|
| Page: [Previous] [Next] 1 2 |
| (21) Posted by Dupont Nicolas [Wednesday, Feb 13, 2013 18:26] |
@ Nikola
Consider the position
 (= 1+1 )
and the sequence 1.b3 Kb5 2.b4 Ka4. The "pass trick" is ok (1.pass Kb5 2.b4 Ka4 or 1.b4 Kb5 2.pass Ka4), but I'm far from being convinced that this sequence shows a tempo move.
The reason is almost the same than in Thierry's (see the above remark by Joost): b2-b3-b4 should not be considered as a tempo move because it is impossible to play b2-b4 directly as a piece must travel through b4. In my sequence it is impossible to play b2-b4 directly otherwise white will be stalemated after black's move.
|
|
| (22) Posted by Georgy Evseev [Wednesday, Feb 13, 2013 18:47] |
It is normal to allow "pass" _after_ the tempo, so the last example contains tempo. Some classic Krikheli helpmates use this kind of definition.
For example:
Iosif KRIKHELI
Magyar Sakkelet 1975
2 H.M.
5S2/8/8/4K1k1/7q/6P1/8/8
h‡3
2.1.1…
1.Qh1 g4 2.Kh4 Kf4 3.Qh3 Sg6‡
1.Qh7 Sg6 2.Kh5 Kf5 3.Qh6 g4‡
|
|
| (23) Posted by Juraj Lörinc [Wednesday, Feb 13, 2013 21:12] |
I know what you mean, Georgy. This Kricheli example is an excellent example and indeed it is understood as tempo related idea. The pass test as described by me works for pure tempo moves, with no additional motifs. Kricheli's manoeuvres Qh4-h7-h6 and Qh4-h1-h3 are sometimes called tempo loss in out circles. These are manoeuvres that can be played using fewer moves, but they aren't due to the necessity to alternate white and black moves.
|
|
| (24) Posted by Dupont Nicolas [Wednesday, Feb 13, 2013 22:16] |
Joost wrote:
"I remember a proofgame (P1080653) by le Gleuher in which he tried to show 5 tempomoves by white pawns, but it was ruled that b2-b3-b4 wasn't tempo play because there was no 'pass' opportunity since the white bishop had to go through b4."
Here is a scheme with c2-c3-c4 and a white bishop has to go through c4. Nevertheless there is a 'pass' opportunity. Is c2-c3-c4 a tempo play?
 (= 16+15 )
PG 5.5 C+
1. Sc3 f5 2. Sd5 f4 3. c3 f3 4. exf3 h5 5. Bb5 h4 6. c4
With 'pass': 1. Sc3 f5 2. Sd5 f4 3. pass f3 4. exf3 h5 5. Bb5 h4 6. c4
|
|
| (25) Posted by Joost de Heer [Wednesday, Feb 13, 2013 23:56] |
QUOTE
Here is a scheme with c2-c3-c4 and a white bishop has to go through c4. Nevertheless there is a 'pass' opportunity. Is c2-c3-c4 a tempo play?
This is intrinsically different than the le Gleuher case. It's impossible to play b2-b4, Bc1-a3, Ba3-c5, but (as you have shown) it's possible to have Bf1-b5, c2-c4.
|
|
| (26) Posted by Georgy Evseev [Thursday, Feb 14, 2013 05:29]; edited by Georgy Evseev [13-02-14] |
And here we have another very tough for definition helpmate example.
Valery GUROV & Georgy EVSEEV
Ukraine - Russie - Macedonie 2000-01
3 Place
2BK4/3S2r1/8/1q4r1/8/6P1/3k1P2/3b4
h‡4 2.1.1…
1.Bh5 Bb7 2.Ke2 Ba6 3.Kf3 Bc8 4.Kg4 Se5‡
1.Ke2 Ba6 2.Kf3 Bb7+ 3.Kg4 Bc8 4.Bf3 Sf6‡
How many tempos are there in every solution? And which moves specifically?
--- Added
I think that I have come to some conclusion.
There are _two_ kinds of tempo play.
1. Classic tempo. The side has to move instead of passing. _Not applicable to proofgames._
2. Tempo maneuver. The piece has to move, leaving square A and arriving to square B (and it is possible that A and B are the same square))). The piece in question takes the route that is longer than expected.
And here there are also two possibilities.
2a) The most direct route interferes with other actions needed in the course of solution. _Some people also consider this case as a tempo maneuver._
2b) The most direct route fails because then it is necessary to "pass" at some stage of solution. _This is a clear rendering of tempo maneuver._
|
|
| (27) Posted by Rajendiran Raju [Thursday, Feb 14, 2013 12:53] |
Diagram for above Post H # 4
 (= 5+5 )
|
|
| (28) Posted by Dupont Nicolas [Thursday, Feb 14, 2013 13:01] |
Here is a scheme illustrating Thierry's:
 (= 16+15 )
PG 5.5 C+
1.c3 f5 2.Qa4 f4 3.Qd4 f3 4.exf3 h5 5.Bb5 h4 6.c4
I think everyone will agree c2-c3-c4 in not a tempo manoeuver (and indeed no pass trick exists). The only difference with my previous scheme is that Qd1 can't play without having opened the door c2, while Sb1 can. I'm not sure this difference is enough strong to claim that c2-c3-c4 is a tempo manoeuver in the Sb1-moving case (although the pass trick exists).
|
|
| (29) Posted by Joost de Heer [Friday, Feb 15, 2013 13:52] |
Yes, in this case c2-c3-c4 isn't a tempomanoeuvre, because c4/Qd4 would take 4 moves anyway.
|
|
No more posts |
Page: [Previous] [Next] 1 2
MatPlus.Net  Forum General Tempo proof games |
ISC 2024
