduction to chess problems was through the purchase of Sam Loyd and his Chess Problems. What was it about the problems in that book that especially appealed to you?
"I think I was attracted as much by the chat in the book and the literary style (both Loyd's and A.C.White's, in their different ways) as by the problems themselves. But I do particularly remember being charmed by the typical strategic 3-move theme of no.430 (II), and I also remember giving up in despair the attempt to solve no.11 (III) and then being bouleversé by the solution." (II: 1.Qf2! ~ 2.Qf4:, Rdf2:/Rff2: 2.Sa3/Se7. This is a corrected version of Loyd's o
riginal setting. III: 1.Qg1! 2.Bf2 3.Bb6: 4.Qc5. 1.Qb4? Ka5!
II Sam Loyd V., Cincinnati Gazette 1859
|
III Sam Loyd 1st prize, Sunday Courier Ty. 1856
|
- Some of those who have been introduced to problems early in life have become well-known as composers in their teens. Perhaps in your case over-the-board chess retained its appeal?
"I did not have nearly as much in the way of personal contacts with other problemists as a boy might have nowadays. This was during World War II, and a government advertising slogan was Is your journey really necessary? When I went to Oxford in 1944, the only member of the University Chess Club interested in problems was David Bivar (a collaborator in two problems) and, later, Leonard Richenberg. I spent a lot of time playing matches, not only for the University but also for the County, much more
jolly socially than composing would have been!"
- At what point did you begin to compose problems that really satisfied you?
"1950-51. At the time I thought no.98 in my book was the best I had done up to that date and I don't now dissent from that."
In Mostly Three-Movers Robin writes:
"I was greatly impressed by two prize-winning focal problems published in the British Chess Magazine in 1943-44. When I became active as a composer a few years later, I had not forgotten them. One was IV. In two variations, obstruction/interferences deny the BQ access to an alternative defensive square. In two others, a critical move by the BQ leads to a shut-off. 1.Rc6 (zz) a5 2.Bd3 ~/Qd3: 3.Sd2/Sg4:; 1... Bd7 2.Bf5 ~/Qf5: 3.Sg4:/Sd2:; 1... Qd8 2.Rd6 ~/Qd6: 3.Sd2/Sg4:; 1... Qa5 2.Rc
3+ Qc3:/Sc3: 3.Sg4:/Sd2; 1... Bb7 2.Re6; 1...g6 2.Rf6+. Dr Zepler did not choose to include this in the collection Im Banne des Schachproblems (1951). By the time that selection was made, he had come to set the highest store by economy, and the two one-purpose WSs in IV are not ideal. But it is very satisfying thematically." |
IV Erich Zepler 1st prize, British Chess Magazine 1944/I
|
V shows reciprocal change, in the form of a block-threat (this is the no.98 referred to above). "Reciprocal change was a relative novelty at that time, and it was taken for granted that one would seek to have an initial zugzwang. `Free change is just a white to play that hasn't come off,' said Dr Zepler. In the set play 2.Bd4/Bb4 serve as anticipatory shut-offs, creating zugzwang. 1... Qe7 2.Bd4 (zz) Qa7/c5 3.Se3/Sa3 (2.Bb4? Qa7!); 1... Qa7 2.Bb4 (zz) Qe7/c5 3.Sa3/Se3 (2.Bd4? Qe7
!); 2... Se~/Sb~ 3.Bd3/ Bc1; 1... Qc4: 2.Bc4: (3.Bb3:). White is initially in zugzwang too and cannot maintain the status quo. He has to give Black a spare move, so the set zugzwang continuations do not work. But the key also closes the BQ's line of communication on the 7th rank. The set anticipatory shut-offs by the WB, with zugzwang, are replaced in the solution by direct shut-offs by the WB, with threat. 1.Sd7 (2.Sc5 3.Sa3/Se3); 1... Qe7 2.Bb4 ~/Qb4: 3.Sa3/Se3 (2... Qa7??, 2.Bd4? f6!); 1...
Qa7 2.Bd4 ~/Qd4: 3.Se3/Sa3 (2... Qe7??, 2.Bb4? f6!)." |
V R. C. O. Matthews 1st prize, The Problemist 1951
|
- Is there any reason why you started at this stage to compose satisfying problems?
"Getting married helped, as conducing to an organised way of life, with evening leisure!" Robin also mentioned that his wife was reconciled to the time he spent on problems, preferring him to compose rather than go out and play chess. This was because, after a game, he would come home either euphoric, having won, or in the depths of despair, having been beaten.
- You mention in Mostly Three-Movers that you learnt from the example of Hartong, Zepler, Eaton, Anderson, and Loshinski and the Soviet composers. Do you regard any of these problemists as having been particularly influential?
"Probably Hartong, at least to start with. My acquaintance with his problems came from Dr Niemeijer's 1946 collection. VI seemed to me about as perfect as one could get." 1.Be7 (2.Qf5:+ Kd4: 3.Q/Re4:); 1... Re3 2.Sc6+ Bc6: 3.Sd3; 1... Rc5 2.Sd3+ Qd3: 3.Sc6. |
VI Jan Hartong V., Skakbladet 1938
|
- Which themes interested you most in your early composing years?
"The focal theme (as in V), annihilation, and consecutive injuries (VII)." In his book Robin writes of this problem: "Two mate squares are doubly guarded, c6 and d6. The result is four consecutive interferences between BR and BB. Black is forced to interfere at the first move by zugzwang and at the second move by mate-threats. 1.S2g3 (zz); 1... Rd7 2.a8S (3.Sb6) Bc5 3.Bc6:; 1... Bd7 2.Kb3 (3.dc3) Rc5 3.Rd6:; 1... Rc5 2.Re7 (3.Rf5) Bd7 3.Rd6:; 1... Bc5 2.Sf5 (3.Se7) Rd7 3.Bc6:. (1...
h5 2.Rf5+ Ke6 3.Sg5.) Zugzwang problems often have tight constraints on their construction. This one is a case in point. Ten years later the Soviet master Jacob Vladimirov arrived independently at a position that was absolutely identical, in all its 24 units!" |
VII R. C. O. Matthews Stratford Express 1951
|
- What characterises your composing style, as compared with e.g. composers of the Soviet school?
"The main difference is that most Continental composers seem to regard threat problems as inherently superior to problems with zugzwang. I do not understand the logic of this. In fact I feel that there tends to be some monotony in the way that so many modern #3 problems have, as a threat, 2.check, giving a flight, 2... BK moves to said flight, 3.mate. Dawson used to speak of a time-threat, which strikes me aas a very reasonable concept.
- In Mostly Three-Movers the expression "purity of aim" features quite frequently. Can you comment on the importance you attach to this?
"This is a phrase of the New German School, of course. I don't expect the key and the key-tries in my problems to be pure in aim, but I do expect that there should be some stage when the ostensible theme of the problem is the only reason why the solution works. Purity of aim must be defined with respect to something specific. The solver must ask himself: Why is this continuation not a threat?"
- What do you regard as the main advantage of collaborative composing?
"It gives a general stimulus. It also makes for lateral thinking. Sometimes I should have given up an idea as impossible if I had been doing it on my own. The `lateral thinking' does sometimes pertain to the theme too, so that you end up with something quite different from the original idea!"
Robin's longest and most fruitful collaboration has been with the distinguished American composer Robert Burger. Indeed, his return to active composition in the 1980s, after a relatively lean period, was largely due to the optimism and enthusiasm of his American collaborator. On several occasions Robin would write to Bob about some matrix: "This looks pretty hopeless, doesn't it?" only to receive a letter in reply saying "The enclosed seems to deal with the difficulties", with a diagram showing a versi
on full of new ideas. In Mostly Three-Movers Robin writes: "Not surprisingly, the reader may discern some differences in style between the Burger-Matthews problems and the others in the book. Moreover, our joint efforts are of a rather different style from most Burger-only problems. Many of the Burger-Matthews problems are very complicated and elaborate" (VIII is quoted as being an extreme example). "But the play in them is not always perfectly pure in aim. Much the same difference, with n
ationalities reversed, can be found in the problems of an earlier Anglo-American partnership, Anderson and Eaton. Their joint compositions were the more elaborate, but sometimes less pure in aim than problems by Eaton alone."
VIII: 1.Bh2 (2.Qb7+ Kd6 3.Qc6+ Ke5 4.Re4/Bg3:); 1... e6 2.f6 Bf6: 3.Qc7 ~/e5 4.Bc6/Qc6 (3.Sa4? Rb2!); 2... Rf6: 3.Sa4 ~ 4.Sb6:/Sc3 (3.Qc7? e5!); (2... Bf8 3.Bg3: ~/Bd6 4.Qe5/Qd6:;) (2.Sf6+? Bf6: 3.Qc7 ef5!) 1... e5 2.Sf6+ Bf6 3.Sa4 ~ 4.Sb6:/Sc3 (3.Sd1? e4!); 2... Rf6: 3.Sd1 ~/Rc2 4.Sc3/Se3: (3.Sa4? Rc2!) (2.f6? Bd7:!); 1... Re6 2.Bg3: 3.Qb7(+) 4.Qc6: (2...e5??). "The double closures of the long diagonal and of the sixth rank are here combined with the single closure of both of two line
s, in order to admit forks. We found ways of forcing separate Novotnys in the two lines. This complicated problem was found difficult by solvers, despite the undistinguished key. It took more composer-hours than almost any other in the book - hours largely spent chasing hares (mainly the idea of using 3.Sc4 (4.Qd6) instead of 3.Sa4)." |
VIII R. C. O. Matthews & Robert Burger 1st prize, The Problemist 1988
|
- Which composers of the younger generation have impressed you particularly?
"There is no doubt that German composers (including ex-DDR) have taken the lead in the 3-mover that used to be held by the Russians. They are not so very young, actually, though a generation or so younger than me. Hans Peter Rehm's 3-ers are as good as anybody's." Other names mentioned were Michael Keller (inevitably!) and Dieter Kutzborski from Germany, Jacob Vladimirov as the leading 4-move composer, Uri Avner for his orthodox problems and selfmates, and Milan Vukcevich in a great many fields.
- Can you point to any recent trends in the 3-mover that you think may be of significance in the development of the genre?
"The most prominent new genre now is the Banny-Hannelius-Dombrovskis-Vladimirov family, especially among German composers. I have to admit that I do not care for it very much. I have asked myself whether this is because it has inherent defects or because I am an old fogey - without coming to any firm conclusion. There is some confusion over the interpretation of these themes in the 3-mover. The standard definitions are relatively clear, but they reference to the 2-mover, where there are three half-move
s only, whereas the 3-mover has five half-moves. I have consciously tried to compose such problems myself, but I do feel that some clarification is needed. The 3-mover is perhaps not going through a very good period."
- You have contributed a column of selected 3-movers to The Problemist for over 30 years. What special efforts has this entailed, and what rewards has it brought?
"The great advantage of writing a regular quotes column is that it forces you to keep up to date with what is being done and by whom. It is not such a great deal of work, especially since Paul Valois (the Editor) is very helpful in sending me tourney awards from exchange copies. I try to avoid automatically quoting 1st prizes, because sometimes problems rated lower are more interesting. I should never quote a problem that wasn't worth it, however many prizes it got. But shouldn't someone else be doing
the column now, for the readers' sake?" (We agreed that there was no other obvious candidate for the job!)
- You have had a very distinguished academic career. How did you fit chess problems into your life as a university lecturer and subsequently as professor and Master of Clare College?
"I suppose that if I had never seen a chess problem I should have been a better academic, but the two have not appeared to be at each other's expense. Periods when I have been doing good work in economics have often been periods when I was composing good chess problems too. More harmful to chess problem composition have been periods of heavy administrative duties, especially if they involved conflict."
- Do you enjoy composing for theme tourneys?
"I'm not very keen. It sometimes happens that a new theme is proposed and is given an impetus by a theme tourney, but it happens more often that the themes are uninteresting, as is the case with the recent WCCT theme."
- How do you feel about judging?
"Judging makes you study problems carefully. If I am faced with two problems in a tourney, one of them original but having constructional defects and the other perfectly constructed but less original, I might ask myself: `Which of these problems would I be pleased to have composed?' As for Album judging, this is a great labour! I am worried about giving an entry 0 or 1 because I might have missed the point. But composers sometimes give far too lengthy solutions, which are not very helpful either."
- After a mini-lecture of mine on Ovidian Chess (Oxford 1994) you mentioned that you might be attracted to fairy chess. Which genres might appeal most?
"I could never be a helpmate composer; so many helpmates are composed every year that the danger of anticipation would be too great for anyone coming to them cold. The selfmate is perhaps the nearest to the 3-mover. I don't think I should find selfmates too difficult to compose, but then there would not be so much novelty. At first I thought Curce was artificial, but I have now come to appreciate its great possibilities. I quite like things that are far removed from ordinary chess, such as neutrals. I
am attracted by hoppers: whereas the Nightrider is simply a constructional device, the Grasshopper introduces fundamentally new considerations. Kriegspiel is another form that brings in completely new considerations, but it is perhaps too complicated for most people. Maybe some simplified form is required?"
- Writing Mostly Three-Movers has given you a chance to review your composing career in some detail. Which of your problems gave you the most satisfaction at the time? Do you still feel the same way about these works now?
"I used to be more tolerant of short threats and of constructional imperfections generally than I am now (though I am still rather casual about non-thematic duals). Otherwise my valuation would be much the same now as at the time."
From the (quite lengthy) list of favourite problems mentioned by Robin, I have selected seven to complete this article. Readers who would have liked more should acquire a copy of Mostly Three-Movers at the earliest opportunity! It can be had for DM45 from bernd ellinghoven, Königstrasse 3, D-52064 Aachen.
IX: "The first example of six Novotnys in the actual solution of a #3. At the time of writing, it is believed to remain the only example, and it has often been quoted. It was a development of a well-known problem of Loshinski's of 1952. Loshinski had a similar matrix but only one BB and hence only four variations. The real originator of the matrix was Kraemer, who had a less well constructed example in 1950. The difficulty in composing IX was to find a threat that could be defeated by a
ll six thematic replies. 1.b4 (2.Bb1: ~ 3.Ra3). After the interferences by the BBs, it is the R on b5 that must do the Novotny, so as to vacate that square: 1... Bb7 2.Rc5 Rc5:/Bc5: 3.Bd4:/Sb5; 1... Bb6 2.Rd5 Rd5:/Bd5: 3.Se4/Sb5; 1... Bd5 2.Rbb6 Rb6:/Bb6: 3.Bd4:/Sb5; 1... Bc5 2.Rb7 Rb7:/Bb7: 3.Se4/Sb5. After captures of the R on b5, that piece no longer survives to do the Novotnys. But now there is no need to vacate the square, so another piece can do the job instead: 1... Rbb5: 2.Qd5 Rd5:/ Bd5
: 3.Se4/Sb5(:); 1... Rhb5: 2.Rb6 Rb6:/Bb6: 3.Bd4:/ Sb5(:). (1... Sd2 2.Ra3+ Sb3 3.Rb3:.) The WQ is not very economically used, but there is some compensation in the decent key and threat." |
IX R. C. O. Matthews British Chess Magazine 1957 Brian Harley Award
|
X: Each of two batteries is defended three times. When one of the defenders moves away, a second defender is decoyed away to deal with a battery check, leaving the third to be shut off at the mate. "This problem was the first example of a sixfold cycle of continuations and mates. However, that feature was not consciously intended." 1.Rg4 (2.Sd7+ Bd7:/Kd4 3.Re4:/S++); 1... Rg2 2.Rc2+ Qb2/Ra1: 3.Sh5/Se8; 1... Rg1 2.Rc1+ Qb2/Rb2 3.Sf5/Se8; 1... Qb7 2.Rb3+ Rb2/Ra1: 3.Sh5/Sf5; 1... Rf4
2.Sf5+ Qh8:/Rh8: 3.Rc1/Rb3; 1... Rh4 2.Sh5+ Qh8:/Rf6 3.Rc2/Rb3; 1... Qa8 2.Se8+ Rf6/Rh8: 3.Rc1/Rc2. (1... dc5 2.Qb8:+ Kd4 3.Se6.) |
X R. C. O. Matthews British Chess Magazine 1956
|
XI: An unusual 2-mover, a Zagoruyko with zugzwang in each of the three phases. 1.Qe1? Kf3/Kd5/d5 2.Sd4/Sef4/Sd4. 1... de5! 1.Qd1? Kf3/Kd5/de5 2.Sg3/Sc5/Bc6. 1... d5! 1.Qb1! Kf3/Kd5/d5/de5 2.Se1/Sdf4/ Se1/Bc6. |
XI R. C. O. Matthews 2nd prize, British Chess Magazine 1951
|
XII: "A more complicated rendering of the idea of the foregoing #2 (XI). It turns on the principle that the piece guarding a flight-square can safely be en prise, so long as the one that is actually attacking the BK is not. This problem achieved prominence by its success in an important event, but its theme has been little followed up by other composers. After 2.Re2+, the move 3.Bc5 can be a direct battery mate to the BK at e6, or an indirect battery mate to the BK at d6. A similar pai
r of possibilities exists after 2.Rd2+ and 3.Sc5. The key leads to reciprocal change by altering the flight move that needs a battery response. Set: 1... Ra8 2.Re2+ Kd6:/Ke6 3.Qc6:/Bc5; 1... Rb8 2.Rd2+ Kd6:/Ke6 3.Qc6:/Sc5. 1.d7 (2.d8Q+ Ke6 3.Qd7) Ra8 2.Rd2+ Kd6/Ke6 3.Sc5/Qc6:; 1... Rb8 2.Re2+ Kd6/Ke6 3.Bc5/Qc6:. (1... Sf7 2.Bf7:+ Kd6 3.d8Q.) A weakness that this problem shares with many others of the free-change type is that Black has little reason to want to make the thematic moves 1...Ra8/Rb
8 until the key has been played." |
XII R. C. O. Matthews 1st place, Section D, International Team Match 1967-71
|
XIII: I had no hesitation in giving this fine problem 1st prize when I judged the 3-movers in The Problemist in 1987. In the award I wrote: "An outstanding study in cyclic play, in which the BR and BBc5, in moving to north and south of the WR's line a5-f5, allow continuations that exploit this line either as an indirect half-pin or for the purpose of square-guarding. The composer also shows his constructional expertise in including Novotny and other by-play variations that make go
od use of the white force." 1.ef6 (2.Sg5+ Ke5 3.Bf4); 1... Be3 2.Bg2+ A Kf5: 3.Qd3 B; 1... Bd6 2.Qd3+ B Rd3: 3.Sg5 C; 1... Rd2: 2.Sg5+ C Ke5: 3.Qe3 D; 1... Rd6 2.Qe3+ D Bxe3 3.Bg2 A. (1... Bc6: 2.Sd4 Bd4:/Rd4: 3.Qd3/Qe3; 1... e6 2.Bf4 ~ 3.Sg5; 1...ef6 2.Rf6: ~ 3.Bg2; 1... Se6 2.Re6:+.) In his book
Robin writes: "The key and threat are the best that could be arranged. I had originally hoped that 2.Sd4 would be the threat." |
XIII R. C. O. Matthews 1st prize, The Problemist 1987
|
XIV: The composer describes this problem as "unusual", giving the following reason. "In most Romans, the weakness of the substitute defences are arrival weaknesses. In XIV the trouble with each of the substitute defences is that it lacks a special arrival advantage which the `good' defences have (viz. putting the Bf1 out of action) to compensate for a removal weakness which is common to the good defence and the substitute defence (viz. giving up the a-file or the b-file). This is
the so-called Sackmann theme, a special case of the Roman. It is shown here with its antiform, so that the threat is one of the thematic variations. 1.Bf1 (2.Rgd7 ~/Rd2/Rd1 3.Rd5:/Qb5:/Sa4: (2... Rd3??); 1... Rb3 2.Rg4 ~/Re3/Re1 3.Bd6/Qb5:/Sa4: (2... Re2??); 1... Ra3 2.f7 ~/Rf2/Rf3 3.f8Q/Qb5:/Sa4: (2... Rf1:??). (1... Rb4 2.Sd5:; 1... Rf1: 2.Sa4:+; 1... Re2 2.Be2:.) The praise given to XIV by experts of different backgrounds and generations (Kipping, Zepler, Burger) suggests that it is one of
my best problems, despite a certain stiffness in construction." |
XIV R. C. O. Matthews 1st prize, Problemisten 1958
|
XV: "This is often referred to as a four-fold Indian (the only one in existence). That description might be objected to, on account of the impurity of aim in the capture 1...d5 2.Rd5:. That impurity is probably unavoidable, as a result of the BP-play that is needed in order to separate the two variations. The purpose of the successive battery openings is to force captures by the BK. 1.Bh3 (zz) g6 2.Bb6: (not 2.Rd6:? or 2.Rd5? stalemate) d5 3.Rd4 Kf7: 4.Rd5:+ (4.Rdd1:+??) Ke1 5.Bd
4 Kd2: 6.Bf2; 1... d5 2.Rd5: (not 2.Bb6:? d4! with an extra move for the BPs) g6 3.Bd4 Kd2: 4.Bb6:+ (4.Bf2+??) Ke1 5.Rd4 Kf2: 6.Rdd1:." |
XV R. C. O. Matthews 1st prize, Die Schwalbe 1952
|
This is by no means the only splendid moremover in Professor Matthews' excellent book, which contains not only the author's shrewd observations on his own and other composers' works, but also plenty more problems of the calibre of those quoted here. What I have been able to convey of the composer himself through this article can be admirably supplemented by a careful study of Mostly Three-Movers.
|