|
|
(1) Posted by Michael McDowell [Sunday, Feb 25, 2007 23:42] |
Correct source? The following problem appears in both "A Century of Two-Movers" (Overbrook series 1941) and the FIDE Album 1914-44-I.
G.P.Golubev
1st Prize 64 1931
(= 9+5 )
Mate in 2
1.Se4 (>2.Sf4)
1...Kxe4 2.Sxe3
1...Kd4 2.Se7
1...Ke2 2.Sc3/Ba6
1...Rxd5 2.Ba6
1...Qxd8 2.Qxe3
Can this have been misprinted twice? The dual is easily eliminated by adding a black knight at e1.
The following problem appears in "The Two-Move Chess Problem in the Soviet Union 1923-43" (Overbrook series 1943)
M.M.Barulin & G.P.Golubev
1st Prize 64 1931
(= 10+10 )
Mate in 2
1.Qe8 (>2.Bc4)
1...Kd5 2.Qf7
1...Bd5 2.Rf6
1...Sd5 2.Re4
1...d5 2.Sd4
Described in the book as the Moscow Theme. Is this another name for Stocchi blocks?
Which is the real "1st Prize 64 1931"? Or were they half-yearly awards?
|
|
(2) Posted by Hauke Reddmann [Monday, Feb 26, 2007 17:06] |
"Moscow" has to do with parades against a double check.
AFAIK dual-avoidance by simultaneous line opening/interference.
Very old theme so I could check my Sidler.
Hauke
|
|
(3) Posted by Michael McDowell [Monday, Feb 26, 2007 17:52] |
Thanks for that Hauke.
If I had thought to look up the Dutch "Thema-Boek" I would have found that the idea also goes under the name of the Chicco theme. Clearly it is quite compatible with Stocchi blocks, as Stocchi himself made examples.
Sometimes I think that players have a point when they criticise problemists for not agreeing on jargon (and even the exact definition of terms). Roll on the day when we catch up with Dawson and adopt his Systematic Terminology. |
|
(4) Posted by David Knezevic [Monday, Feb 26, 2007 19:22] |
Chicco theme and Moscow theme are synonyms!
Definition: White threats a double-check mate. Black defends in such way that with his move he simultaneously prevents the attack by both threat pieces. Thus, the defence is possible only by closing one white line and opening another black line. (Nenad Petrović, "Šahovski problem" 1949) |
|
No more posts |
MatPlus.Net Forum Twomovers Correct source? |