51 Flights of Chess Fancy - Beasley - 2009

John Beasley
51 Flights
of
Chess Fancy
and a few other frolics
rdwdw4kd
dp0pdp0p
pdwdwhbd
dwdwdwdw
wdwdwdwd
dPdwdwdw
wdP)P)P)
dwGwdwIw
What was White’s first move
with a bishop?
Contents
Introduction 3
1 Endgame studies 4
2 Creating a study from a game position 25
3 Problems 29
4 Variant forms of chess 33
5 How did we get here ? 41
6 Joke compositions 45
Interlude 53
7 Three knight puzzles 55

8 Three coin puzzles 58
9 Three thirteen-hole pegboard puzzles 59
10 Three bridge frolics 61
Sources and technical notes 64
ISBN 978-0-9555168-1-8
Author’s copyright notice. I have no authority to waive any rights that

may be held by others, but in so far as anything in this book is original
with myself it may be quoted or copied without payment or formality;
I ask only that there be due acknowledgement.
Typeset by the author

Originally printed by MediaPRINT Ltd, The Print Cabin,
381 Luton Road, Harpenden, Herts AL5 3NF
Published by the author at 7 St James Road, Harpenden, Herts AL5 4NX
June 2009 (version with minor corrections April 2011)
Introduction
This is the third, and will be the last, of my little chess vanity-books.
Some flights of chess fancy (1989) was a typical problem composer’s
vanity-book of the period, and contained between a half and two thirds of
what I had published up to then. But while the advent of home computers
and “desktop publishing” vastly increased the amount that people could
write, there was no corresponding increase in the time they had for
reading, and I deliberately restricted More flights of chess fancy (2000)
to the 25 positions that I thought people could work through before
becoming bored. The present book contains slightly more than twice as
many, so I am expecting readers to be selective, but the positions are
grouped by type, and the reader who finds a particular chapter not to his
or her taste can easily abandon it and move on to the next.
Some flights concentrated on problems, but included a few endgame
studies. More flights contained problems only. The present book gives
precedence to endgame studies, which have been my main interest in
recent years, but it repeats my favourite problems from Some flights and
More flights with one or two recent additions, and there are a few items
from fields other than chess.
In the endgame study chapter, I have put the solutions immediately
below the diagrams, but each new position is always at the top of a
column and normally at the top of a new page, and the reader who prefers
to solve for himself should find it easy enough to cover the text and have
a go before reading on. In the problem chapters, the diagrams appear first
without solution, and the solutions appear overleaf below fresh diagrams.
In many cases, particularly in the endgame study chapter, I have added
a few words saying how the position was discovered. Perhaps these brief
descriptions will help to show that chess composition is not the arcane
mystery which it is sometimes thought to be, and will tempt readers into
having a go themselves.
I am sometimes asked by a budding composer how many studies or
problems he or she needs to produce for the exercise to be worth while,
and my answer is very simple: one good one. Whether anything that
follows meets this criterion is perhaps another matter, but I hope it will at
least raise a passing smile.
Harpenden, Hertfordshire, England, June 2009.

Chapter 1
Endgame studies
There are several ways of producing a chess endgame study: to work back from a
predetermined final position and try to find a plausible starting position from
which play naturally leads up to it, to analyse a naturally occurring position or set
of positions and see what happens, to riffle through a pile of computer output and
see if the machine has found anything interesting, or to spot something completely
out of the blue, usually in a position which has been set on the board by someone
else. Examples produced by each of these methods will appear in what follows.
1.1 1.1a
wdwdwdwd wdwdwdwd
dwdwdpiw dwdwdpdw
wdwdwdwd wdwdwdkd
dw0w)Kdw dw0w)wdw
wdPdwdwd wdPdKdwd
dwdwdwdw dwdwdwdw
wdwdwdwd wdwdwdwd
dwdwdwdw dwdwdwdw
White to play and win 1 Ke4, after 1...Kg6
Let’s start with something very simple. gives 1.1a but with Black to play.
1 e6 fxe6+ 2 Kxe6 and wins? Yes, but If now 2...Kg5 then 3 e6! fxe6 4 Ke5,
Black will play 1...Kf8, and after 2 exf7 and White will win despite being
Kxf7 he will meet White’s eventual temporarily a pawn down; Black’s king
Kxc5 with ...Kc7 and draw; and if is on precisely the wrong square
White tries 2 Kf6/Ke5 instead, we will (he could draw from either g6 or g4).
have 2...fxe6 3 Kxe6 Ke8, and the Alternatively, 2...f6/f5+ 3 exf6 and
result will be the same. 4-5 Kxc5, or 2...Kg7 3-4 Kxc5.
All right, try 1 Ke4: no, 1...Kg6 1.1a is in fact a position of reciprocal
(see 1.1a) 2 Kd5 Kf5 3 Kxc5 Kxe5, and zugzwang, where Black to play loses
after 4 Kb6 f5 both sides will promote. but White to play cannot win. If to
Hmm. The solution is actually 1 Kf4, avoid it Black plays 1...f6, then 2 Kf5
and only if 1...Kg6 then 2 Ke4. This etc; if 1...Kh6/Kh7 then again 2 e6.
Endgame studies 5
1.2 1.2 was composed to show the

longest possible bishop retreat along a
wdwdwdwd diagonal through the Black king, and
dwdwdwdw illustrates the disadvantages of working
wdBdwdwd back from a predetermined final
dwdwdwdw position: this final position may be
wdwdwdwd spectacular, but only limited lead-in
gpGwdwdw play may be possible, and the starting
wHwdwdwd position may be undesirably artificial.
iwIwdwdw Can we do better? Not, I think, without
adding extra material, and this would
White to play and win reduce whatever impact the study might
have. To reach 1.2, Black might have
1.2 is a trifle of a different kind. White played ...Ba3 to pin the White knight,
has a win on material, but Black but why did White leave it there to be
threatens 1...Ka2 and 2...Bxb2+, after pinned? Suppose we had a position like
which the recapture will give stalemate.
Hence 1 Be4 Ka2 2 Bb1+, and after wdwdwdwd
2...Ka1 we have 1.2a : dwdwgwdw
wdBdwdwd
1.2a
dwdwdwdw
wdwdwdwd wdwdwdwd
dwdwdwdw dpdwdwdw
wdwdwdwd wHwdwdwd
dwdwdwdw iwIwGwdw
wdwdwdwd
gpGwdwdw intending 1 Bc3 Ba3 etc; yes, but White
wHwdwdwd can untangle himself by 1 Na4 (1 Nc4
iBIwdwdw gives another alternative win), and if
1...Ba3+ 2 Kd1 b2 then 3 Bc3 and it is
After 2...Kb1 Black who is pinned.
In short, it does not appear possible
A waiting move will force Black’s to provide more than a two-move
bishop to release the pin, but 2 Bd4 can introduction to 1.2a without resorting to
be met by 2...Bc5 since 3 Bxc5 will captures or exchanges.
give a second stalemate, and if 2 Be5, 1.1, in contrast, was discovered
for 2...Bd6 3 Nc4+/Nd3+ Bxe5 4 Nxe5, by analysing a naturally occurring
Black has 4...b2+ with a third. The position. I was doodling around with
bishop must go all the way: 3 Bh8! the men, as one does, and suddenly
6 Fifty-one flights of chess fancy
noticed what I had put on the board. 1.3

My immediate thought was that
somebody must have discovered it wdwdwdwd
before, but a search of Harold van der dpdwdwiw
Heijden’s “Endgame study database wdwdwdwd
2000” (subsequently confirmed by a dw)wIwdp
search of his “Endgame study database wdp)wdw)
III, which contains most of the dwdwdwdw
endgame studies published up to 2005) wdwdwdwd
failed to locate a predecessor, and a dwdwdwdw
search of a database of a million games
played to 1999 suggested that neither White to play and win
had it occurred in actual play.
The latter is perhaps the more easily In 1.3, White must try and catch the
explained. What were the moves fleeing c-pawn. Try the obvious 1 Ke4:
immediately preceding? Could we not no, Black will reply 1...Kf6,
have had a position such as
1.3a
wdwdwdkd
dwdwdpdw wdwdwdwd
wdwdwdwd dpdwdwdw
dw0w)wdw wdwdwiwd
wdPdwdKd dw)wdwdp
dwdwdwdw wdp)Kdw)
wdwdwdwd dwdwdwdw
dwdwdwdw wdwdwdwd
dwdwdwdw
with Kf5 for White and ...Kg7 for 1 Ke4, after 1...Kf6
Black? Yes, but Kf4 would have won
more simply. Black would still have and if 2 d5 then 2...c3 3 Kd3 Ke5 4 d6
had to play ...Kg7, to meet Ke4 with Ke6 5 Kxc3 b6! and he will hold the
...Kg6, after which Kf5 gives 1.1 with draw (6 cxb6 Kxd6 7-8 Ke4 Kxb6
Black to play and the win is easy. 9-11 Kxh5 Ke7 12 Kg6 Kf8, or 6 Kc4
1.2a is obviously somewhat artificial. bxc5 7 Kxc5 Kd7 8 Kd5 Kd8 9 Ke6
1.1 seems completely natural, but even Ke8 10-11 Kg6 Kxd6 12 Kxh5 Ke7
to reach 1.1 either someone has just 13 Kg6 Kf8). If instead 2 Kf4 then
captured something or White’s last 2...Ke6 3 Ke4 (else 3...Kd5 wins for
move was an inferior one. But so what? Black) Kf6 repeats the position, while
It’s still a pleasant little study. 2 Ke3 Kf5 gives 1.3b,
Endgame studies 7
1.3b This little study grew from the

position below,
wdwdwdwd
dpdwdwdw wdwdwdwd
wdwdwdwd dpdwdwdw
dw)wdkdp wdwdwiwd
wdp)wdw) dw)pdwdp
dwdwIwdw wdw)bIw)
wdwdwdwd dBdwdwdw
dwdwdwdw wdwdwdwd
Further 2 Ke3, after 2...Kf5 dwdwdwdw
and an immediate 3 d5 is needed even which occurred in a bishop-and-pawn

to avoid defeat. study I quoted in British Endgame
So 1 Ke4 doesn’t work, and the Study News. The composer’s intended
move must be 1 Kf4. If now 1...Kf6 move was Ba2, but White can win more
then 2 Ke4 gives 1.3a with Black simply by playing Bc4, since ...dxc4
to play, which is disastrous for him. can be met by Kxe4 and we have 1.3a
The natural 2...Ke6 exposes his king to with Black to play. Having noticed this,
check, 3 d5+, so he has no time to play I realised that position 1.3a was in fact
3...c3, and after 3...K~ 4 Kd4 White reciprocal zugzwang, and all that
will have time to capture Black’s pawn remained was to find a way of
and then come back to defend his own. exploiting it.
But Black needn’t play 1...Kf6. He
also has 1...Kg6, after which 2 Ke4 can Here’s a little constructional task. We
be met by 2...Kf6 and 2 Ke3 by 2...Kf5. all know that K + B + N can force a
All right, 2 Kf3, passing the choice win against a bare king, but that K + B
back to Black. 2...Kf6 is met by 3 Ke4 alone or K + N alone cannot. Now give
as we have seen (3 Ke2 also wins), the Black king some accompanying
while 2...Kf5 allows 3 Ke3 and this men, so that K + B + N can no longer
time it is 1.3b that we have with Black force a win, but make the position such
to play (3...Ke6 4 Kd2 Kd5/K~ 5 Kc3, that if we remove either White’s knight
or 3...Kg4 4 d5). or his bishop, leaving him with K + B
So 1.3a and 1.3b are both reciprocal alone or K + N alone, he can now win.
zugzwang. Experience has shown that I call this the “Thomas à Becket” theme
while solvers soon spot the need for (bishop and knight are all very well on
1 Kf4, they tend to overlook that their own, but put them together and
Black can set a second poser by playing you get trouble).
1...Kg6. Answer at the end of the chapter.
1.4 (“Festina lente!”) have 3...Kd4 4 Kf3 (to release the

knight from the duty of guarding g3,
wdwdwdwd but it is too late) Kc4 and the pawn will
dwdwdwdw fall. White must make haste slowly:
wdwdwdwd 3 a3! If now 3...Kd4 then 4 Kf3 Kc4
dwdwdwdw 5 Nd2+ and 6 Nb1 (or 5 Ne3+ and
wdwdkdwd 6 Nc2 if preferred), and if 3...Kf4 then
dwdwdwdp 4 a4 and White is a tempo ahead of the
PdwdKdNd line 3 a4 (4...Ke4/Ke5 5 a5 Kd5/Kd6
dwdwdwdw 6 Kf3 and 7-8 Nb3/Nc4). The name
“Festina lente!” for compositions of
White to play and win this kind is due to Artur Mandler.
This was discovered by rummaging
White cannot stop Black’s pawn from through computer output. If a position
promoting, but he can aim for f2 or g3 with a pawn on the third rank is
to threaten a fork, and the correct way reciprocal zugzwang, there is always a
turns out to be 1 Ne3 h2 (else the pawn chance that the only winning move with
will be stopped, say 1...Kd4 2 Kf3 h2 the pawn on the second rank will be
3 Nc2+ K~ 4 Kg2) 2 Nf1. If Black now “pawn-one”. I therefore went through
promotes to a queen, he is soon seen to the computer-generated list of
lose (2...h1Q 3 Ng3+ Kd4 4 Nxh1 Kc3 reciprocal zugzwangs with N + P v N
5 Kd1 Kb4 6 Kc2 Ka3 7 Kb1), and the (all 4121 of them) which had appeared
same happens if he plays 2...Kd4 and with issue 122 of the endgame study
lets White take on h2. But he can make magazine EG, looking for positions
a knight, 2...h1N : with the pawn on the third rank, the
Black knight on the bottom rank, and
1.4a the White knight threatening the
second-rank square above the Black
wdwdwdwd knight and able to fork the Black knight
dwdwdwdw and king (so that we could hope to
wdwdwdwd force a knight promotion by Black in
dwdwdwdw the previous play). This gave me a short
wdwdkdwd list, and all that remained was to
dwdwdwdw examine each in turn and to see which
PdwdKdwd would allow suitable lead-in play.
dwdwdNdn The famous problemist T. R. Dawson
used to regard chess composition as
After 2...h1N scientific discovery rather than artistic
creation, and the point could hardly be
If White now runs his pawn by 3 a4, we better exemplified.
Endgame studies 9
1.5 There is in fact no win from 1.5a,

and the mistake was at move 1. White
wdwdwdBd must ignore the siren lure of the pawn
0wdwdwdw on b4, and play 1 Kd3 Kb5 2 Kd4 to
kdwdwdwd keep the Black king out of c5. Now
dwdwdwdw 2...a5 gives 1.5b,
w0wdwdwd
0wdwdwdw 1.5b
PdKdwdwd wdwdwdBd
dwdwdwdw dwdwdwdw
White to play and win wdwdwdwd
0kdwdwdw
1 Kb3, obviously, and after 1...Kb5 w0wIwdwd
2 Bf7 (or should it be Be6?) a5 3 Be8+ 0wdwdwdw
Kc5 4 Ka4 Kb6 we have 1.5a and Pdwdwdwd
surely White’s bishop will soon be able dwdwdwdw
drive Black’s king away from the pawn
on a5? 1 Kd3, after 2...a5
1.5a and how will White prevent ...a4 and

...b3 taking off his last pawn? Ah,
wdwdBdwd 3 Bc4+ Kb6 (3...Ka4 4 Kc5 and mate
dwdwdwdw next move) 4 Bb3 Kb5 5 Ba4+! with a
wiwdwdwd well known but always attractive mate
0wdwdwdw if Black captures the bishop (5...Kxa4
K0wdwdwd 6 Kc4 b3 7 axb3). If instead 5...Kb6
0wdwdwdw then 6 Kc4/Kd5 with a routine win.
Pdwdwdwd 1.5, like 1.2, was discovered by
dwdwdwdw working back from a desired final
position. The mate has been exploited
1 Kb3, after 4...Kb6 many times since its first appearance in
the 1840s, and the only part of the
But it isn’t so easy. 5 Bb5 Kc5, and if study which I can claim as original is
6 Kxa5?? then 6...b3 and it is Black the initial journey of the White king to
who will win. Try 6 Bd3 Kb6 7 Bc4 keep the Black out of c5. However,
instead, when the bishop will prevent experience has shown this to be quite
7...b3? Yes, but Black will have 7...Kc5 deceptive, and there is a pretty finish to
attacking it, and again White will be reward the solver who eventually finds
unable to capture the pawn at a5. the right answer.
1.6 (by Wallace Ellison and myself) defence of his pawn). This gives 1.6a :
Kdkdwdwd 1.6a
)wdwdwdw
wdwdwdpd Kdkdwdwd
dwdwdwdw )wdwdwdw
wdwdwdwh wdwdwdwd
dwdwdwdw dwdwdw0w
wdwdB)wd wdwdwdwh
dwdwdwdw dwdBdwdw
wdwdw)wd
White to play and hold the draw dwdwdwdw
Without the pawns on g6 and f2, White After 1...g5
would have an easy draw. He would
check the Black king away from c8, The natural move is 2 Be4 penning the
forcing it to move to c7, and then play knight, but Black can temporize by
to keep the knight away from the 2...Kc7, and after 3 f3 Ng2 we have
squares giving on b6. But if Black can 4 B~ Nf4 5 Be4 (as we shall see, if
capture the f-pawn without losing his Black can reach e5 he will win, so
g-pawn, he will win. He will play to a White must guard d3/g6 as well as d5)
square such as e5, forcing the White Ne6 6 B~ Nc5 7 Bb5 (the same motif –
bishop to play to e6 or b5, and then White must defend d3 as well as a4/d7)
make a tempo move with his pawn. and we have reached 1.6b :
The natural opening move is 1 Bd3 –
or should we throw in a check first, 1.6b
1 Ba6+ Kc7 2 Bd3? No, Black will play
2...g5 with an eventual win; a best-play Kdwdwdwd
line is 3 Be4 g4 4 Bd3 Nf3 5 Bf5 Ne5 )wiwdwdw
6 Be6 Nd3 (to meet 7 Bxg4 by 7...Nc5 wdwdwdwd
and 8...Na4 or 8...Nd7) 7 Bd7 (now dBhwdw0w
7...Nc5 can be met by 8 Bb5/Be8, and wdwdwdwd
7...Nxf2 by 8 Bxg4) Nf4 (threatening dwdwdPdw
8...Nd5) 8 Bc6 Ng6 (aiming for c8, wdwdwdwd
which cannot be prevented) 9 B~ Ne7 dwdwdwdw
10 Be6/Bb7 Nc8 11 Bxc8 Kxc8 12 f4
g3 13-14 f6 g1Q 15 f7 Qg2 mate. 2 Be4, after 7 Bb5
So we confirm 1 Bd3, and the natural
reply is 1...g5 (if instead 1...Kc7 then 7...Kc8 (this tempo move has become
2 f4, and Black’s knight is tied to the possible because the knight guards the
Endgame studies 11
squares from which the bishop might Wallace’s original diagram, so this may
check) 8 Bc6 (nothing else is better) not be the precise position that he sent
Nd3 9 Bb7+ (again nothing else is me, but it reproduces the essentials.
better) Kc7 10 B~ Ne5 (Black has
attained his first objective) 11 Bb5/Be6 1.6c
(White’s first priority is to guard c4/d7,
so he must leave his pawn to its fate) wdwdwdwd
Nxf3 12 B~ Ne5 13 Bb5/Be6 g4 14 B~ dw0wdwdw
Nc4/Nd7 and 15...Nb6 mate. wdwdbdwd
Letting the knight out by say 3 Bd3 Hwdwdwdw
is soon seen to be even worse, and wdwdwdwd
2 Be4 is in fact a losing move. Correct dPdwdwdw
is the apparently absurd 2 f4! throwing wdwdwdw0
away the vital pawn. 2...g4 would allow dwdwdKdk
3 f5 with an easy draw (or 3 Bf5+ if
White prefers, since 3...Nxf5 will be White to play and win (intended)
stalemate), so Black must take, 2...gxf4,
and now we play 3 Be4? No, 3...Kc7, Wallace’s intention was 1 b4 Bd5
and White must release the pressure. 2 Kf2 c6 3 Nb7 followed by the play
Correct is 3 Bf5+, playable because the we saw above with reversed colours
capture will again be stalemate, and (after 2 Be4 g5 3 f3 Ng2). This was a
only after 3...Kc7 do we at last play the fine piece of analysis, typical of its
penning move 4 Be4. Now Black is originator, but then it occurred to me to
helpless. 4...Kc8 will be met by 5 Bf5+ wonder: after 1 b4, what happens if
repeating the position we have just had, Black plays the utterly ridiculous move
and 4...f3 allows 5 Bxf3 since the 1...c5? It draws, doesn’t it? White
capture will once more give stalemate. cannot cope with a fleeing c-pawn, so
And if we now ask why 1 Ba6+ Kc7 he must play 2 bxc5, and Black draws
2 Bd3 g5 cannot similarly be followed by the play already seen.
by 3 f4, since 3...gxf4 4 Be4 is drawn, This seemed too good to waste, so
the simpler answer is 3...g4 though I reversed the colours to give 1.6, in
3...Ng2 also wins. which the chance discovery has become
This is an example of “composition” the main line and Wallace’s excellent
by spotting something in a position analysis refutes the apparently natural
which had actually been put on the move 2 Be4, and suggested that we
board by somebody else. During 1995, publish it as a joint study. We sent it to
Wallace Ellison was looking at endings a magazine in Eastern Europe and no
with knight against bishop in which solvers’ comments reached us, but it
the knight needed to win a pawn. 1.6c has always had a good response when
illustrates one of them. I no longer have I have put it up in front of an audience.
1.7 (by J. N. Baxter, my version) After 1 Bf1 Bc6 2 h4, the capture
2...gxh3 opens extra lines of attack for
wdwdwdwd White, Black’s bishop cannot play to c6
dbdwdwdw because it is already there, and 2...Bd7
wdwiwdwd is met by 3 Bd3 winning at once. This
dpdpdpdp leaves 2...Be8, and a best-play line is
wdwIw)pd 3 Be2 Bc6 4 Bd1! Bd7 5 Bb3 Be6
)w)wdw)w 6 Bc2 Bc8 7 a4 bxa4 8 Bxa4. When we
wdwdwdB) tried this before, the Black bishop was
dwdwdwdw on e6/f7/g8, and he could play ...Bf7 or
...Bg6. With his bishop on c8, he cannot
White to play and win stop White penetrating to e8, and the
rest will be easy.
I set 1.7 in the British Chess If, after 1 Bf1 Bc6, White plays 2 h3
Magazine with two questions: how instead of 2 h4, 2...Be8 holds the draw.
does White win after 1 Bf1 Bc6 2 h4, White can continue 3 hxg4 hxg4 4 Be2
and why does 1 h4 not work? and then play as before to get his
bishop through to e8, but with no target
e f
wdwdwdwdd a on h5 there is nothing to be gained, and
e b
dwdwdwdw g if instead 3 h4 then 3...Bc6 gives Black
the draw already seen. If White plays
h
wdwiwdwdc
1 h3 in the initial position, 1...Bc6
dpdpdpdp draws. And if Black meets 1 Bf1 with
wdwIw)p) 1...Ba6 instead of 1...Bc6, the answer is
A B
)w)wdw)w not 2 a4 “exploiting” the pin (when
C C
wdwdwdwdD E 2...bxa4 wins for Black) but 2 Bd3 etc.
F G
dwdwdwdw H Baxter had the bishops already on f1
and c6, and the Pc3 on e3. The latter
Take the latter first. Black can meet allowed 1 h4 Be8 2 Bd3 Bd7 3-4 Bb3
1 h4 by the corresponding-square Bg8 5 Kc3 Kc5 (else 6 Kb4) 6 a4, when
defence shown above (if White goes to 6...bxa4 loses and 6...b4+ gives White
A, Black goes to a, and so on), and he an outside passed pawn with all the
must start with 1...Ba8! since he is initiative and perhaps an unwanted win.
already on b7. If White plays to 1.7 removes this unclear line (now, if
b3/c2/d1 and advances the a-pawn, White’s king leaves d4, Black can play
Black, now on g8/e6/f7, can exchange his bishop to d7/h7/g6 and only then his
and meet White’s Bxa4 with ...Bf7 or king to c5, and the draw is not difficult
...Bg6. This keeps the White bishop to show) and adds the elegant refutation
from e8, and it soon becomes clear that 1 h4 Ba8, and though it is only “Baxter,
White will get nowhere. version JDB” I thought it worth doing.
Endgame studies 13
1.8 But what a curious set of

corresponding squares! Usually, such
wdwdwdwd squares satisfy a simple shift-and-
dwdwdbdw reflect geometrical relationship, but
pdwdwiwd here we don’t just have one or two
)pdpdwdp exceptional pairs, we have two distinct
w)w)wIw) subsets. Squares Aa-Ee are an odd
dwdwdBdw number of files and ranks apart, and can
wdwdwdwd be displaced by one file and then
dwdwdwdw reflected top-to-bottom into each other.
Squares Gg-Jj are an even number of
Can White win without first files and ranks apart, and can be
withdrawing his king? displaced by four ranks and then
reflected side-to-side into each other.
1.8 is another corresponding-square And there are two further pairs, Ff and
bishop-and-pawn study. Can White Kk, which are an odd number of files
outmanoeuvre Black just by making and ranks apart but do not satisfy the
bishop moves? shift-and-reflect relationship of Aa-Ee.
Normally, two incompatible subsets
d
wdwdwdwde k suh as Aa-Ee and Gg-Jj could not
b c
dwdwdwdw g Z co-exist, because the attacker would
simply move from one to the other and
a
pdwdwiwdiz h
the defender would be unable to follow
)pdpdwdp j
suit. But here, the only moves that
w)w)wIw) f Black cannot match are F-H and H-F,
A F
dwdwdwdw G z and he doesn’t need to; if White moves
B C
wdwdwdwdH I from F to H or from H to F, Black
D E
dwdwdwdw J K doesn’t lament his inability to play f-h
or h-f, he simply takes the bishop.
In fact he cannot, and the diagram White can win by a temporary king
above shows why not. If Black makes withdrawal, say 1 Bd1 Be8 2 Bb3 Bc6
the slightest slip, he loses; for example, 3 Kf3, with perhaps 3...Kf5 4 Bc2+ Kf6
1 Be2 Be8? 2 Bd3 (threat 3 Bf5) Bd7 5 Ke3 Be8 (5...Bd7 6 Kf4) 6 Bb3
3 Bc2 Bg4 (else 4 Bd1 at once) 4 Bb3 Bc6/Bf7 7 Kf4 or 3...Kf7 4 Bd1 Be8
Be6 5 Bd1 Bf7 6 Bf3, and we are back 5 Be2 Kf6 6 Bf1 Bd7 7 Bg2 Bf5/Bg4+
at 1.8 but with Black to play. However, (7...Be6 8 Kf4) 8 Ke3 Be6 9 Kf4. But
if Black answers every White bishop this is routine, and not particularly tidy;
move by playing his own to a square it is only the demonstration that he
with the corresponding lower-case cannot outmanoeuvre Black by bishop
letter, White can never make progress. moves alone that is at all elegant.
1.9 (after Artur Mandler) when White could now win by 9 Kd5
since 9...a1Q would allow 10 Qh8+).
wdwdwdKd So White must think of something
$wdw)wdw else, and the answer is 1 Kf7 Rf4+
wdwdwdwd 2 Ke6! Re4+ 3 Kd7 Rd4+ 4 Ke8,
0wdwdwdw going right round his pawn and
pdwdrdwd reaching e8 from the left. Now 4...Kd3
dwdwiwdw gives 1.9a with the Black rook on d4
wdwdwdwd instead of f4, and White can play 5 Rd7
dwdwdwdw pinning it and exchanging it off: 5...a3
6 Rxd4+ Kxd4 7 Kd7 (say) a2 8 e8Q
White to play and win a1Q 9 Qh8+. If instead 4...Re4 or
4...Ke2 then 5 Rxa5 and 6 Kf7, with a
The White king will have to hide on e8 shelter for the king after 6...Rf4+ 7 Ke6
sooner or later, but if he goes there Re4+ 8 Re5; if 4...Rd5 then 5 Kf7 Rf5+
straight away, 1 Kf8 Rf4+ 2 Ke8, Black 6 Ke6, and even playing to take off the
will play 2...Kd3 to bring his own king new queen will not help (6...Ke4 7 e8Q
nearer to his pawns : Re5+ 8 Kd7/Kf7 Rxe8 9 Kxe8 and
10 Rxa5).
1.9a This was a spin-off from my
translation of Mandler’s book Studie.
wdwdKdwd I was analysing one of his studies by
$wdw)wdw computer, and a sideline came down to
wdwdwdwd 1.9 with the White king on e6 instead
0wdwdwdw of g8. I expected the computer to play
pdwdw4wd Kd7 or Kf7 indifferently, and was very
dwdkdwdw surprised to see that it had a strong
wdwdwdwd preference for Kd7. But examination
dwdwdwdw soon showed why, and then it was just
a matter of adding the little king walk
1 Kf8, after 2...Kd3 to highlight the distinction.
The fact that each of White’s
If now 3 Kd7 then 3...Rd4+, and if attempts to win from 1.9a demands a
further 4 Ke6 then 4...Re4+ and even different refutation (3 Kd7 Rd4+,
5...Rxe7 is enough to draw; if 3 Kd8 3 Kd8 Re4, 3 Rxa5 Kc2) is a definite
then 3...Re4, and if further 4 Rxa5 bonus (and a nightmare for solvers).
Kc3/Kc2 5 Rxa4 then 5...Rxa4 6 e8Q Usually, a composer has to go to a great
Ra8+; and if 3 Rxa5 then 3...Kc2 4 Kd7 deal of trouble to achieve such a thing.
Rd4+ 5 Ke6 Re4+ 6 Re5 Rxe5+ 7 Kxe5 Here, it turned up completely by
a3 8 e8Q a2 draws (but not 3...Kc3, accident.
Endgame studies 15
1.9 (after Artur Mandler) when White could now win by 9 Kd5
since 9...a1Q would allow 10 Qh8+).
wdwdwdKd So White must think of something
$wdw)wdw else, and the answer is 1 Kf7 Rf4+
wdwdwdwd 2 Ke6! Re4+ 3 Kd7 Rd4+ 4 Ke8,
0wdwdwdw going right round his pawn and
pdwdrdwd reaching e8 from the left. Now 4...Kd3
dwdwiwdw gives 1.9a with the Black rook on d4
wdwdwdwd instead of f4, and White can play 5 Rd7
dwdwdwdw pinning it and exchanging it off: 5...a3
6 Rxd4+ Kxd4 7 Kd7 (say) a2 8 e8Q
White to play and win a1Q 9 Qh8+. If instead 4...Re4 or
4...Ke2 then 5 Rxa5 and 6 Kf7, with a
The White king will have to hide on e8 shelter for the king after 6...Rf4+ 7 Ke6
sooner or later, but if he goes there Re4+ 8 Re5; if 4...Rd5 then 5 Kf7 Rf5+
straight away, 1 Kf8 Rf4+ 2 Ke8, Black 6 Ke6, and even playing to take off the
will play 2...Kd3 to bring his own king new queen will not help (6...Ke4 7 e8Q
nearer to his pawns : Re5+ 8 Kd7/Kf7 Rxe8 9 Kxe8 and
10 Rxa5).
1.9a This was a spin-off from my
translation of Mandler’s book Studie.
wdwdKdwd I was analysing one of his studies by
$wdw)wdw computer, and a sideline came down to
wdwdwdwd 1.9 with the White king on e6 instead
0wdwdwdw of g8. I expected the computer to play
pdwdw4wd Kd7 or Kf7 indifferently, and was very
dwdkdwdw surprised to see that it had a strong
wdwdwdwd preference for Kd7. But examination
dwdwdwdw soon showed why, and then it was just
a matter of adding the little king walk
1 Kf8, after 2...Kd3 to highlight the distinction.
The fact that each of White’s
If now 3 Kd7 then 3...Rd4+, and if attempts to win from 1.9a demands a
further 4 Ke6 then 4...Re4+ and even different refutation (3 Kd7 Rd4+,
5...Rxe7 is enough to draw; if 3 Kd8 3 Kd8 Re4, 3 Rxa5 Kc2) is a definite
then 3...Re4, and if further 4 Rxa5 bonus (and a nightmare for solvers).
Kc3/Kc2 5 Rxa4 then 5...Rxa4 6 e8Q Usually, a composer has to go to a great
Ra8+; and if 3 Rxa5 then 3...Kc2 4 Kd7 deal of trouble to achieve such a thing.
Rd4+ 5 Ke6 Re4+ 6 Re5 Rxe5+ 7 Kxe5 Here, it turned up completely by
a3 8 e8Q a2 draws (but not 3...Kc3, accident.
1.11 (version by Christopher Jones) A plausible try is now 3 Nb4

attacking the bishop, since 3...B~
wdwiwdwd 4 Nc6+ Bxc6 will again allow White to
dwdPdwdw sacrifice for stalemate, but Black has
wHwdPdwd 3...Bxd7 and he just wins (4 exd7 Ne3
dwdwdwdw 5 Nc6+ Kxd7 6 Ne5+ Ke6 7 Nf3 Kd5
Rdwdwdwd 8 Nxh2 Ke4 9 Kg1 Kf4 with 10 Kh1
dwdwdb0w g2+ 11 Kg1 Kg3 or 10 Nf1 Nxf1
wdwdwdn0 11 Kxf1 Kf3). Instead, 3 e7+ Kxd7
dwdwdwdK 4 e8Q+ (not 4 Nf6+, when Black can
play 4...Ke6 leaving the bishop to
White to play and hold the draw control e8 and again he just wins,
5 Ne4 Ne3 6 e8Q+ Bxe8 7 Nxg3 Ng4
1 Ra3 will be met by the shut-off mate 8 Kg2 Bc6+ 9 Kh3 Bf3 10 Kh4 Nf2 or
1...Ne3, and the only way to avoid 5 e8Q+ Bxe8 6 Nxe8 Nf4 7 Nc7+/
immediate disaster is 1 Ra8+ Bxa8 Ng7+ Ke5 8 Nb5/Ne8 Nd3 and 9...Nf2)
2 Nd5 (not 2 Nxa8, when Black simply Kxe8 5 Nf6+ K~ 6 Ne4 and we have
plays his knight round to f2). This gives 1.11b :
1.11a, which is trickier than it seems :
1.11b
1.11a
wdwdwdwd
bdwiwdwd dwdwdkdw
dwdPdwdw wdbdwdwd
wdwdPdwd dwdwdwdw
dwdNdwdw wdwdNdwd
wdwdwdwd dwdwdw0w
dwdwdw0w wdwdwdn0
wdwdwdn0 dwdwdwdK
dwdwdwdK
After 5...Kf7 6 Ne4
After 2 Nd5
Again, a capture or a knight move gives
If Black now plays 2...Bxd5, White will stalemate, and now anything else
sacrifice his pawns for stalemate, and if allows Nxg3 followed by Kxh2.
he moves his knight he pins the White I originally had a White pawn on a7
knight and again White will sacrifice. instead of the rook. Christopher Jones
This leaves the bishop, and 2...Bc6 is subsequently suggested using a rook,
slightly the better move because it and it seemed to me to be rather a good
makes White play precisely at move 4. idea.
Endgame studies 17
1.11, like 1.2 and 1.5, was composed 1.12

by working back from a predetermined
final position, and even more than 1.2 it wdwdwdwd
shows the disadvantage of this method: dwdwdKdp
the starting position is unpleasantly wdbdwdw0
artificial, whether it is set with an dwdwdwdk
a-pawn or with a rook. Sadly, we wdwdwdNd
cannot make it even slightly less dwdwdw)w
artificial by putting the pawn on a6 and wdndwdwd
moving the bishop back to d1, dwdBdwdw
intending 1 a7 Bf3 etc, because there
will be an unwanted alternative solution White to play and win
by 1 e7+ Kxe7 2 Nd5+ Kxd7 3 a7 Bf3
4 Nf6+ K~ 5 a8Q Bxa8 6 Ne4. White can easily win a piece (1 Ne5+
Coming back to the study some years and 2 Nxc6, 1 Ne3+ and 2 Nxc2, 1 N~+
later, and trying to find a better setting, and 2 Bxc2), but none of these wins the
I looked at this Black-to-play position, game and correct is 1 Kf6 threatening
where White’s king is away from the mate in two. Black’s only defence is to
corner : adopt White’s tactic in 1.11, leading to
1...Bf3 2 Bxf3 Nd4 3 Bd1 :
wdbdwdwd
dwdwdwdw 1.12a
wdwdNdwd wdwdwdwd
dwdwdw0w dwdwdwdp
wdwdwdnd wdwdwIw0
dwdwdwdK dwdwdwdk
wdwdwiw) wdwhwdNd
dwdwdwdw dwdwdw)w
wdwdwdwd
Fortunately I spotted the flaw before dwdBdwdw
I had wasted too much time: Black has
...Nxh2 releasing the stalemate. Then a After 3...Bd1
further point occurred to me: if h1 were
blocked, Black could follow White’s If now 3...Nf3 then 4 Kf5 Nd4+ 5 Ke5,
Kxh2 by ...g4, White’s knight would and if the knight runs to safety on say
have to move, and ...g3 would be mate. c6 then 6 Kf6 forces mate; if 3...Ne2
This seemed too good to waste, so attacking g3 then 4 Nxh6 (4 Bxe2
I reversed the colours, and a little more stalemate, 4 N~ stalemate) Kxh6 5 g4
work produced 1.12 : (5 Bxe2 again stalemate) N~ 6 g5 mate.
1.11, like 1.2 and 1.5, was composed 1.12

by working back from a predetermined
final position, and even more than 1.2 it wdwdwdwd
shows the disadvantage of this method: dwdwdKdp
the starting position is unpleasantly wdbdwdw0
artificial, whether it is set with an dwdwdwdk
a-pawn or with a rook. Sadly, we wdwdwdNd
cannot make it even slightly less dwdwdw)w
artificial by putting the pawn on a6 and wdndwdwd
moving the bishop back to d1, dwdBdwdw
intending 1 a7 Bf3 etc, because there
will be an unwanted alternative solution White to play and win
by 1 e7+ Kxe7 2 Nd5+ Kxd7 3 a7 Bf3
4 Nf6+ K~ 5 a8Q Bxa8 6 Ne4. White can easily win a piece (1 Ne5+
Coming back to the study some years and 2 Nxc6, 1 Ne3+ and 2 Nxc2, 1 N~+
later, and trying to find a better setting, and 2 Bxc2), but none of these wins the
I looked at this Black-to-play position, game and correct is 1 Kf6 threatening
where White’s king is away from the mate in two. Black’s only defence is to
corner : adopt White’s tactic in 1.11, leading to
1...Bf3 2 Bxf3 Nd4 3 Bd1 :
wdbdwdwd
dwdwdwdw 1.12a
wdwdNdwd wdwdwdwd
dwdwdw0w dwdwdwdp
wdwdwdnd wdwdwIw0
dwdwdwdK dwdwdwdk
wdwdwiw) wdwhwdNd
dwdwdwdw dwdwdw)w
wdwdwdwd
Fortunately I spotted the flaw before dwdBdwdw
I had wasted too much time: Black has
...Nxh2 releasing the stalemate. Then a After 3...Bd1
further point occurred to me: if h1 were
blocked, Black could follow White’s If now 3...Nf3 then 4 Kf5 Nd4+ 5 Ke5,
Kxh2 by ...g4, White’s knight would and if the knight runs to safety on say
have to move, and ...g3 would be mate. c6 then 6 Kf6 forces mate; if 3...Ne2
This seemed too good to waste, so attacking g3 then 4 Nxh6 (4 Bxe2
I reversed the colours, and a little more stalemate, 4 N~ stalemate) Kxh6 5 g4
work produced 1.12 : (5 Bxe2 again stalemate) N~ 6 g5 mate.
Endgame studies 19
1.14 Indeed it is, and in fact it is better,

because after 2 Kc3 Ba2 3 g6 we have
wdwdwdwd 1.14b,
dwdwdpdw
wdwdwdwd 1.14b
dpdw0w)w
w)biwdPd wdwdwdwd
dwdPdwdw dwdwdpdw
wdwIPdwd wdwdwdPd
dwdwdwdw dpdk0wdw
w)wdwdPd
White to play and hold the draw dwIP)wdw
bdwdwdwd
Almost the exact opposite happened dwdwdwdw
with 1.14. This was my contribution to
the 1996 WCSC, when the director was After 2 Kc3 Ba2 3 g6
Brian Stephenson.
1 dxc4 Kxc4 is clearly hopeless, and Black doesn’t have to play 3...fxg6;
so 1 e3+ Kd5 is almost automatic, and he can win by 3...Kd6 (4 g7 f6 etc).
now 2 Kc3 Ba2 seems promising: ah This option is not available after 2 g6,
yes, 3 g6 fxg6 4 e4+ K~ 5 g5, after because the bishop is still under attack.
which the Black king is shut out and all So the correct solution is 1 e3+ Kd5
White has to do is to keep his king in 2 g6 fxg6 3 Kc3 Ba2 4 e4+ K~ 5 g5.
contact with d3 : 1.13 had a deliberately constructed
logical sequence, which in practice
1.14a everybody short-circuited. In 1.14, the
placing of the Black bishop on c4 to
wdwdwdwd force 2 g6 rather than 2 Kc3 was
dwdwdwdw merely a constructional device to avoid
wdwiwdpd a dual, and was not intended to fool
dpdw0w)w anyone at all; yet while the great
w)wdPdwd majority of solvers found their way
dwIPdwdw through to the correct final position,
bdwdwdwd more than half of them lost points by
dwdwdwdw wrongly playing 2 Kc3.
The immediate inspiration for 1.14
Black cannot win was the study by Tronov which is in
Endgame Magic, but the idea occurs in
But wait a minute: isn’t 2 g6 fxg6 several studies and even crops up from
3 Kc3 Ba2 4 e4+ etc just as good? time to time over the board.
1.15 This was based on what we might

call an “ultimate reciprocal zugzwang”
whwdwdwd
dwdwdwdw wdwdwdwd
wdpdwdwd dwdwdwdw
dwdwdwdw wdwdwdwd
wdPdwdwd dwhwdwdw
dwdpdQdw wdwdwdwd
pipIwdwd dwdpdwdw
dwdwdNdw pdpHwdwd
White to play and win iwIwdwdw
Play in 1.15 starts 1 Qf6+ Kb1 2 Qa1+ where whoever is to move must allow
Kxa1 3 Kc1, which is hackneyed but mate in one. It may be asked if we
avoids starting with the king trapped in cannot reach this in both “right” and
the corner, and we have 1.15a, “wrong” lines without the extra pawns.
All I can say is that I cannot achieve it.
1.15a Suppose, utterly crudely, that we set
whwdwdwd whwdwdwd
dwdwdwdw dwdQdwdw
wdpdwdwd wdwdwdwd
dwdwdwdw dwdwdwdw
wdPdwdwd wdwdwdwd
dwdpdwdw dwdpdwdw
pdpdwdwd pdpdwdwd
iwIwdNdw iwdKdNdw
After 3 Kc1
intending 1 Kc1? Nxd7 2 Nd2 Nc5 and
where Black must play 3...Nd7/Na6 to 1 Kd2! Nxd7 2 Kc1 Nc5 3 Nd2. Firstly,
avoid mate on b3. this can have no history, since Black’s
If White now plays 4 Nd2 still last move was a bad one (if ...c3-c2+,
aiming for b3, Black will reply 4...Nc5, ...Nxd7 would have won, if ...b3xc2+,
and it is White who will be mated. ...d3xc2+ would have won). Secondly,
White must insert 4 c5, and after it isn’t sound anyway, because 1 Kd2
4...Nxc5 5 Nd2 everything works. c1Q+! wins for Black. So the tempo
If instead 4...d2+ then 5 Nxd2 Nxc5 must be lost earlier in the play, and I
6 Kxc2 and again mate next move. cannot come within a mile of success.
Endgame studies 21
1.16 This wasn’t too bad for a first

attempt at study composition, though
wdwdwdKd of course it was outclassed by a
dwdwdwdw famous study by H. F. L. Meyer (Chess
wdwdwdwd Player’s Chronicle 1885, White Ke7,
dwdwdwdw Bh8, Pf2 (3), Black Kc4, Pd3 (2), draw
wdwdwdwd by 1 Bc3! Kxc3 2-3 f5 d1Q 4 f6
dwdwdPdw Qe1+/Qe2+ 5 Kf8!). I was inspired by a
wdwdwdw0 remark remembered from one of the
dwdwdBdk little Bonham and Wormald Chess
Questions Answered books, that there
White to play and hold the draw were positions where a bishop’s pawn
even on the sixth rank could draw
1.16 was my first published study, and against a queen because the attacker
appeared in print with a couple of had neither check nor pin. I no longer
moves of crude introduction which had the book, but memory suggested
nowadays I would omit. 1 f4 Kg1 is 1.16a as a possible position, and you
obvious, but the next move is not the can imagine my delight when I found
natural 2 f5, when 2...h1Q wins for I could lure the Black king to his
Black (in those pre-computer days, unfortunate square by means of a
satisfying myself that he won after 3 f6 sacrifice.
Qa8+ 4 Kg7 Qa1 took me a month) but
2 Bg2. Black must capture, 2...Kxg2, At this point, readers may care to look
and now 3 f5 h1Q 4 f6 gives 1.16a, at the position below before turning the
page. White is trying to win.
1.16a
wdRdwdwd
wdwdwdKd dw)wdwdp
dwdwdwdw wdwdw1wd
wdwdw)wd dwdwdwdw
dwdwdwdw wdwdRdwd
wdwdwdwd dKdwdwdw
dwdwdwdw wdwdwdwd
wdwdwdkd dwdwdwdk
dwdwdwdq
After 4 f6 This was my second study, and
appeared with a note that a solver who
and White cannot be prevented from had not promoted White’s pawn within
advancing his pawn to f7. seven moves was on the wrong track.
1.17 This was a spin-off from attempts to

provide an introduction to 1.16. I set up
wdRdwdwd
dw)wdwdp wdwdwdKd
wdwdw1wd dwdwdwdw
dwdwdwdw wdwdwdwd
wdwdRdwd dwdwdwdw
dKdwdwdw wdwdwdwd
wdwdwdwd dwdwdP0p
dwdwdwdk wdwdBdwd
White to play and win dwdwdwGk
The reason that a study like 1.17 is intending 1 Bf1 h2 2 Bxh2 gxh2 etc.
difficult is that the opening sacrifice This turned out to allow unwanted
seems pointless, and not until the solver alternative solutions and today I would
spots the quiet move that follows does think it undesirable anyway, but for
he realise its purpose: 1 Rh4+ Qxh4 some reason the line I looked at first
2 Rg8! This gives 1.17a, was 1 f4 Kxg1 2 f5 Kf2 3 f6 Kxe2
4-5 f8Q g1Q+ 6 Kh7 Qa7+ 7 Kg8 h2 :
1.17a
wdwdw!Kd
wdwdwdRd 1wdwdwdw
dw)wdwdp wdwdwdwd
wdwdwdwd dwdwdwdw
dwdwdwdw wdwdwdwd
wdwdwdw1 dwdwdwdw
dKdwdwdw wdwdkdw0
wdwdwdwd dwdwdwdw
dwdwdwdk
After 2 Rg8 White has only 8 Qe8+, and Black will
escape after either 8...Kf2 9 Qf8+ Kg2
and the rest is automatic: 2...Qh3+ or 8...Kd2 9 Qd8+ Kc2 10 Qc8+ Kb2.
(Black has no other check) 3 Kb4 (as 1.17, like 1.16, was outclassed by
long as White keeps to the b-file, Black others (there is a famous Mitrofanov
will have no check in the middle of the study where a White Ka5 is checked by
board) Qh4+ 4 Kb5 Qh5+ 5 Kb6 a Black Qh5, and White sacrifices his
Qh6+ 6 Kb7, and now Black has no own queen on g5 so as to hide his king
check at all. on a6), but I still have a soft spot for it.
Endgame studies 23
1.18 a discovered check, 2...Kd5 allows

3 Kd3, and other moves allow 3 Nd4
wdwdwdwd with Kd3 and Kc3 to follow (a best-
dwdwdwdw play line is 2...Kf4 3 Nd4 Ke5 4 Kd3
wdwdwdwd Kd6 5 Kc3 Kc5 6 Ne2 K~ 7 Kb2).
dwdwiwdw And how was it discovered? I had
wdwdwdwd downloaded Rafael Andrist’s database-
dwdwdwdw mining program Wilhelm for review in
wdwdKdBd British Endgame Study News, and to
hwdwHwdw see what it could do I asked it to search
for positions with K + B + N v K + N
White to play and win where the only move to win was
Bg2-h1. Excluding captures and
1.4 and 1.10 were discovered by retreats from immediate danger, it gave
rummaging through computer output. me nine such positions, of which 1.18a
For 1.18, I got the computer to do its was one of the simplest.
own rummaging. Some of the others were extremely
Play starts 1 Nf3+, and if the Black complicated. The most remarkable was
king does not stay in contact with d4 perhaps
White will play 2 Nd4 and shut in the
Black knight. If 1...Kd5 then 2 Kd3 wiwdwdwd
(2...Nb3 3 Nd2+/Nd4+), which leaves dwdwdwdw
1...Ke4 : wHwdwdwd
1.18a
dwIwdwdw
wdwdwdwd
wdwdwdwd dwhwdwdw
dwdwdwdw wdwdwdBd
wdwdwdwd dwdwdwdw
dwdwdwdw
wdwdkdwd where the entire long diagonal is open
dwdwdNdw and Bf3 seems a much more plausible
wdwdKdBd move; but the position after Bf3 and
hwdwdwdw ...Kc7 is reciprocal zugzwang, so 1 Bf3
Kc7 fails whereas 1 Bh1 Kc7 2 Bf3
After 1...Ke4 succeeds. But if Black plays 1...Ka7 he
can delay the capture of the knight until
Further checks fail, as does 2 Kd2, and move 31, and I have not looked at the
the only move to make progress is details. This is merely a curiosity;
2 Bh1. A knight move now loses to 1.18a leads to a charming little study.
1.19 (Richard Gare de Lyon) 1.20 (Thomas à Becket)
wiwdwdwd wdwdwdwd
dP0wdpdp dwdwdwdw
KdP0wdwd wdwdwdwd
0wdP0wdw dwdwdwdw
r0wdPdw0 wdwdwdwd
1pdw)pdP dwdwdpdB
q4pdw)wd wdwdwdw0
hbHwdwdw dwdwdKHk
White to play and win White cannot win, but...
Two medieval jokes to finish the 1.20 answers the constructional task
chapter. 1.19 was dedicated to the which we saw earlier in the chapter.
memory of the crusading king who was As set, White cannot win, and must
so nicknamed because he was always give stalemate by Nxf3 if he is even to
popping off to the Mediterranean. avoid losing; but take away either the
White can lose a move only in the h1 knight or the bishop, and he has a mate
corner, so 1-17 Ka6 f6 (say) 18-34 Ka6 in two. If the multiple mates in two
h6 35-51 Ka6 h5 52-68 Ka6 f5 (no with the bishop are thought undesirable,
choice now) 69 exf5 and mate at move the addition of an extra pawn on f4
75. Illegal position, of course; Black would remove them, but there seems
must have started with twelve pawns. little point and I prefer it as it is.
Chapter 2
Creating a study from a game position
The previous chapter has included brief notes on how the studies came into being,
but a great deal of detail has been skipped, and in particular we have passed lightly
over most of the false trails with which the practising composer becomes all too
familiar.
In the present chapter, we follow the gestation of a study as it happened.
We take a game position, which had an interesting move both in the play and in the
“might have been”, we distil the essence of it, and we then see what we can do to
make it even richer. On this occasion, the composer was reasonably lucky. All too
often, he isn’t; but if composers were never lucky at all, there would be no studies
for us to enjoy.
A (Tischbierek-Vorotnikov) B
wdwdwdwd wdwdwdwd
dwdwiwdw dwdkdPdw
wdwdw0Kd wdwdwIwd
dwdwdPdw dwdwdPdw
p0p0wdPd w0w0wdwd
dPdPdwdw dPdPdwdw
w)Pdwdwd w)wdwdwd
dwdwdwdw dwdwdw1w
Black to play After 7 Kf6
In February 2002, Hew Dundas sent Leonard asked what better first move
me A, from a game Tischbierek- or moves Black could have played. My
Vorotnikov, Leipzig 1999. He had seen computer thought that both 1...axb3 and
it in Leonard Barden’s Financial Times 1...Kf8 appeared to win, but 1...Kf8
column, and thought I might find it of was clearly the move that he had in
interest. Play continued 1...cxb3 2 cxb3 mind. It therefore occurred to me to try
a3 3 Kg7! a2 4 g5 a1Q 5 gxf6+ Kd7 and create a study in which this move
6 f7 Qg1+ 7 Kf6! (see B) and White was necessary in order to win.
may even be winning despite his initial The first step was to reverse the
disadvantage. colours and set up C :
C E
wdwdwdwd wdwdwdw!
dwdwdwdw dwdwdwdw
wdwdpdwd wdwdpdwd
dpdw)wdw dwdw)wdw
wdpdwdw) wdpdwdwd
dk)wdwdw dwdwIwdw
wdwIwdwd wipdwdwd
dwdwdwdw dwdwdwdw
Win by 1 Kc1 only D, after 1 h6 Kb2 ... 4 Ke3 c2
1 Kc1 clearly won; 1 h5 equally clearly (now we have E above) 5 Qh1 c1Q+
didn’t (1...Kb2 2 h6 b4 and both sides (5...c3 6 Qb7+ etc) 6 Qxc1+ Kxc1
will promote). But the refutation of 7 Kd4 Kd2 8 Kxc4 and 9-11 Kxe6 with
1 h5 didn’t include the move ...Kc3, a win for White (which was nonsense,
which played such an important role in but I am telling it as it happened). This
the game, so I moved the pawn forward being so, if we added a pawn on e7 to
to h5 to reinstate it : slow the White king down then 1 h6
ought to fail. This gave F, with which
D the computer was happy.
wdwdwdwd F
dwdwdwdw
wdwdpdwd wdwdwdwd
dpdw)wdP dwdw0wdw
wdpdwdwd wdwdpdwd
dk)wdwdw dpdw)wdP
wdwIwdwd wdpdwdwd
dwdwdwdw dk)wdwdw
wdwIwdwd
Alas, 1 h6 also wins dwdwdwdw
The intention was 1 h6 Kb2! 2 h7 b4 Win by 1 Kc1 only
3 h8Q bxc3+ 4 Ke2 c2 5 Qb8+ Kc3! as
before, but alas, the computer said that This was the sheerest good luck,
1 h6 won anyway. because the reason 1 h6 had worked
However, it occurred to me that this previously had nothing to do with the
was because of lines such as 4 Ke3 c2 line above (Black can play 8...Ke3, and
Creating a study from a game position 27
if 9 Kc5 then 9...Ke4 10 Kd6 Kf5 and it My ambitious idea was to start the
is Black who wins). The line the h-pawn back at h2, to make the Black
computer had actually found from E king run into the well known but
was 5 Qh2 Kb1 6 Qh7 Kb2 7 Qb7+ always pleasant zugzwang trap with
Kc3 8 Qh1 Kb2 9 Qg2 Kb1 10 Qb7+, Kf6/Pf7 against White Pf5/h6,
and the addition of the pawn on e7
had killed this quite fortuitously by wdwdwdwd
blocking the seventh rank. I later dwdwdpdw
moved the pawn from e7 to f7, giving wdwdwiw)
G, and wondered why I had not put it
there to start with.
dwdwdPdw
wdwdwdwd
G dwdwdwdw
wdwdwdwd
wdwdwdwd dwdwdwdw
dwdwdpdw
wdwdpdwd and to sort out the Q-side by exploiting
dpdw)wdP the equally well known win with a king
wdpdwdwd against three passed pawns :
dk)wdwdw
wdwIwdwd wdwdwdwd
dwdwdwdw dwdwdwdw
wdwdwdwd
Win by 1 Kc1 only
dwdwdwdw
G seemed to me to have distilled the
w0p0wdwd
essentials of Tischbierek-Vorotnikov. dwdwdwdw
The key moves were all there (1 h6 wdwdwdwd
Kb2 2 h7 b4 3 h8Q bxc3+ and if 4 Ke2 dwIwdwdw
then 4...c2 5 Qb8+ Kc3 and draws
at least, 1 Kc1 and wins), and the I say “ambitious” because a composer
position, unusually for a study derived who specifies so much detail in the
from a game, was actually simpler and play leaves himself little scope for
more natural than the original. But of constructional finesse; all he can do is
course this was merely a one-move to try the few available settings in turn,
study, and hardly worth publication and hope one will prove sound. In the
even as a constructional exercise. event, I struck lucky with 2.1 overleaf,
It would be very much better if we but there are lines in the analysis which
could have some play after 1 Kc1, so are definitely the computer’s and not
I worked on. mine.
2.1 or 8...c3 9 Kd4 b5 10 f6 b4 11 Kc4 Kc1

12 Qf4 Kc2 13 Qf2 Kc1 14 Kxb4! d1Q
wdwdwdwd 15 Kxc3). As before, it is the b-pawn
dpdwdpdw which must advance, 2...b5, leading to
wdw0wdwd 3 h6 b4 4 h7 bxc3+ 5 Ke2 (Ke1/Ke3
dwdwdPdw are no better) c2 6 h8Q+ :
wdpdwdwd
dk)wdwdw 2.1b
wdwIwdw) wdwdwdw!
dwdwdwdw dwdwdpdw
White to play and win wdw0wdwd
dwdwdPdw
The actual solution is easy to follow. wdpdwdwd
1 Kc1! Kxc3 2-4 h6 Kf6 and now it’s dwdwdwdw
book: 5 K~2 d5 6 Kc3 (else 6...d4) b5 wipdKdwd
(best) 7 K~2 b4 8 K~2 d4 (8...b3 dwdwdwdw
9 Kc3, 8...c3 9 Kb3/Kd3) 9 Kc1! and
Black’s moves soon run out. 2...b5, 6 h8Q+
If instead 1 h4 then 1...Kb2! 2 h5,
and Black must be careful; 2...d5 leads Moves by the Black king now lose, as
to 3 Ke3! Kxc3 4 h6 d4+ 5 Ke4 d3 6 h7 does 6...c3, but 6...f6! holds the draw.
d2 7 h8Q+ Kc2 8 Qh2, 7 Qxf6+ c3 is easy, and 7 Qb8+ is met
by 7...Kc3! as before. As in G, the key
2.1a Tischbierek-Vorotnikov moves 1...Kb2,
7...Kc3, and 1 Kc1 all appear, and the
wdwdwdwd defensive sacrifice 6...f6 is a bonus.
dpdwdpdw Leonard disclaimed all credit for the
wdwdwdwd move ...Kf8 (he said it was probably
dwdwdPdw found in the game post-mortem), and
wdpdKdwd 2.1 appeared in Correspondence Chess
dwdwdwdw as by “JDB after Tischbierek-
wdk0wdw! Vorotnikov”. It is not free from minor
dwdwdwdw inaccuracy and many people hit on
the right first move straight away, but
1 h4, 2...d5, 8 Qh2 I think it has its points. I sent the
various versions to Hew as I found
and the computer finds a win in all lines them, and he said it was fascinating to
(8...Kc1 9 Qf4 Kc2 10 Qf2 Kc1 11 Qe3 watch the study grow; I hope readers
Kc2 12 Qe2 b5 13 Kd4 Kc1 14 Qe3 etc, also have found the story of interest.
Chapter 3
Problems
This chapter will be quite short, because most of my post-beginner problems have
been in variant forms of chess. However, strict orthodoxy also has its appeal.
In the endgame study chapter, I assumed that most readers would wish to read
rather than solve. Problems, in contrast, are composed as a challenge. From here
on, therefore, positions will normally be presented without solution in the first
instance, so that those wishing to solve need not arrange cards or cut-out sheets to
avoid seeing the answer prematurely, and the solutions will appear over the page
below repeat diagrams.
3.1 3.3
wdwgwGBd wdwdwdwd
dw0w4w0w dwdwdwdw
wdpdNdPd wdwdNIwd
dw)kHR)w dBdkdwdw
wdw0wdwd wdwdp)wd
dwdpdwdw dwdw)wHw
wdw)wIwd wdwdwdwd
dwdw$wdw dwdwdwdw
White to play and mate in two White to play and mate in five
3.2 (after K. Mortsoch) 3.2 was used in the French national

solving championship in 1993. It may
wdwdwdwd have only six men, but it held up a past
dwdwdwdw and future World Solving Champion
wdwdwdwd for half an hour (I was invigilating, and
dwdwdwdw could see him working on it long after
wdwdwdwd he had filled in the rest of his paper),
dwdwdwdw and defeated another international team
wGNdkdKd solving member altogether. Maybe you
dw$wHwdw will spot the answer straight away, but
if you find it difficult you will be in
White to play and mate in four very good company.
3.1 attention, and I subsequently produced

a version in which the White rook bore
wdwgwGBd on e6 instead of e5 :
dw0w4w0w
wdpdNdPd 3.1a
dw)kHR)w
wdw0wdwd wdwdwGBd
dwdpdwdw dw0w4wdp
wdw)wIwd wdPdN$w)
dwdw$wdw dPdk)wdw
wdwdw)wd
White to play and mate in two dwdKdwdw
wdwdwdwd
White can discover check by either dwdwdwdw
knight, but the key 1 Rf7 abandons one
line of check, blocks the other, makes White to play and mate in two
no threat, gives the Black king a flight
square, and exposes White’s own king Now every Black move is set with a
to check : mate (1...Rxe6 2 Bxe6, 1...R~ 2 Nxc7)
and the solver is given no clue.
wdwgwGBd
dw0w4R0w 3.2 (after K. Mortsoch)
wdpdNdPd wdwdwdwd
dw)kHw)w dwdwdwdw
wdw0wdwd wdwdwdwd
dwdpdwdw dwdwdwdw
wdw)wIwd wdwdwdwd
dwdw$wdw dwdwdwdw
wGNdkdKd
But if Black gives the check, 1...Rxf7+, dw$wHwdw
the reply 2 Nf4 gives mate because
Black’s rook is now pinned; if Black White to play and mate in four
takes the knight instead, 1...Rxe6,
2 Rd7 is mate, Black’s rook again Again there is no clue, and the solver
being pinned; and if his king takes the just has to work it out: 1 Rd1 Kxd1
knight, 1...Kxe6, 2 Rf6 is mate. 2 Kf3 Kd2 3 Ne3 Kxe1 4 Bc3.
This would not in fact trouble an Mortsoch (1859, original source not
experienced solver, who sees at once known to me) had White Kf6, Bc7,
that 1...Rxe6 is a move that needs Nf8/d7 (4), Black Ke8 (1), mate in
Problems 31
three by 1 Kg6; I merely extended the 3.4 (with Michael McDowell)

problem to four moves by putting a
rook sacrifice on the front. It is a pity wdwdwHRG
that the rook cannot start in the open at dwdwdwhw
a1, but there would be cooks in three by wdwdwdw$
1 Ra3/.../Ra8 Kd~ 2 Kf~ and 1 Bc1 dwdNdkdw
Kd1 2 Nd4. As it is, 1 Ra1, threatening wdwdw)wd
these lines, becomes a vicious try. dwdwdPdp
pdwdwdw)
3.3 4bdwdwdK
wdwdwdwd White to play and force Black
dwdwdwdw to mate him in three
wdwdNIwd
dBdkdwdw 3.5
wdwdp)wd
dwdw)wHw wdRdwdwd
wdwdwdwd dwdwdwdw
dwdwdwdw wdwdw0w)
dwdwdBdw
White to play and mate in five wdw!wdw)
dwdndwIw
1 Kf7 (a waiting move) Kd6 2 Nf5+ wGNiwdw)
Kd5 3 Kg7 (another waiting move, dndwdwHw
making space for the Black king to
come to the right) Kxe6 4 Bc6 Kxf5 White to play and force Black
5 Bd7. Yet again there is little or to mate him in six
nothing by way of a clue.
Not at the time having seen the Here, play follows the normal rules, but
damage that a problem like 3.2 could White’s objective is to force Black to
do in a solving competition, I sent 3.3 give mate (so, in 3.4, Black will not
to a newspaper column. It lacks the move his bishop unless he has to).
vicious try 1 Ra1 of 3.2, but had it been 3.5 was composed for the 1994
saved up for a medium-level solving World Chess Solving Championship,
tourney it might have proved quite and Jonathan Mestel was one of six
effective. We notice that in 3.2 and 3.3, competitors to succeed. If you want
each man still on the board takes part in to see how you might yourself do in
the mate, and each square within the similar circumstances, give yourself an
Black king’s field is denied to him by a hour. The use of board and men is
single man. permitted.
3.4 (with Michael McDowell) leading solver approaches a challenge

of this kind.
wdwdwHRG We can’t control two knights, so let’s
dwdwdwhw capture one of them. Suppose White
wdwdwdw$ does nothing on his first move, then we
dwdNdkdw have 1...Nc3 2 Rxc3 Kd1 3 Kg4 Kd2
wdwdw)wd 4 Kh5 Kd1 5 Bg4+ Kd2 6 Qf4+ Nxf4,
dwdwdPdp
pdwdwdw) wdwdwdwd
4bdwdwdK dwdwdwdw
wdwdw0w)
White to play and force Black
to mate him in three
dwdwdwdK
wdwdwhB)
Play 1 Rh7, waiting for Black to move dw$wdwdw
his knight. If 1...Ne8/Nh5, follow up wGNiwdw)
with 2 Rf7+ Nf6 3 Bg7 (Black’s knight dwdwdwHw
having blocked White’s bishop,
White’s bishop then blocks his rook). or 1...Na3 2 Bxa3 and the same. So to
If instead 1...Ne6 then 2 Rh5+ Ng5 meet 1...Kd1 we need a move that
3 Rg7 (Black’s knight having blocked doesn’t disturb this, and it won’t be Rc7
White’s rook, White’s rook blocks his because in that case Rc6 would work
bishop). The idea was mine, the just as well – ah! 1 h3 Kd1 2 Qxd3+
polished construction was Michael’s. Nd2 3 Be4 f5 4 Bh1 f4+ 5 Kh2 f3
6 Qf1+ Nxf1 :
3.5
wdRdwdwd
wdRdwdwd dwdwdwdw
dwdwdwdw wdwdwdw)
wdwdw0w) dwdwdwdw
dwdwdBdw wdwdwdw)
wdw!wdw) dwdwdpdP
dwdndwIw wGNdwdwI
wGNiwdw) dwdkdnHB
dndwdwHw
White to play and force Black So much for my fond hopes that a
to mate him in six solver who had found the mate on h5
would waste his time looking for a
Let’s listen to Jonathan, and see how a companion mate on h3!
Chapter 4
Variant forms of chess
We now leave ordinary chess, and look at a few of the many variant forms that
have been invented over the years. Some continue to use the ordinary board and
men, some are played on different boards, some introduce new kinds of men.
4.1 (by Gyorgy Evseev, my version) 4.2
wdwdwdwd wdwdwdwd
dwdwdwdw dwdwdPdk
wdwdwdwd wdwdwdwd
dwdwdwdw dwdwdwdK
wdwdwdwd wdwdwdwd
dwdpdwdw dwdwdwdw
wdNdwdwd wdwdwdwd
dwdwdwHw dwdwdwdw
Losing (Giveaway) Chess White to play and win
White to play and win (a) ordinary chess, (b) Losing Chess
One of the most popular of all chess 4.2 is a two-part study in ordinary and
variants is Losing (Giveaway) Chess, in Losing Chess.
which capturing is compulsory and the
object is to get rid of all your men. The 4.3
king is an ordinary man and may be
captured, and a pawn may promote to rdwdwdwd
king. It is widely played among friends, dwdwdwdw
it is a common choice at end-of-season wdwdwdwd
“fun” meetings, and the endgame phase dwdNdwdw
offers particular subtlety and delight. wdwdwdwd
In The Encyclopedia of Chess Variants, dwdwdwdw
David Pritchard described this as wdwdwdNd
“the most appealing stage of the game, dwdwdwdw
a garden of surprises”, and I think all
who have explored it even superficially Losing (Giveaway) Chess
will endorse his verdict. White to play and win
4.1 (by Gyorgy Evseev, my version) 4.2
wdwdwdwd wdwdwdwd
dwdwdwdw dwdwdPdk
wdwdwdwd wdwdwdwd
dwdwdwdw dwdwdwdK
wdwdwdwd wdwdwdwd
dwdpdwdw dwdwdwdw
wdNdwdwd wdwdwdwd
dwdwdwHw dwdwdwdw
Losing (Giveaway) Chess White to play and win
White to play and win (a) ordinary chess, (b) Losing Chess
The answer to 4.1 is 1 Ne2, offering In ordinary chess, 1 f8R, as known for
Black a second capture. If now 1...dxc2 many years. In Losing Chess, the same
then 2 Nc3 c1B (any other promotion only different: 1 Kh6 Kxh6 2 f8R!
loses at once) 3 Na2 (see the left-hand
diagram below), after which the bishop 4.3
must move away and the knight gives
itself away on the square the bishop has rdwdwdwd
just left. This doesn’t work after dwdwdwdw
1...dxe2, because after 2 Ne3 e1B wdwdwdwd
3 Ng2 Black has 3...Bh4, but White can dwdNdwdw
play 2 Nd4 e1B 3 Ne6 and the knight wdwdwdwd
will have a giveaway wherever the dwdwdwdw
bishop moves (see the right-hand wdwdwdNd
diagram); and this doesn’t work after dwdwdwdw
1...dxc2, because after 2 Nd4 c1B
3 Nc6 Black can escape by 3...Bh6. Losing (Giveaway) Chess
White to play and win
wdwdwdwd
dwdwdwdw 4.1 and 4.2 were discovered by normal
exploration with board and men. 4.3
wdwdNdwd was thrown up by a definitive computer
dwdwdwdw analysis.
wdwdwdwd Black to play would have to allow
dwdwdwdw two immediate giveaways. White to
Ndwdwdwd play starts 1 Ngf4 (or Nge3 by
dwgwgwdw symmetry) Ra1 2 Ng6 Ra2 3 Ne5 :

Variants of chess 35
wdwdwdwd 4.4
dwdwdwdw wdwdwdwd
wdwdwdwd dPdwdwdw
dwdNHwdw wdwdwdwd
wdwdwdwd dwdwdwdw
dwdwdwdw wdwdwdwd
rdwdwdwd 0pdwdwdw
dwdwdwdw wdwdwdwd
dwdwdwdw
Black now has three moves. If 3...Rh2
then 4 Nb6 Rh1 5 Nbc4 Rh8 6 Nb2, Losing (Giveaway) Chess
and we have a left-to-right reflection of White to play and win
4.3 but with Black to play. If 3...Ra1
then 4 Nf6 Ra2 (4...Rb1 is equivalent) 4.5
5 Nfd7, and if 5...Rh2 then 6 Nb6
transposing into the previous line; Kdkdwdwd
if instead 5...Ra1 then 6 Ng4, with dwdwdwdw
another position where Black to play Pdwdwdwd
must allow two immediate giveaways : dndndwdw
wdwdwdwd
wdwdwdwd dwdwdwdw
dwdNdwdw wdwdwdwd
wdwdwdwd $wdwdwdw
dwdwdwdw Optional Replacement Chess
wdwdwdNd White to play and hold the draw
dwdwdwdw
wdwdwdwd 4.4 completes our brief Losing
4wdwdwdw Chess selection. 4.5 features Optional
Replacement Chess, where a player
At the top of the page, this leaves may put a captured man back on the
3...Ra8, met by 4 Ng4 Ra1 5 Ngf6 Ra2 board on any vacant square (a pawn not
6 Ng8 Ra1 7 Nge7 Ra2 (7...Rh1 8 Nb4 on the first or last rank, a bishop only
with a left-to-right reflection of the on a square of the same colour).
position above) 8 Ng6 Ra1 9 Ngf4 Ra8 In ordinary chess, Black would play to
10 Ng2 and we are back at 4.3 but with reach a standard win with a lone knight
Black to play. Moving only a knight, (1 Rc1+ Ndc7+ 2 Rxc7+ Nxc7+ 3 Ka7
White has managed to transfer the Nd5 etc). How can putting a captured
move to his opponent. knight back on the board help White?
4.4 Kdkdwdwd
wdwdwdwd hw$wdwdw
dPdwdwdw Pdwdwdwd
wdwdwdwd dndwdwdw
dwdwdwdw wdwdwdwd
wdwdwdwd dwdwdwdw
0pdwdwdw wdwdwdwd
wdwdwdwd dwdwdwdw
dwdwdwdw
Black naturally continues 2...Nxc7+,
Losing (Giveaway) Chess taking the White rook off, and White
White to play and win captures the knight and puts it back a
second time, 3 Kxa7 (Nb6) :
1 b8Q! Not 1 b8R, when 1...a2 2 Rxb3
a1N 3 R~ Nb3 wins for Black; but after wdkdwdwd
1 b8Q and the same, White has 3 Qc2. Iwhwdwdw
This is the simplest Losing Chess Phwdwdwd
position I know where a promotion to
queen is needed in order to win.
dwdwdwdw
wdwdwdwd
4.5 dwdwdwdw
wdwdwdwd
Kdkdwdwd dwdwdwdw
dwdwdwdw
Pdwdwdwd If there were no knight on b6, Black
dndndwdw would win by 3...Nd5. As it is, White
wdwdwdwd threatens to capture this knight for the
dwdwdwdw third time, this time finally taking it off
wdwdwdwd the board, and if Black moves it or
$wdwdwdw defends it he gives stalemate.
White cannot put the knight on b6 at
Optional Replacement Chess move 2 because he would be putting his
White to play and hold the draw own king in check, so he must do it in
two steps. If he tries 2 Rxc7+ (Nb7),
1 Rc1+, and if 1...Nbc7+ then 2 Ka7 hoping for axb7+ next move, Black has
and Black must let the White king out. 2...Nxc7 (Ra7) mate. If he tries 3 Kxa7
1...Ndc7+, therefore, and we have the (Nb7) with the same idea, Black can
first capture and replacement, 2 Rxc7+ reply 3...Nc5 4 Kb6 N7xa6 (Pc4), and
(Na7) : play out the book win with 2N v P.
4.6 4.7 (after J. E. H. Creed)
wdwdwdwd wdwdwdwd
iPdwdwdw dwdwdwdw
wdwdwdwd K$bdwdwi
)wdwdwdw dwdwdwdw
Kdwdwdwd wdwdwdwd
dwdwdwdw dwdwdwdw
wdwdwdwd wdwdwdwd
dwdwdwdw dwdwdwdr
White to play and win Maximummer
(a) ordinary chess, (b) Cylindrical (a) as set, selfmate in six
Chess, (c) Circular Chess (see below) (b) White P on b6, selfmate in seven
In Cylindrical Chess, the a and h files In a maximummer, Black always plays

are contiguous (so, from the normal his longest legal move (0-0 counts as 4,
game array, 1 g3 pins Black’s d-pawn). 0-0-0 as 5), but checks are normal.
Circular Chess is played on a board Black to move here would play ...Ra1,
comprising four 16-cell rings shown which would be mate even though
below in diagrammatic form : ...Bh1 would be longer than ...RxK.
4.8
wdwdwwwdwd wdwdkdwd
iPdwwwdwdw 1q1q1q1q
wdwdwwwdwd Rdwdwdwd
)wdwwwdwdw !wdwdwdw
Kdwdwwwdwd wdwdwdwd
dwdwwwdwdw dwdwdwdw
wdwdwwwdwd wdwdwdwd
dwdwwwdwdw dwdwIwdw
Grasshoppers a7-h7; mate in four
Imagine the two sides made
semicircular and joined so that a1-a8- A grasshopper moves along Q-lines,
h8-h1-a1 forms a continuous ring, but must jump one man and land on the
likewise b1-b8-g8-g1-b1 and so on. square beyond (so Rxa7 can be met by
Men start in their normal positions, and ...Gc7xa7). Black to move could play
promotion is on ranks 1 and 8 as usual. ...Ga7xa5, and if Ra8+ then ...Ga5-d8.
4.6 defence. So the move 1 a6, needed to

win in ordinary and Cylindrical Chess,
wdwdwdwd is the only move not to win in Circular!
iPdwdwdw
wdwdwdwd 4.7 (after J. E. H. Creed)
)wdwdwdw
Kdwdwdwd wdwdwdwd
dwdwdwdw dwdwdwdw
wdwdwdwd K$bdwdwi
dwdwdwdw dwdwdwdw
wdwdwdwd
White to play and win dwdwdwdw
(a) ordinary chess, (b) Cylindrical wdwdwdwd
Chess, (c) Circular Chess dwdwdwdr
In ordinary chess, 1 a6, with 1...Kxa6 Maximummer
2 b8R since b8Q would be stalemate. (a) as set, selfmate in six
This doesn’t work in Cylindrical (b) White P on b6, selfmate in seven
Chess because K + R v K isn’t a win,
but 2 b8Q is now possible because As set, 1 Rb8 Ra1+ 2 Kb6 Bh1 3 Kb5
there is no stalemate. Ba8 4 Rb7 Rh1 5 Rb6+ Bc6+ 6 Ka6
Ra1. With a pawn on b6, 1 Ka5 Ra1+
2 Kb4 Bh1 3 Kb5 Ba8 4 b7 Rh1
wdwdwwwdwd 5 b8R Bg2 6 Rb6+ and the same.
iPdwwwdwdw
4.8
wdwdwwwdwd
)wdwwwdwdw wdwdkdwd
Kdwdwwwdwd 1q1q1q1q
dwdwwwdwdw Rdwdwdwd
wdwdwwwdwd !wdwdwdw
dwdwwwdwdw wdwdwdwd
dwdwdwdw
wdwdwdwd
Neither works in Circular Chess dwdwIwdw
because K + R v K is still not a win and
2 b8Q is again stalemate, but now there Grasshoppers a7-h7; mate in four
is no need to save the b-pawn;
K + P v K is a win even with a side The concentration on a7 is a snare and
pawn, because there is no stalemate a delusion, and the breakthrough will
come on the other wing: 1 Rh6. Either 4.9 (by Kurt Smulders, my version)
1...Gh5 or 1...Ga4 will allow immediate
mate, so Black must move his king. RdwGwhwd
If 1...Kf8 then 2 Qh5 : dk)wdwdw
wHwdw$pd
wdwdwiwd dwdwdw0w
1q1q1q1q w)wHwdKd
wdwdwdw$ dwdwdwdw
dwdwdwdQ wdwdwdwd
wdwdwdwd dwdwdwdw
dwdwdwdw Neutral pawn c7; mate in two
wdwdwdwd
dwdwIwdw A player may move a neutral man as if
it were his own, or capture it as if it
If now 2...Kg8 then 3 Rxh7, and if were his opponent’s. Neutral pawns
3...Gxh7 then 4 Qe8; if 2...Ke8 then promote to neutral pieces. White can
again 3 Rxh7, and the Gf7 is pinned. play c8R, but c8Q would check his own
If instead 1...Kd8 then 2 Qa2 : king. Smulders’s original is overleaf
and many will prefer it, but the version
wdwiwdwd has a property which I like.
1q1q1q1q
wdwdwdw$ 4.10 (after J. E. H. Creed)
dwdwdwdw r4wdwdwg
wdwdwdwd inGwdwdw
dwdwdwdw wdwdwdwd
Qdwdwdwd Iwdwdwdw
dwdwIwdw wdwdwdwd
dwdwdwdw
Again both king moves can be met by wdwdndad
3 Rxh7, and if 3...Gxh7 then 4 Qg8; dwdwdwdw
and if 2...Gh5 then 3 Rxh5.
If 1 Qh5 then 1...Kd8 (not 1...Ga5, Imitator g2; mate in two
when White plays 2 Ra8+ Gd8 3 Qa5
and Black must allow a mate on d8). An imitator copies each move, and a
If 1 Qa2 then 1...Kf8, and if further move can be made only if the imitator
2 Qh2 hoping for a reflection of the can copy it. 1 Kb6 (Ih3) is legal (Black
play after 1...Kd8 2 Rxh7 then 2...Kg8 cannot play KxK) and check (White
3 Rxa7 Gh1! can). The answer: 1...Bf6 (If1)!
4.9 (by Kurt Smulders, my version) 4.10 (after J. E. H. Creed)
RdwGwhwd r4wdwdwg
dk)wdwdw inGwdwdw
wHwdw$pd wdwdwdwd
dwdwdw0w Iwdwdwdw
w)wHwdKd wdwdwdwd
dwdwdwdw dwdwdwdw
wdwdwdwd wdwdndad
dwdwdwdw dwdwdwdw
Neutral pawn c7; mate in two Imitator g2; mate in two
1 Rf7 gives a flight square and makes 1 Bb6 (If1) is not check because the
no threat, and Black has four moves. Black knight blocks the imitator, but it
1...Kxb6 2 c8N (not c8R, when Black restricts Black to moves by this knight
has 2...Rxd8/Rc7). 1...Nd7 2 c8B (not because anything else will bring the
c8Q, when Black can move the queen imitator out into the open. Again Black
away). 1...Ne6 2 c8Q (2 c8B Bd7). has four moves, and again White has
1...Nh7 2 c8R (2 c8N Ne7). Four Black four different mates in reply. Three of
moves, four different promotions. them are king moves: 1...Nc3 (Id2)
Smulders’s original setting 2 Kb4 (Ie1), 1...Nf4+ (Ig3) 2 Kb5
(Ih3), and 1...Ng3 (Ih2) 2 Ka4 (Ih1).
wdBdwdwd This leaves 1...Nd4+ (Ie3), after which
iPHwdwdR no king move works :
wHwdwdwd
4n)wdwdw r4wdwdwg
pdwdwdwd indwdwdw
)wdwdwdw wGwdwdwd
wdwdwdwI Iwdwdwdw
dwdwdwdw wdwhwdwd
dwdwfwdw
yields to 1 Na6, with similar play and wdwdwdwd
an extra line 1...Rxa6 2 Rxb7 where dwdwdwdw
the neutral pawn is captured. Many will
think the version unjustified, but “four The answer is 2 Bxd4 (Ig1), a mating
Black moves, four different mates” is retreat along the line of check quite
a property I like in a two-mover, and it unlike anything that can happen in
seems particularly appropriate here. ordinary chess.
Chapter 5
How did we get here ?
I have always been fascinated by “retro” problems, where the solver is given a
position and has to deduce something about the play which led up to it, and when
I was running the British Chess Magazine problem column I found that my annual
month devoted to such problems attracted as much interest as the rest of the year’s
offerings put together. Never mind that the “games” must have been wholly
unrealistic; it was the logical demonstrations that appealed.
5.1 5.2
rdwdw4kd rdb1kgn4
dp0pdp0p 0p0w0p0w
pdwdwhbd wdw0wdwd
dwdwdwdw dwdwdwdw
wdwdwdwd wdwdwdwd
dPdwdwdw dwdwdPdw
wdP)P)P) P)P)PdP)
dwGwdwIw $NGQIBHR
What was White’s first bishop move? Position after Black’s 8th move
What was the game?
Retros come in many flavours. Some,
like 5.1, pose explicit questions as to 5.3
the nature of the previous play. Some,
like 5.2, require a complete game to a rhb1kgn4
given position (and note that it must be 0p0p0p0p
a game to precisely the move stipulated wdwdwdwd
– it is easy to reach 5.2 after White’s dwdwdwdw
7th move, but this is irrelevant). Some wdwdwdwd
require deductions of other kinds (for dwdwdwdw
example, that a king or one of his rooks P)P)P)P)
has moved, so he cannot castle on that $NGK!BHR
side). And so on...
We met ORC in Chapter 4. In 5.3, Optional Replacement Chess
White’s K and Q have changed places. How soon can we reach this position?
5.1 5.2
rdwdw4kd rdb1kgn4
dp0pdp0p 0p0w0p0w
pdwdwhbd wdw0wdwd
dwdwdwdw dwdwdwdw
wdwdwdwd wdwdwdwd
dPdwdwdw dwdwdPdw
wdP)P)P) P)P)PdP)
dwGwdwIw $NGQIBHR
What was White’s first bishop move? Position after Black’s 8th move
What was the game?
At first sight, 5.1 seems innocent
enough, if we ignore the curious fact No, it wasn’t the b8 knight that was
that a knight must have been allowed in captured, it was the g8 knight, and the
to capture the bishop originally on f1 b8 knight is now at g8: 1 f3 h5 2 Kf2
(well, funny things happen in retros). Nh6 3 Kg3 h4+ 4 Kxh4 Ng4+ 5 Kxg4
However, we then notice that Black’s d6+ 6 Kg3 Nd7 7 Kf2 Nf6 8 Ke1 Ng8.
c8 bishop, like White’s f1 bishop, must 5.2 remained unpublished for several
have been captured at home, and hence years, and in the meantime I came
that the bishop at g6 must be a across a statement that a gap of more
promoted pawn. Furthermore, it can than three moves (two by one side, one
only have promoted on b1, so it must by the other) between a uniquely
have captured its way as a pawn from realisable game and the shortest game
e7 across to a2, captured back to b1, to the same position was surely
and then escaped as a bishop, all before impossible. This caused me to produce
White’s b-pawn blocked the way out by a position where the gap was four
advancing to b3. White moves and three Black (from the
If White’s c1 bishop had been still at game array, move White Ng1 to f4, Pf2
home while all this was going on, only to f3, Ph2 off, Ke1 to h2, Black Ng8 to
the a-pawn, the a-rook, and the two e4, Pf7 to f6, giving a position easily
knights would have been available for reached after Black’s 7th move but
the advancing e-pawn to capture: not reachable after White’s 11th only by
enough. So White’s c1 bishop also playing 1 f3 Nf6 2 Kf2 Ne4+ 3 Ke3 f6
must have been captured at home, 4 h4 Kf7 5 Nh3 Kg6 6 h5+ Kxh5 7 Kf4
releasing his queen and his h-rook as Kh6 8 Kg4 Kg6 9 Nf4+ Kf7 10 Kh3
additional fodder for the Black e-pawn, Ke8 11 Kh2).
and White’s first bishop move must This prompted others to explore the
have been b8-a7. field, and my record was soon beaten :
How did we get here? 43
5.2a (by Hiroshi Nagano) 5.4
rhb1wgw4 whb1kgw4
0p0p0w0p 0p0w0p0p
wdwdw0wd wdwdwdwd
dwdndwdk dwdpdwdw
wdwdwdwH wdwdwdwd
dwdwdPdw dwdPdwdw
P)P)PdP) P)PdP)P)
$NGQIB$w $wGQIBHR
Position after White’s 11th move Progressive Chess
What was the game? Position after series 5 (a) as set,
(b) White Pd3 on d4
After Black’s 6th move, easy; after Where were the missing men captured?
White’s 11th, only 1-2 Nh4 Nd5 3 f3 f6
4-6 Kg4 Ke5 7 Kh3 Kf4 8 Rg1 Kg5 In Progressive Chess, like Losing Chess
9 Kg3 Kh6! 10 Kf2 Kh5 11 Ke1. This a game which is widely played, White
is a lovely thing, simple, subtle, and plays one move, Black two, White
striking. Far from bewailing the loss of three, and so on (so the moves to date
my short-lived record, I was delighted have been W, BB, WWW, BBBB, and
to see what I had apparently inspired. WWWWW).
5.3 5.5
rhb1kgn4 rdwdkgw4
0p0p0p0p 0p0p0p0p
wdwdwdwd wdwdwdwd
dwdwdwdw dwdwdwdw
wdwdwdwd wdwdwdwd
dwdwdwdw dwdwdwdw
P)P)P)P) wdwdwdwd
$NGK!BHR dwGwIwdw
Optional Replacement Chess Maximummer
How soon can we reach this position? White to play and win
In four moves only: 1 e4 Nf6 2 Qf3 We met maximummers in Chapter 4.

Nxe4 (Pe2) 3 Qf6 Nxf6 (Qg8!) 4 Kd1 In 5.5, Black is assumed to have been
Nxg8 (Qe1). maximumming from the start.
5.4 5.5
whb1kgw4 rdwdkgw4
0p0w0p0p 0p0p0p0p
wdwdwdwd wdwdwdwd
dwdpdwdw dwdwdwdw
wdwdwdwd wdwdwdwd
dwdPdwdw dwdwdwdw
P)PdP)P) wdwdwdwd
$wGQIBHR dwGwIwdw
Progressive Chess Maximummer
Position after series 5 (a) as set, White to play and win
(b) White Pd3 on d4
Where were the missing men captured? The essence of the argument is as
follows: (a) Black’s last move must
(a) is straightforward, a possible line of have been with his a-rook, else he
play being 1 Nc3, 2 d5 Nf6, 3 Na4 Nb6 would have had a longer alternative;
Nxa8, 4 Nd7 Nb6 Nxa8 Nb6, 5 d3 Be3 (b) he can never have moved his king in
Bxb6 Be3 Bc1. Minor variations are reply to a check, since this check could
possible, but in each case Black’s Ra8 only have come from a knight, and a
must have been captured at home, his pawn capture would have provided a
Ng8 on b6, and White’s Nb1 on a8. longer alternative; (c) he can never
This fails in (b) because the pawn on have moved his king other than in
d4 blocks the bishop’s path to b6, and reply to a check, nor can he have
something quite different is needed: moved his h-rook, since a knight move
1 Nf3, 2 Nc6 Rb8, 3 Nd4 Nxc6 Nxb8, or a pawn-two would have provided a
4 d5 Nf6 Nd7 Nxb8, 5 d3 d4 Nd2 Nf3 longer alternative. So Black cannot
Ng1. Again minor variations are play 0-0-0, but he can play 0-0.
possible, but in each case Black’s Ra8 The winning procedure is now clear
must have been captured on b8, his (force ...0-0, force ...Kh8, mate him).
Nb8 on c6, and White’s Ng1 on b8. The simplest sequence appears to be
Black’s original Ng8 is now at b8, 1 Bh6 Rd8 2 Bxg7 Ra8 3 Bd4 Rd8
and White’s Nb1 at g1; every capture 4 Bxa7 Ra8 5 Bd4 Ra1+ 6 Bxa1 Bh6
has occurred on a different square. 7 Be5 Bc1 8 Bxc7 Bh6 9 Bf4 0-0
And why does this fail in (a)? 10 Bd6 Bc1 11-16 Kxb7 Bc1
Because White cannot lose a move 17-18 Kxd7 Bc1 19 Kxe7 Bh6 20 Kf6
during series 5; he can play Pd2 to d3 Bc1 21 Bxf8 Bh6 22 Bxh6 Kh8
and Nb1 to g1 in four moves, six, or 23 Ke7 f5 24 Kf8 f4 25 Bg7, and of
any larger number, but not in five. course there are many alternatives.
Chapter 6
Joke compositions
By its very nature, there is no precise definition of a joke composition. If there
were, it would not be a joke. Sometimes the joke is merely in the presentation,
sometimes, indicated by “(perhaps)”, the normal rules are to be bent a little ...
6.1 6.3
wdwdw4wI kdwdwdwd
dwiw)wdw dw!wdwdw
wdwHwGq0 wdwdwdwd
HwdQdBdP dwdwdwdw
wdwdwdwd wdwdwdwd
dwdwdwdw dwdwdwdp
wdwdwdwd wdwdwdw)
dRdwdwdw dwdwdwdK
White to play and win (perhaps) Fuddled men; mate in two
6.2 In 6.3, the men have had a little too

much to drink: not s’mush azh t’totally
wdwdwdQd incaPASHitate’m, y’unnershtan’, but
)wdwdwdw enough to slow them down a bit. More
wdwdwdwd precisely, a fuddled man cannot make
dwdwdwdw two moves in succession; having
wdwdwdwd moved, it must wait a move to get its
dwdwdwdp wits back before it can move again.
wdwdwdq4
dwdwIwdk When I was running the BCM problem
column, I used to print an “April Fool”
Grasshopper Chess problem each year. One year, I set the
White to play and win (perhaps) question, “Put a White king on g1,
(a) as set, (b) White Pa7 to b7 White man on c1, Black king on c3,
Black man on g3, White to play and
We met the Grasshopper in 4.8. In 6.2, win.” Well?
promotion is to GRBN but not to Q. Answer as 6.4 overleaf.
6.1 As set, 1 a8G mate, and no “perhaps”

about it.
wdwdw4wI With the pawn on b7, any promotion
dwiw)wdw will leave Black stalemated, and if say
wdwHwGq0 1 Kf1 then 1...Ga8 and Black’s rook is
HwdQdBdP free. But the stipulation does say
wdwdwdwd “perhaps”: 1 b8, promoting to a Black
dwdwdwdw grasshopper. This gives Black a move,
wdwdwdwd and play unfolds 1...Gh8 2 Kf1 Gf8
dRdwdwdw 3 Ge8 Gd8 4 Gc8 Gb8 5 Ga8 mate.
A pawn on the eighth rank was once
White to play and win (perhaps) explicitly allowed to remain a pawn
by the laws of the game. Promotion
Try 1 exf8R: no, this puts an extra to an opposing piece has never been
guard on d8, and 1...Qg7+ forces deliberately allowed, though some early
stalemate. Try 1 exf8N: no, extra guard codes did not explicitly forbid it.
on d7, and 1...Qh7+ forces stalemate.
1 exf8B Qg8+ similarly (extra guard 6.3
now on d6). But if White plays 1 exf8
remaining a pawn we have 1...Qg7+ kdwdwdwd
2 Bxg7 releasing d8, 1...Qh7+ 2 Bxh7 dw!wdwdw
releasing d7, and 1...Qg8+ 2 Qxg8 wdwdwdwd
releasing d6, while 1...Qxf6+ destroys dwdwdwdw
the stalemate at once and White will wdwdwdwd
win as soon as the checks have run out. dwdwdwdp
wdwdwdw)
6.2 dwdwdwdK
wdwdwdQd Fuddled men; mate in two
)wdwdwdw
wdwdwdwd White playzh – hic! – sorry, plays
dwdwdwdw 1 Qb6, which temporarily immobilizes
wdwdwdwd her and allows the Black king to move:
dwdwdwdp 1...K~. White now plays 2 Kg1, after
wdwdwdq4 which his queen, having recovered her
dwdwIwdk wits, sees that she can now capture the
Black king, so this is check; and
Grasshopper Chess Black’s king, being temporarily
White to play and win (perhaps) immobilized in his turn, cannot move
(a) as set, (b) White Pa7 to b7 out of check, so it is mate.
Joke compositions 47
6.4 (April Fool) In one of the early hands in Victor

Mollo’s book Bridge in the Menagerie,
wdwdwdwd which we shall meet again, the Rueful
dwdwdwdw Rabbit, defending against Four Spades,
wdwdwdwd discarded when any sane defender
dwdwdwdw would have ruffed, thus (as the cards
wdwdwdwd lay) denying declarer a later entry to
dwmwdwjw dummy and leaving him with no play
wdwdwdwd for a contract which against normal
dwfwdwow defence would have been cast-iron.
How had the Rabbit produced such
White to play and win an inspired double-dummy defence,
almost as if he could see through the
It’s draughts! (This is the game which backs of the cards, “not that such a gift
is known as “checkers” in America.) could normally help him to any great
Play 1 g1-h2 g3-f2 (else White will extent”? It turned out that he had
capture, crown his remaining man, thought he was defending against 3NT,
and play out the book win with two and so had succeeded in breaking an
kings against one) 2 c1-d2! c3^e1 unbreakable contract because he did not
3 h2-g1 : know what it was.
This started me thinking: can we
wdwdwdwd do something similar at Kriegspiel?
dwdwdwdw In Kriegspiel, a player sees only his
wdwdwdwd own men, and an umpire tells him
whether the move he is trying is legal
dwdwdwdw (if it isn’t, he takes it back and tries
wdwdwdwd another). The umpire also announces
dwdwdwdw checks (as “on the file”, “on the rank”,
wdwdwjwd “on the longer diagonal through the
dwdwmwow king”, “on the shorter diagonal”, or
“from a knight”) and captures.
Black must now play 3...e1-d2, and he Therefore, if Black is down to a bare
loses both his men. king (which White knows, because the
We may note that White must play umpire has announced captures) and
his moves in the right order. If he plays the umpire announces “Black has
1 c1-d2 c3^e1 2 g1-h2, hoping for moved”, is it possible for the White
2...g3-f2 3 h2-g1 and the same, Black men to be in a position such that he can
has 2...e1-f2, and after 3 h2^f4 f2-g1 he mate the Black king in one if and only
has reached the double corner with a if he does not know where it is?
draw. Answer as 6.5 overleaf.
6.5 6.6
wdwdwdwd rdwdwdw4
dwdwdw)Q dp0wdp0p
wdwdw$wd pdndwhqd
dwdwdw$w gkdbdwdR
wdwdwdwd wdPdwdwd
dBGwdwdw )K0wdwdw
wdwIwdwd wdw)wGwd
dwdwdwdw dwdwdwdw
Kriegspiel Cylinder Chess
Black is down to a bare king Should White resign?
White hears “Black has moved”; can
he now mate in one? 6.7 (version by Noam Elkies)
If Black’s king is somewhere in the wiwdwdwd

rectangle a7-e8, White does not know dw0Pdpdw
where it is (even if it has just come KdBdw)wd
from f7, which White will have dwdwdwdw
known because the umpire will have wdwdwdwd
announced the double check, it could dwdwdwdw
now be on either e8 or e7), but g8Q is wdwdwdwd
mate in all cases. If, alternatively, it is dwdwdwdw
on a3, White does know where it is
(it has just moved out of a check from a Stalemate in one (perhaps)
bishop, which the umpire will have (a) as set, (b) add Black rook on c8
announced, and it is soon seen that
“Black has moved” can only have been 6.8
announced if it is now on a3), but there
is no mate. wdwdwdwd
dwdwdwdw
We met Cylinder Chess (a and h files w)wdwdwd
contiguous) in Chapter 4. dwdwdwdw
In 6.8, you naturally play 1 b7, but wdwdwdpd
he replies 1...a1R with a glint in his dwdwdwdp
eye, and you can see that he is going to pdPdwdw$
meet 2 b8Q with 2...0-0-0 mate. How dwdwiwdK
can you outwit him without appealing
to the tournament director? See text (left)
6.9 (version by Noam Elkies) 6.10a
rdwdwdwI rdwdrdkd
dwdwdw)P dpdqdpZp
wdwdw!wd pdndw!pd
dwdwgwdw dwdpZwGw
wdwdwdwd wdw)wdwd
dwdwdwdw dPZwdwdw
wdwdwdwd PZwdw)P)
dwdwdwdk $wdwdRIw
White to play and save the game White to play and win
(perhaps)
6.10b, left
In 6.9, you are playing with an ancient 6.10c, right
and venerable chess set in an ancient
and venerable club and you appear to wdwdwdkd
be hopelessly lost, but there is dwdwdw)w
(perhaps) a way out of the morass... wdwdwZwd
dwdwZKdw
As everyone knows, the Loch Ness wdwZwdwd
Monster has two properties: (a) it dkZwdwdw
undoubtedly exists; (b) nobody has w1wdwdwd
actually seen it. In Loch Ness Chess, dKdwdwdw
the long black diagonal from b2 to g7
represents the dark and mysterious 6.10b: Is White mated?
loch, and as long as a man on the loch 6.10c: White to play and win
is observed by another man (of either
colour), it is perfectly safe. However, 6.10d
as soon as it is no longer observed,
the monster appears and swallows it. wdwdwdwd
A pawn “observes” the squares it can dwdwdwZw
capture to. From the game array, play wdk)wZwd
1 d4 (safe, White’s queen observes d4) !wdwZw)w
e5 (also safe, White’s Pd4 observes e5), wdwZwdwd
and if 2 dxe5 the monster swallows the dwIwdwdw
now unobserved pawn on e5. wZwdwdwd
In 6.10a to 6.10d, the task is to solve dwdwdwdB
the given problem both in ordinary
chess and in Loch Ness Chess. What was the last move?
6.6 6.7 (version by Noam Elkies)
rdwdwdw4 wiwdwdwd
dp0wdp0p dw0Pdpdw
pdndwhqd KdBdw)wd
gkdbdwdR dwdwdwdw
wdPdwdwd wdwdwdwd
)K0wdwdw dwdwdwdw
wdw)wGwd wdwdwdwd
dwdwdwdw dwdwdwdw
Cylinder Chess; should White resign? Stalemate in one (perhaps)
(a) as set, (b) add Black rook on c8
First thoughts: no, of course he
shouldn’t, he has just given mate. 6.8
Second thoughts: where did the
mating pawn come from? Not from d3, wdwdwdwd
which would have involved two dwdwdwdw
captures and Black has only lost one w)wdwdwd
man. So it must have come from c2, dwdwdwdw
and Black must be in the middle of wdwdwdpd
taking it en passant. The completion of dwdwdwdp
this move will leave White mated (the pdPdwdw$
Black queen is pinning the rook on h5), dwdwiwdK
so the answer is “yes”.
Correct answer: No. It is not polite to 1 b7 a1R intending 2...0-0-0 mate;
resign before your opponent has now what?
finished moving.
Echo Black’s promotion by 2 b8R, and
6.7 (top of next column). As set, now you can meet 2...0-0-0 by playing
promote to king; with a Black rook 3 RxR en passant.
added on c8, promote to a Black king. A few years ago, there was a vogue
The original version of this was for problems incorporating each of
submitted as a joke entry to a tourney the “odd” moves of modern chess
for stalemate problems which were (underpromotion, castling, en passant
unorthodox in some way, and the capture). Well, what those who take
judges awarded it a “Dishonourable themselves seriously can treat as a
Mention” of which I was immensely serious exercise, those of us who are
proud. Noam Elkies subsequently less serious can use as the medium for a
improved the construction. joke ...
6.9 (version by Noam Elkies) move on g7. This doesn’t work in Loch
Ness chess because the bishop’s move
rdwdwdwI leaves the queen unobserved, but now
dwdwdw)P there is no need for White to bring up a
wdwdw!wd second man to guard g7; he can play
dwdwgwdw 1 Qg7 mate at once. The logic is the
wdwdwdwd same as that which we saw after 1 d4
dwdwdwdw e5 2 dxe5 (e5 off) from the game array;
wdwdwdwd the queen is safe from the monster
dwdwdwdk since she is observed by the Black king,
but if Black takes the queen he will
White to play and save the game be unobserved and the monster will
(perhaps) swallow him.
Well, we did say you were playing 6.10b

with an ancient and venerable set in
an ancient and venerable chess club, wdwdwdwd
so play 1 g8N, discreetly making sure dwdwdwZw
that you take a loose-headed knight wdwdwZwd
from the box. You can now meet dwdwZwdw
1...Bxf6+ by 2 Nxf6, carefully picking wdwZwdwd
up the knight by its head and dkZwdwdw
leaving the base behind to block the pin w1wdwdwd
line... dKdwdwdw
6.10a Is White mated?
(a) ordinary chess, (b) Loch Ness Chess
rdwdrdkd
dpdqdpZp In ordinary chess, obviously yes. In
pdndw!pd Loch Ness chess, perhaps not, on the
dwdpZwGw grounds that after White has played
wdw)wdwd KxQ Black’s recapture KxK would
dPZwdwdw allow his own king to be eaten by
PZwdw)P) the monster, and surely this is not
$wdwdRIw something that he can permit?
But Black doesn’t have to recapture
White to play and win with his king. He can withdraw his king
(a) ordinary chess, (b) Loch Ness Chess by say Kb4, and let the monster do his
work for him. So again the answer is
In ordinary chess, 1 Bh6 with mate next yes.
6.10c In ordinary chess, e5xd6 e.p.+,

preceded by d7-d5 and e4-e5+ :
wdwdwdkd
dwdwdw)w wdwdwdwd
wdwdwZwd dwdpdwdw
dwdwZKdw wdkdwdwd
wdwZwdwd !wdwdw)w
dwZwdwdw wdwdPdwd
wZwdwdwd dwIwdwdw
dwdwdwdw wdwdwdwd
White to play and win dwdwdwdB
(a) ordinary chess, (b) Loch Ness Chess
From here, 1 e4-e5+ d7-d5 2 e5xd6
In ordinary chess, 1 Kf6 with 1...Kh7 produces the given position.
2 Kf7 to follow. In Loch Ness chess, This couldn’t have happened in Loch
1 Ke6 (to stop 1...Kf7) and the same. Ness chess because Black’s d7-d5
Not however 1 Kg5 hoping for 1...K~ would have cut off the queen’s
2 Kh5 Kg8 3 Kh6 and once more the observation of the pawn on e5, but
same, because 1...Kf7 threatens 2...Ke7 White could have played c5xd6 e.p.+
withdrawing observation of the pawn. instead. Again the queen’s observation
This forces White to play 2 Kh6 at of e5 would have been cut off, and his
once, and after 2...Kg8 3 K~ Kf7 the previous move could have been with a
game is drawn. pawn, knight, or rook moving to this
square to discover check, say :
6.10d
wdwdwdwd
wdwdwdwd dwdpdwZw
dwdwdwZw wdkdwZwd
wdk)wZwd !w)wZw)w
!wdwZw)w wdwZPdwd
wdwZwdwd dwIwdwdw
dwIwdwdw wZwdwdwd
wZwdwdwd dwdwdwdB
dwdwdwdB
What was the last move? Now 1 e4-e5+ (e5 off) d7-d5 2 c5xd6
(a) ordinary chess, (b) Loch Ness Chess duly produces the given position.
Interlude
The remaining chapters will be quite short, and it will not be typographically
convenient to continue giving the problems with solutions over the page.
I am therefore giving all the remaining problems here. The last two of the bridge
frolics (10.2 and 10.3) are not posed as problems.
dwdwd wdwd*dwd
wdwdw dwdwdwdw
dwdwd wdwdwdwd
wdwdw dwdwdwdw
HNHNH wdwdwdwd
dwdwdwdw
7.1 On a 5x5 board, White has five wdwdwdwd
policemen who start in a straight line at dwdwdwHw
the bottom, and Black has a burglar
who may start anywhere. All men move 7.3 (after George Jelliss) On an empty
as knights, but there is no capturing. board, put a White knight on its home
Can White play to trap the burglar, or square g1. White aims to reach Black’s
can the burglar run for ever? palace, e8, but after each move Black
can place a mine on any empty square,
dwdwdwd and this square will henceforth be
barred to the knight. Can the knight
NdwdwdN reach the palace, or will it eventually
dwdwdwd have to step on a mine?
wdwdwdw
dwdwdwd 8.1 Given a currency with coins of
wdwdwdw value 1, 2, 5, 10, 20, 50, and 100,
dwdNdwd obtain four sums of money, each
consisting of exactly two coins and
7.2 This time there are only three each being twice as large as its
policemen on a 7x7 board, but they can predecessor.
move simultaneously. The policemen
start from the position given above, and 8.2 Given the same currency, obtain a
the burglar is on a dark square away sum of money which can be realised by
from a corner. The burglar moves first; a single coin, by two coins, by three, by
can the policemen catch him? four, or by five.
54 Fifty-one flights of chess fancy (and a few other frolics)
8.3 Given eleven coins of which at

1
most two are duds, and given that (a) a
dud is either heavy or light, (b) two
heavy or two light duds balance each 2 3 4
other, and (c) a heavy dud and a light
dud balance two true coins, identify the 5 6
duds if any in five weighings. 7
8 9
1
10 11 12
2 3 4 5
13
6 7 8
1
9 10 11 12
2 3 4
13
5 6 7 8 9
9.1 On the solitaire pegboard above,

solve the following problems. 10 11 12
Vacate 6, play to finish at 6.
Vacate 1, mark the peg at 13, and
play to finish with this peg back at 13. 13
Vacate 1, mark the pegs at 6 and 8,
and play to interchange these pegs and 9.3 On the solitaire pegboard above,
to clear the rest of the board. solve the following problems.
Vacate 1, mark the peg at 13, and
9.2 On the solitaire pegboard at the play to finish with this peg back at 13.
top of the next column, solve the Vacate 7, play to interchange the
following problems. pegs at 5 and 9.
Vacate 7, play to finish at 7. Vacate 2, play to interchange the
Vacate 7, mark the pegs at 1 and 13, pegs at 1 and 5.
and play to interchange these pegs and
to clear the rest of the board. 10.1 Construct a bridge deal in which
Vacate 7, play to interchange the each of the four hands, if declarer, can
pegs at 3 and 11 similarly. make 3NT against any defence.
Chapter 7
Three knight puzzles
These are not quite chess, but anything with a knight in it cannot be very far away.
7.1 (Burglar and five policemen) gives a position we shall see again :
On a 5x5 board, White has five dwdwd

policemen who start in a straight line at
the bottom,
wdwhw
HNHwd
wdNdw
dwdwd dwHwd
wdwdw
dwdwd Black can only move to b5 or e2, and
wdwdw White plays to d4 and shuts him in.
HNHNH If Black is on b4, White plays N4e3
and Nbc1, Black goes to d5/a2 and
and Black has a burglar who may start back to b4, and it’s much the same :
anywhere. All men move as knights,
but there is no capturing. Can White dwdwd
play to trap the burglar, or can the
burglar run for ever?
whwdw
The policemen should always win.
dwHNH
They play to c4/b3/c3/d3/c2, which wdNdw
they can always do, and after Black has dwHwd
moved there are three cases :
It’s White’s move, but no matter; White
dnhwd plays say Ned5, Black goes to a2, and
Nb4 shuts him in.
whNdw If Black is on c5, simplest is N2a3.
dNHNd If Black goes to e4, Ndc5 forces him to
wdNdw d2, and we have the same pattern yet
dwdwd again. If Black goes to a4 it takes a
little longer, but Nbc5 forces him to b2,
If Black is on b5, White plays N4a3, and Nc2 followed by N2e3 once again
Black can only go to d4, and Ndc1 sets up the familiar pattern.
7.2 (Burglar and three policemen) holds out longest by returning to d4,
and White plays to a4/g4 plus a square
This time there are only three which threatens d4, say c2 :
policemen on a 7x7 board, but they can
move simultaneously. The policemen dwdwdwd
start from the position given below, wdwdwdw
dwdwdwd
dwdwdwd NdwhwdN
NdwdwdN dwdwdwd
dwdwdwd wdNdwdw
wdwdwdw dwdwdwd
dwdwdwd
wdwdwdw There are now two cases. Suppose
dwdNdwd first that Black keeps away from the
side policemen, say by going to c6. The
and the burglar is on a dark square policemen play to b6/e5/d4 :
away from a corner. The burglar moves
first; can the policemen catch him? dwdwdwd
If he starts in the centre, he can be wHndwdw
caught, but from any other non-corner
square he can run for ever. He moves to
dwdwHwd
one of the squares shown below :
wdwHwdw
dwdwdwd
wdwdwdw
dwdndwd dwdwdwd
whwdwhw
dwhnhwd There follows b4 (holds out longest),
ndndndn d5/d3/c2 :
dwhnhwd
whwdwhw
dwdndwd dwdwdwd
wdwdwdw
dwdNdwd
Now he always has four options, and
the police can only block three of them.
whwdwdw
However, if he starts in the centre, he
dwdNdwd
cannot reach this group. His first move wdNdwdw
can threaten only one square in the dwdwdwd
group, c5, e5, c3, or e3, and White goes
to c5, e5, and c3 or e3 as needed. Black c6 (holds out longest), e5/b4/d4 :
Three knight puzzles 57
dwdwdwd 7.3 (after George Jelliss)

wdndwdw
On an empty board, put a White knight
dwdwHwd on its home square g1. White aims to
wHwHwdw reach Black’s palace, e8, but after each
dwdwdwd move Black can place a mine on any
wdwdwdw empty square. Who will win?
dwdwdwd White can always succeed. He starts
by playing Ng1-e2, after which he has
a5, c6/c4/b3 (or e7, c6/d5/f5 with an 24 ways of reaching e8 in four more
equivalent position) : moves and each path consists of four
moves in different directions :
dwdwdwd
wdNdwdw wdwd*dwd
hwdwdwd dwdwdwdw
wdNdwdw wdwdwdwd
dNdwdwd dwdwdwdw
wdwdwdw wdwdwdwd
dwdwdwd dwdwdwdw
wdwdNdwd
b7, d6/a5/c5 and he’s caught. dwdwdwdw
If from the position d4, a4/g4/c2
the burglar tries a square adjacent to Black’s best defence is to mine the
one of the side policemen, say b5, the squares c7/d6/f6/g7 next to his palace,
policemen play to d4/c3/e3 : but if White always moves in a
direction opposite to that from the
dwdwdwd Black palace to the square he has just
wdwdwdw mined, he will breach Black’s defensive
wall just in time. For example, if Black
dndwdwd mines c7, two left and one down from
wdwHwdw his palace, White moves two right and
dwHwHwd one up: Ne2-g3. If Black continues by
wdwdwdw mining f6, two down and one right,
dwdwdwd White moves two up and one left:
Ng3-f5. If Black now mines d6, two
Now d6 (which holds out longest) can down and one left, White moves two up
be met by b5/c4/e4, and we have a and one right, Nf5-g7, and Black
90-degree rotation of a position which cannot place a mine on g7 because the
we have already seen. White knight is already there.
Chapter 8
Three coin puzzles
The first two of these, though amusing, are mathematically trivial, and would have
been discovered by anybody who cared to look for them. Very probably somebody
did, though nobody claimed to have done so when they appeared in The Games
and Puzzles Journal a few years ago. The third is of somewhat heavier metal.
8.1 (once, twice, four times ...) 8.3 (11 coins, < 2 duds, 5 weighings)
To get four sums of money from coins Given eleven coins of which at most
of value 1, 2, 5, 10, 20, 50, and 100, two are duds, and given that (a) a dud is
each consisting of two coins and each either heavy or light, (b) two heavy
being twice as large as its predecessor, duds or two light duds balance each
set other, and (c) a heavy dud and a light
dud balance two true coins, the duds if
15 = 5 + 10 any can be identified in five weighings
30 = 10 + 20 by balancing
60 = 10 + 50
120 = 20 + 100 1, 3, 4 against 2, 5, 6
1, 4, 2 against 3, 7, 8
8.2 (one potato, two potatoes ...) 1, 2, 3 against 4, 9, 10
5, 7, 9 against 6, 8, 10
To obtain a sum of money which can be
realised by one, two, three, four, or five and setting up a fifth weighing in the
of the above coins, consider light of the results. It may be verified
that each of the 81 possible sets of
20 results from these four weighings can
10 + 10 arise in precisely three ways.
10 + 5 + 5 This was a fortunate arithmetical
5+5+5+5 accident. If we have n coins, there are
10 + 5 + 2 + 2 + 1 2n2 + 1 possibilities, and w weighings
give 3w different sets of results.
This was the only solution with the 2.112 + 1 = 35, and a weighing of three
English coinage as it was some years coins out of eleven against three gives
ago, but now the existence of a £2 coin 81 = 34 possibilities whether the result
provides an alternative. is left down, right down, or balance.
Chapter 9
Three thirteen-hole pegboard puzzles
I have done little work on “full-size” peg solitaire boards since completing The Ins
and Outs of Peg Solitaire in 1985, and this little can be found in issue 28 (2003) of
George Jelliss’s The Games and Puzzles Journal and in a paper “New problems on
old solitaire boards” which George Bell and I wrote for the colloquium on Board
Games Studies at Oxford in 2005. The latter is due to be published in Volume 8 of
Journal of Board Games Studies, and in the meantime George has posted a copy
on the web.
However, during 1987 and 1988 I examined some smaller boards, and found
some very attractive problems on them. A small selection appears below. Most of
these problems have not been published before, at least not by me, though it is
quite possible that somebody else rediscovered and published them in the interim
(or even discovered them before I did).
It should perhaps be stressed that a solitaire problem, unlike a chess problem,
rarely has a unique solution. Even if the jumps required are uniquely determined,
the player normally has a measure of latitude in the order in which he makes them.
The solutions that follow are therefore specimens only.
9.1 (“Star Peg”) 12-4, 13-8, 9-11, 2-10, 8-1-6-13-8-6.

The harder problem “Vacate 1, play to
1 finish at 1” is solved in The Ins and
Outs of Peg Solitaire.
Vacate 1, mark 13, play to leave the
2 3 4 5 marked peg at 13: 6-1, 5-3, 12-4, 1-8-6,
2-4, 9-3, 13-6-1-8-13.
Play to interchange 6 and 8: 6-1, 5-3,
6 7 8 2-4, 13-6, 12-10, 9-3-11, 8-13-6, 1-8.
Both the marked pegs must travel by
the corners; a simple triangular
9 10 11 12 interchange such as 6-1, 8-6, 1-8 is not
possible.
Despite the unfortunate limitation of
13 being unable to start by vacating the
central hole, this is an attractive little
Vacate 6, play to finish at 6: 1-6, 5-3, board.
9.2 (“Wheel Peg”) 9.3 (“Diamond Peg”)
1 1
2 3 4 2 3 4
5 6
7 5 6 7 8 9
8 9
10 11 12 10 11 12
13 13
Vacate 7, play to finish at 7: 1-7, 11-3, Vacate 1, mark 13, and play to leave
10-1-7, 12-1, 7-2-4-7-10-12-7. With its the marked peg at 13: 5-1, 12-2, 1-7,
final six-sweep and two in the previous 11-3, 9-1-7, 2-12, 13-5-7-9-13.
play, the final survivor has jumped over Vacate 7, play to interchange 5 and
eight of the eleven pegs to be removed. 9: 1-7, 5-1, 12-2, 4-12, 13-7, 10-4,
Play to interchange 1 and 13: 2-7, 2-10, 9-13-5, 1-9.
13-2, 9-5, 1-7-13, 8-3, 12-1, 2-4-7-1. Vacate 2, play to interchange 1 and
Play to interchange 3 and 11: 2-7, 5: 12-2, 9-7, 6-8, 13-7, 3-11, 1-9-7, 5-1,
4-2, 13-4, 11-5, 3-11, 10-1-12-7, 5-9-3. 7-13-5.
Chapter 10
Three bridge frolics
10.1 3NT from any side, low heart. Declarer discards a spade
against any defence from dummy and ducks a spade, setting
up seven spade tricks to go with the ace
Consider a suit distributed as follows: of diamonds and the heart already in
Q 10 9 the bag, and the defence can take at
most three more tricks before letting
– KJ
him in to make them.
A8765432 Similar play occurs if the defenders
This yields seven tricks only if there is take either or both of their aces before
a side entry to the long hand, because if playing a low heart or club, though
the ace is played on the first or second declarer must be careful to answer the
round then the third round will be won lead of a low heart by ducking a spade
in the short hand, and if the ace is held and a low club by ducking a diamond;
up until the third round the defence will and if the defenders broach spades or
take the first two tricks. However, if a diamonds before taking their four
preliminary discard can be made from tricks, declarer will make an overtrick.
the short hand, a first-round duck will This appeared in The Games and
set up the rest of the suit. Puzzles Journal in 1988. Fourteen years
Now consider a deal consisting of later, I opened my morning copy of
four such suits : The Guardian, and there in the bridge
S Q 10 9 column was this very deal with the
H – name “Thomas Andrews” attached to it.
D A8765432 Apparently he had performed a
C KJ systematic analysis by computer of all
rotationally symmetric deals, had
S – S KJ
spotted this one as being of particular
H A8765432 H Q 10 9
interest, and had published it on his
D KJ D –
web site as the new discovery he
C Q 10 9 C A8765432
genuinely believed it to be. I might add
S A8765432 that both he and The Guardian behaved
H KJ impeccably, and unhesitatingly and
D Q 10 9 indeed handsomely acknowledged the
C – prior discovery as soon as they became
Suppose the defence starts by leading a aware of it.
10.2 The Ultimate Disaster reading my Two Diamonds as a cue bid

showing a strong hand, showed his own
“The trouble with these artificial second suit by bidding Two Spades,
bidding systems,” said the Oldest and East, having a splendid fit for
Member, “is that it takes only a single West’s second suit, raised him to Four
mistake to throw the entire machine out Hearts.
of gear. My former partner and I used “I still thought I was responding to a
to play nothing more exotic than a Two Two Club opener, and if partner’s bid
Club system with Blackwood and some was based on a spade suit then my hand
elementary cue bids, but even with was worth far more than my initial Two
these simple tools a single error once Diamonds had indicated. However,
landed us with the worst result that can East’s jump to Four Hearts had left no
possibly occur at a Bridge table. room to investigate, so I bid a
“We were a game up, when West Blackwood 4NT to ask for aces.
dealt this hand : Partner, having none, replied Five
S Q J 10 9 Clubs, and of course I interpreted this
H K as meaning all four. So I bid 5NT to ask
D K for kings, and partner duly replied Six
C K J 10 9 8 7 6 Spades to show three. This seemed to
guarantee us all thirteen tricks, six
S A S 32
spades (surely any partner opening Two
H A5432 H Q 10 9 8 7 6
Clubs and following with Two Spades
D AQ9876 D 5432
had at least a five-card suit), AK in
C A C 2
hearts, AK in diamonds, and AKQ in
S K87654 clubs, so I bid 7NT. Double, said West.
H J Perhaps I should have asked for a
D J 10 review of the bidding, but I merely
C Q543 went through my calculations again,
“West opened One Diamond, partner found them still good, and redoubled.
overcalled with Two Clubs, and East “West led an ace – I forget which,
passed. Unfortunately I had been and it didn’t matter – and with fourteen
paying more attention to my coffee cup tricks on top the defenders had no
than to the bidding, and I had missed trouble in making thirteen of them.
the opening bid and thought I was That was thirteen down, redoubled,
responding to a Two Club opening by vulnerable, and 150 honours to the
partner. I therefore bid a negative Two defence; and you cannot get a worse
Diamonds. West showed his second result than that however hard you may
suit by bidding Two Hearts, partner, try.”
Three Bridge frolics 63
10.3 Did the Rabbit play too well? The Rabbit passes the first diamond,
and takes the second. He has a vague
One of the Rueful Rabbit’s rare failures feeling that there is a long diamond suit
occurred in the celebrated match out somewhere, and his idea, if neither
between the Leprechauns and the the hearts nor the clubs break, is to
Gremlins (Bridge in the Menagerie, throw someone in on the third round
1979 Faber paperback edition, pages and obtain a ruff and discard. He then
67-84). tests the hearts and the clubs, ending in
S 986 hand. In fact this makes no difference,
H 9876 because if the second suit breaks he can
D 83 reach the long card by crossing in
C 9874 spades, but it is a matter of elementary
Rabbit technique to block the run of his
S Q J 10 7 S A432
suits if it is possible to do so. At trick
H A43 H KQ52
eight, he leads the ace of clubs from
D A94 D Q
hand, and this is what the Hog can see :
C AQ5 C K632
S A43
S K5
H 5
H J 10
C A led D –
D K J 10 7 6 5 2
C 63
C J 10
The Gremlin, North, opened with a S K5
psychic One Spade, the Hog, South, H –
responded Two Diamonds, and the D 10 7 6 5
Rabbit, West, ended up in 3NT. “The C –
Gremlin led a diamond and the Rabbit, The Hog has already had to discard one
relying on the spade finesse for his diamond on the third heart, and he can
ninth trick, went three down.” Three see that if he discards another he will be
down seems excessive – even the thrown in on the third round and forced
Rabbit would surely have tested both to lead away from his K5 in spades.
the hearts and the clubs before risking He therefore bares his king of spades, a
the finesse – but in fact the Rabbit routine brilliancy seen a thousand times
would seem to have incurred a well- in the annals of the Griffins, and waits
deserved penalty for having tried to for the finesse.
play properly. Had he performed with But the Rabbit, flustered by the
his usual incompetence, he would have failure of the clubs to break, leads the
made two overtricks. ace of spades from the wrong hand, and
Consider the following line of play. that is that.
Sources and technical notes
1.1 diagrammes 125, April-June 1998. follow, but White’s h-pawn will go, and
diagrammes, founded in 1973, is a French can he in fact win the resulting ending?
composition magazine which suddenly took After 2 Kxd5 Kf6 3 Nc4 Ne7+ 4 Ke4
wing in the late 1980s and for half a dozen (I don’t think anything else is better) Ng6
years was quite the best of the composition 5 Nd6/Na5 Nxh4 6 Nxb7 Nf5 my computer
magazines which were written in languages initially rated the position as +1.5 to White,
that I could read. I was its endgame study but the deeper it analysed the less convinced
columnist for ten years from 1993, but it became, and by the time it got to about
I don’t say it was a good magazine because 25-ply it seemed to have conceded that
I used to write for it; I was quietly proud to White could not force a win; Black’s
write for it because I thought it a good h-pawn was too great a distraction. In any
magazine. case, Black’s defences outside the main line
must be refuted relatively simply if a study
1.2 EG 34, November 1973. is to be aesthetically satisfying, and a
sideline needing analysis as deep as this
1.3 diagrammes 149, April-June 2004. would put the setting out of court even if a
The bishop-and-pawn study had appeared in win in it were eventually to be found.
the British Chess Magazine in 1947, and I
had quoted it in a special number of British 1.4 diagrammes 126, July-September
Endgame Study News devoted to British 1998. No significant backward extension
compositions from the period 1937-49. appears possible without adding extra
Unfortunately I didn’t notice the unwanted material. Black’s last move could obviously
line Bc4 until after the magazine had gone have been h5-h6, but g2 is a bad square for
to press, and I was not greatly surprised White’s knight; wherever it might have
when readers (Noam Elkies was the first) come from, unless its move was a capture it
started writing in to draw attention to the would have had a better alternative. 3 Nd2+
oversight. Noam also noticed, as I did, that is given by the computer as an alternative
1.3a was reciprocal zugzwang, but the winning move, but it is a blind alley; Black
extension back to 1.3 was my own. plays 3...Kf4 threatening to bring his knight
It may be asked whether an exchange on into play by 4...Ng3, White must play 4 Nf1
c4 cannot be incorporated into the play, to prevent this, and 4...Ke4 repeats.
thus avoiding starting in a position where My first attempt to produce a study by
Black’s c-pawn is already offside. All I can examining the lists of reciprocal zugzwangs
say is that I have been unable to do so other in EG ended in disaster. I searched the
than by crudely putting a Black piece on c4 zugzwangs with B + N v N for positions
and letting White capture it straight away. with a similar relationship between the
For a time, I thought it might be possible to knights and the Black king, again with a
move the White king back to f4 and the view to having a knight promotion by Black
Black pawn to d5, and to add knights on b2 in the preceding play, and came up with
and a5, with intention 1 Ke5 (1 Nd3 Nc6) White Ka2, Bb4, Nd6 (3), Black Ka4, Pd3
Nc4+ 2 Nxc4 dxc4 etc, but 1...Nc6+ proved (2), win not by 1 Bc5? d2 2 Ne4 d1N but by
unexpectedly troublesome. It concedes the 1 Ba3! d2 Ne4 d1N 3 Bc5. I published this
d-pawn at once and the b-pawn will soon in diagrammes, and the next post brought a
puzzled letter from Harold van der Heijden: the computer’s discovery as the main line,
“Dear John, what is going on, this had been there was really no other way of describing
published by Simkhovich in 1940!” And the result. None of these studies appears
indeed it had been; he, long before the here, nor do one or two other joint studies
advent of computers, had discovered the where “my” contribution was discovered for
same position of reciprocal zugzwang, and me by the computer, but in the present case
had worked out exactly the same way of I found the key move for myself and felt
exploiting it (64, 1940). As a non-computer that my contribution had been a significant
production, this was a classic, the play after one.
the reciprocal zugzwang being by no means
trivial, and it remains among my favourites 1.7 British Chess Magazine, November
even though it embarrassed me by totally 2008. Baxter’s original took 2nd Prize in the
anticipating a discovery which I had thought 1961 New Statesman Tourney.
was my own.
1.8 British Endgame Study News,
1.5 The Problemist, January 2005. September 2004.
The Problemist is the magazine of the
British Chess Problem Society, and since 1.9 diagrammes 139, October-December
1968 it has included a column for original 2001. It gave my solvers a lot of trouble.
endgame studies (edited by Adam Sobey One, having played to 1.9a, sent me one of
until 2000). In truth, problem magazines White’s plausible tries, and I said No, Black
provide an environment very far from ideal plays such-and-such; then he sent me the
for endgame studies, but The Problemist second try, and again I said No; then he sent
gave me a platform for my early efforts, and the third try, and I said a third No. At that
I still try to send it something respectable point, I put him out of his misery.
from time to time.
1.10 diagrammes 130, July-September
1.6 Moravskoslezský šach, 1996 (as by 1999.
“WDE and JDB”). Moravskoslezský šach
was a short-lived magazine which circulated 1.11 Original setting in The Problemist,
in the Eastern half of the Czech Republic. March 1981; version by Christopher Jones,
Several further studies appeared in my British Endgame Study News, September
diagrammes column as by “So-and-so and 2000. BESN is a quarterly magazine which
JDB”. This often meant only that I had does not normally take originals unless they
tested a composer’s contribution by are incidental to an article or have been
computer and that it had disclosed a flaw derived from a study already published in it,
for which there was an obvious fix, and but it regularly reprints British originals
wherever possible I tried to persuade the which have appeared elsewhere, and it also
composer that I had done nothing and that carries articles describing how a certain
he would have found and fixed the fault study came into being. 1.11 featured in one
for himself had he also had access to a of these, and Christopher wrote in to
computer for testing (a significant amount suggest the alternative setting.
of what appears in print has been silently The just-in-time Black wins in the lines
influenced by editorial input of this kind). 3 Nb4 Bxd7 and 4 Nf6+ Ke6 were rare
But sometimes the composer insisted, and examples of a composer having good luck.
when the computer-discovered bust was a The composer has no control over sidelines
win or draw for Black and the “fix” like this; either they work or they don’t, and
consisted of reversing the colours and using all too often they don’t.
1.12 The Problemist, July 1990. Black’s the difficulties that can arise. Much as I love
answer to the various win-a-piece lines is to endgame studies, I consider them unsuitable
try to win or exchange off White’s last for really serious competitive solving,
pawn. If 1 Ne5+ Kg5 2 Nxc6, taking off where money or prizes are at stake and
Black’s bishop, Black has 2...Ne3, with people will argue over the slightest detail.
3 Be2 Nf5 4 g4 Ng3 5 Bd1/Bf3 h5 or 3 Bf3 For such purposes, the precision of
Nf1 4 g4 Nh2. Some other lines allow “mate within n moves” is essential, and
White to avoid the exchange of pawns by I am fully in agreement with those who say
answering ...h4 by g4, but with Black’s that the WCSC should be openly and
bishop bearing down on the promotion unashamedly a problem-solving event and
square his h-pawn then becomes the endgame study round should be
unpleasantly strong. No line is particularly dropped.
difficult, but there are quite a lot of them,
and I was quietly relieved when the 1.15 The Problemist, July 2007.
computer endorsed my original verdict. The White pawn on c5 appears to be
necessary in order to give White a tempo
1.13 World Chess Solving Championship, move, but can we not manage without the
1994. Gurvich (1st Prize, Tourney of the Black pawn on c6? On a 9x9 board, yes,
Dagestan Committee of Physical Culture because the Black knight can start at e9, and
and Sport, 1952) had White Kb8, Rh5, Bg8 a version of the study in this form appeared
(3), Black Kf8, Be3, Ng1, Pg6 (4), draw by in the German composition magazine
1 Rh8 Kg7 2 Bh7 g5 3 Bf5 Kxh8 4 Bg4 etc. feenschach in 1973. On an 8x8 board, an
I dealt with the problem of side variations unobstructed dark-square knight which can
by announcing in advance that each of the reach b3 in three moves can also reach e2,
studies to be used in the championship had a and this is fatal for White.
clear main line, and that everybody giving it I discovered the present setting (or
in full would receive full points. something very similar) in the 1980s or late
1970s, but I omitted to write it down,
1.14 World Chess Solving Championship, and when I came to send it off to an editor
1996. Tronov (Shakhmatny vestnik 1913, I was unable to reconstruct it. I rediscovered
corrected in the British Chess Magazine in it two or three years ago. We may note that
1995) had White Kf2, Pg5/b4/e4/b3/d3 (6), the interference between the Black knight
Black Ke5, Bd1, Pa6/d6/e6/g6/h4 (7), draw and pawn is mutual; the pawn blocks the
by 1 b5 axb5 2 Ke3 d6 3 d4+ Kd6 4 e5+ and knight at move 3, the knight returns the
5 b4. compliment at the end.
As regards the occasional appearance of
such finishes over the board, one leading 1.16 The Problemist, January 1971. Why
solver, who was an international master as do I say that the Meyer study outclasses it?
a player and therefore entitled to be taken Because the starting position is more
seriously, said that in his opinion the draw natural, the White pawn starts right back on
after 3...Ba2 was obvious, and that a Black the second rank, and the White king moves
player trying to win in real life would play into position during the play. This last can
3...Bxd3. A possible continuation is now be achieved in 1.16a only by introducing
4 Kxd3 e4+ 5 Kc3 Ke5 6 K~ Kf6 7 Kc3 some extraneous motivation, such as
Kg5 8 Kd4 Kxg4 9 Kxe4 Kh4 10 Kd5 g5 making the king’s move capture something.
11 e4 etc, all White’s moves apart from the With the king on g7 instead of g8 in 1.16a,
sixth having been forced. I don’t think he the move 2 Bg2 would indeed fail, but the
found many supporters, but it does illustrate unwanted move 2 f5 would work instead.
1.17 The Problemist, January 1972. 1.19 diagrammes, special number 22,
Mitrofanov (1st Prize, Rustaveli April-June 1998, as “after T. R. Dawson”.
Memorial Tourney, 1967) had White Ka5, Dawson had produced an orthodox problem
Re4, Pa6/g6/b5/d5/h5 (7), Black Ka7, Bd6, featuring similar out-and-back king play
Ne5/f3, Ph2 (5), with intention 1 b6+ Ka8 (Fairy Chess Review, February 1950, White
2 Re1 Nxe1 3 g7 h1Q 4 g8Q+ Bb8 5 a7 Kh1, Pb7/c6/c4/e3/e2/g2 (7), Black Ka7,
Nc6+ 6 dxc6 Qxh5+ 7 Qg5!! Qxg5+ 8 Ka6 Pc7/e7/g7/b6/g6/c5/e4/g3 (9), mate in “not
Bxa7 9 c7 and a remarkable winning less than 60” by 1-9 Ka6 10-16 Ka6 etc),
position with 2P v Q + B + N. 2...Nc4+ but in truth a closer predecessor was Kling,
gives Black a difficult draw, but moving the quoted in Alexandre’s 1846 collection
other knight from f3 to g2 is generally (original source not known to me), White
accepted as fixing it Kc6, Bh1, Nd6/b5, Pa6/f5/d4/g4/e3/h3 (10),
My original intention was to have the Black Kb8, Pa7/b6/f6/g5/h4 (6), mate in 10
rook arriving at g8 by underpromotion, the moving only the king (1-3 Kf3 4-6 Kf3
pawn on h7 being absent and promotion to 7-9 Kc6 10 Kc7). The “Gare de Lyon” joke,
queen being met by ...Qg3+ and stalemate. one of the classic bilingual puns, is due to
However, this created difficulties at the end, 1066 And All That.
when Black could play ...Qh7 pinning the
pawn. I did eventually get it to work, but 1.20 British Chess Magazine, December
only at the cost of some extra material, and 1994.
the result was not elegant. John Roycroft
mentioned my efforts to David Gurgenidze 2.1 Correspondence Chess, Summer
at a meeting in Tbilisi in 1975, and 2002. The Barden column was in “today’s”
Gurgenidze set up a brilliant double-file Financial Times (communication from Hew
version with a b-pawn in which White dated 16 February 2002). Apart from the
promoted to a rook on f8 and then moved duals in the main line, which occur in all
his king up the a-file if Black checked on long-range studies using this mechanism,
the g-file and up the b-file if Black checked Black can invert the moves ...f6 and ...c2 in
on the h-file (EG, 1976). Unfortunately the reply to 1 h4. However, if he plays ...f6
there also had to be a White pawn on c6, earlier, say 3 h6 b4 4 h7 f6, White can
and this created a dual Ka4/Kb4 if Black play 5 cxb4 c3+ 6 Kd3 c2 7 h8Q c1Q
played ...Qh3+. The idea would work 8 Qxf6+ with a win (Marc Bourzutschky’s
perfectly on a 10x10 board, though at least provisional database for Q + 2P v Q + P
one extra pawn appears to be needed in the confirms, saying that White can promote or
top right-hand corner to give the White king convert to a winning 6-man position within
a haven if Black simply lets White’s b-pawn 16 moves). Marc’s provisional database
promote and plays for perpetual check. assumes promotion only to queen, but this is
The version used in the 1994 WCSC had not a position in which Black is likely to
White Kg4, Rg8, Bh8, Pg7/a6 (5), Black have a drawing underpromotion resource.
Ka1, Qa3, Pg6/g5 (4), win by 1 Rb8 Qa4+
2 Kxg5 Qa5+ 3 Kxg6 Qxa6+ 4 Kg5 Qa5+ 3.1 British Chess Magazine, January
5 Kg4 Qa4+ 6 Kg3 Qa3+ 7 Kg2 Qa2+ 1976. 3.1a was used in the Belgian national
8 Kg1 Qa7+ 9 Kh1. It is of course greatly solving championship in either 1991 or
inferior to the original, but the final twist 1992, and was subsequently published in
8...Qa7+ 9 Kh1 caught one or two. The Hindu, 20 June 1992. I have moved
3.1 one file to the right, and reflected 3.1a
1.18 British Endgame Study News, left to right, to bring the positions into
September 2003. alignment.
3.2 Used in the French national solving generations as little more than convenient
championship, 1993, and subsequently examples of what not to do; and because
published in the British Chess Magazine, their administration and judging soaks up
June 1995. vast amounts of effort, the WCCT
particularly so, and if devoted instead to
3.3 The Independent, 4 May 1987. The composition this would produce far more of
only point of possible originality lay in the value than is generated by the tournament.)
hesitant retreat of the White king from f6 to
f7 to g7. The piloting of the Black king by 3.5 World Chess Solving Championship,
making him capture knights had been done 1994. A long problem with two variations
many times before. was needed to complete the selfmate round,
Another example in which an apparently and having the manuscript of JiKí Jelínek’s
simple single-line problem created havoc in book on echoes in Bohemian selfmates for
a solving competition was given by a translation, I was able to look for a long-
problem by David Fawcett which appeared range echo which hadn’t been done before.
in the Gentleman’s Journal around 1870. “Bohemian”, in this context, refers to
(This particular Gentleman’s Journal was a multiple-variation problems in which the
weekly paper for boys which ran from 1869 character of the mates is pre-eminent (each
to 1872, and Fawcett appears to have been square in the mated king’s field is either
one of its schoolboy readers.) This had blocked by a friendly man or guarded by a
White Ke4, Bc2, Nd5/d4, Pf3/a2/e2 (7), single enemy man, no square being doubly
Black Kc5, Pf4 (2), mate in six by 1 Ke5 guarded nor guarded and blocked, and every
Kc4 2 Bf5 Kc5 3 Bh3 Kc4 4 Kd6 Kxd4 enemy man left on the board, apart possibly
5 Bf1 Kc4 6 e3. I set it in five-move form from the king and one or more pawns, takes
(White Ke5, Black Kc4) in the solving part in the mate). Selfmates of this kind in
competition at a meeting of the British which the king is mated on squares as far
Chess Problem Society in 1997, and even apart as h5 and h2 are relatively rare.
in this simplified form it defeated nine
competitors out of thirteen. 4.1 The Problemist, January 1997. If
instead 1 Nc~ (say Nb4) d2 2 N~ (either)
3.4 5th World Chess Composition then 2...d1B, and while White can now give
Tournament, 1992-95. I am a disbeliever in one knight away Black will soon give his
composition tourneys in general and an bishop to the other; if 1 Ne1 d2 2 Ne2/Nh3
emphatic disbeliever in the WCCT, but our then 2...d1N.
captain that year had done me several Evseev (2nd Prize, phénix 1992) had
favours at times not always convenient to White Nb8 (1), Black Pd5/c3/e3 (3), win by
himself and I felt I owed him something. 1 Nc6 and either (a) 1...d4 2 Nxd4 etc, or
In the event, 3.4 gained us a couple of (b) 1...c2 2 Nd4 and either 2...e2 3 Nxc2 or
points, but it was really far too light for this 2...c1B 3 Ne2 with several more N v B
tournament, and Michael and I both felt that wins, or (c) 1...e2 2 Ne5 d4 3 Nc4. This was
it would have given more pleasure in an both earlier than mine and more profound,
ordinary solving column. but I have been told that my simpler setting
(Why am I a disbeliever in composition also has its appeal.
tourneys? Because I believe that we should
compose to entertain, not to gain points or 4.2 International problemists’ meeting,
prizes; because the leading places seem too Bournemouth 1989. John Roycroft set a
often to go to complicated heavyweights, light-hearted tourney for “twin” studies,
which will be regarded by subsequent with the rider that more account would be
taken of the nature of the twinning 4.5 British Chess Magazine, December
mechanism than of any subtlety in the play. 1992 (as part of my annual off-beat solving
I submitted 4.2 as a joke entry, and he gave competition). The refutation of 2 Rxc7+
it the prize for sheer cheek. (Nb7) by 2...Nxc7 (Ra7) mate was due to
Graeme Oswald, one of my solvers; I had
4.3 Variant Chess 27, Spring 1998. VC given 2...Nxc7+ (R off) followed by a
was founded by George Jelliss in 1990 as 2N v P win (which is sound enough but
one of two successors to his magazine takes longer). According to the computer,
Chessics (1976-87). best play after 3 Kxa7 (Nb7) Nc5 4 Kb6
The classic “lose a move with a knight” N7xa6 (Pc4) results in mate at move 46.
study in ordinary chess is of course that by This, like 1.6 and 1.12, was a chance
H. A. Adamson, Chess Amateur, January discovery. I was looking for a variation on
1924 (not “1923” as sometimes quoted), the classic mate with a lone knight, and
White Kb6, Nc2, Pc7/h6/e5 (5), Black Kc8, suddenly noticed the bust.
Bd5, Pb7/e7/h7/e6 (6), win by 1 Na3 Bc6
2-3 Nc3 Bd3 and now 4-5 Nc5 Bd5 6-7 Nf4 4.6 As a triplet, probably not before The
Bf5 8 Ne2 Bd3 (to meet 9 Nd4 by 9...Bc4) Classified Encyclopedia of Chess Variants
9 Nc3! returning to the position after (2007), page 221, though the failure of 1 a6
3...Bd3 but with Black to play. Black now in Circular Chess had been noted in British
has nothing better than 9...Bc4, and after Endgame Study News, special number 24,
10 Ne4 White will soon win a pawn. March 2001. The Classified Encyclopedia
As regards the genesis of the present was the second edition of David Pritchard’s
study, I had programmed my computer to Encyclopedia of Chess Variants (1994),
generate a definitive database of three-man completed by myself at the request of his
endings without pawns, and on playing widow. Circular Chess is played by a group
through the longest win with 2N v R centred on the Tap and Spile, Hungate,
I noticed that we seemed to likely have a Lincoln, who have held an annual World
“lose a move” manoeuvre somewhere in the Championship since 1996. They play to
ending. So indeed it proved. slightly different rules (a1 light, K-side on
White’s left and Black’s right, no capturing
4.4 Variant Chess 34 (nominally “Winter en passant), but the essentials are the same.
1999” but not actually published until well
into 2000). Its originality is in some doubt, 4.7 International problemists’ meeting,
because Laurent Bartholdi had produced a Bournemouth 1989 (produced for a solving
definitive database of three-man endings competition). The competition problems,
with pawns a couple of years before, and excluding a few found to be unsound, were
had he or anyone else trawled this database subsequently published in The Problemist
for positions in which P = Q was the only in November 1989. Unlike the other twin
move to win this position would have been problems in this book, where a small change
thrown up. However, there is a difference in the stipulation produces a radical change
between constructing a computer database in the solution, this is merely two different
and singling out a position within it as settings of the same idea. I am quite unable
worthy of particular attention, and the to decide which I prefer.
publication of 4.4 in VC 34 did not result in
any claim of prior discovery; nor, so far as I 4.8 International problemists’ meeting,
know, has any such claim been made since. Bournemouth 1989 (solving competition).
Other promotions clearly don’t win, and in This problem succeeded in outwitting its
fact P = N and P = K both lose. own composer. Several solvers claimed
1 Qa2 etc, and I could neither remember nor be told that it had been done already, but as
recreate the refutation and conceded a cook. with 4.4 nobody has brought a prior
appearance to my notice. “White Ng1 to f4,
4.9 Inserted in a correction slip to Some etc” appeared in The Problemist in March
flights of chess fancy, 1989. Smulders’s 4.9a 1993, and 5.2a in Tsume-shogi Paradise
appeared in Europe Échecs in 1970. 1995. Gerd Wilts, at the cost of a more
This was a sad story. In 1972, not then artificial position, subsequently matched
being aware of the Smulders, I produced an Nagano’s numerical difference but with a
all-promotion setting in which three of the unique game in each part: U.S. Problem
promotions took place on one square and Bulletin, 1997, White d2/h2/d1/e1/g1/h1
the fourth on another. When the authors of empty, Kf2, Qg4, Re6, Ne2, Pd5/f4/g3 (15),
the Oxford Companion wanted an example Black b8/e8/g8 empty, Kf7, Nh5, Pf6 (15),
of neutral men for their first edition (1984), play 1-2 d5 Nd4 and now (a) 3 f4 Nxe2
they consulted me, and being still unaware 4 Kf2 Ng3 5 hxg3 Nf6 6 Rh6 Nh5 7 Re6 f6
of the Smulders I offered them mine. 8 Qg4 Kf7 9 Ne2 or (b) 3 Kd2 Nxe2 4 Ke3
Having become aware of the Smulders, Ng3 5 hxg3 Nf6 6 Rh6 Nh5 7 Re6 f6 8 Qg4
I urged them very strongly to use it as the Kf7 9 Qh3 Kg6 10 Ne2 Kg5 11 f4+ Kh6
example in their second edition (1992), but 12 Kf2 Kg6 13 Qg4+ Kf7.
they told me they preferred to put in an
example of an entirely different kind. 5.3 British Chess Magazine, December
The result is that the Smulders has not 1992. The reason for the stipulation “find
had anything like the exposure it deserved, the shortest game” was to try and sort out
though I did my small best to put the matter the top end of a solving competition (I was
right by using it to exemplify neutral men in afraid that if I stated the length required
the Classified Encyclopedia. in advance I would get a large number of
all-correct solutions), but people have told
4.10 International problemists’ meeting, me they think it was unfair and I have some
Bournemouth 1989 (solving competition), sympathy. The problem has indeed been
with knights instead of rooks on a8/b8. My quoted with the stipulation “Position after
reasoning at the time was that it was a Black’s 4th move, find the game”, and
problem about bishops and knights and the I have seen no reason to object.
imitator wasn’t part of a part of a normal set
anyway, so why restrict ourselves to the 5.4 Variant Chess 30, Winter 1998.
normal two knights and bring rooks into it?
But experience has shown that the version 5.5 The Problemist, November 1978.
with rooks is much easier to set up on a
board to show to friends, and today I think 6.1 EBUR, September 1996. EBUR was
I would have decided differently. a Dutch-Flemish endgame study magazine.
According to the Oxford Companion, the
5.1 The Problemist, January 1972. The pioneering setting of “dummy pawn to
original setting had no knight on f6, when draw” was by Kling, and Dawson, in
White’s first move still had to have been Ciassa’s Fairy Tales (1947), published a
b8-a7 but could have been a capture. position in which White had to do it three
times running. There is also a problem by
5.2 Used in the French retro solving Sam Loyd in which such a promotion is the
championship, 1998, and subsequently only way to force mate in three. I therefore
published in phénix (a French composition remain surprised that nobody had set the
magazine), September 1998. I expected to task “dummy pawn promotion to win”
before, because once the idea is conceived 6.9 Chess Braintwisters, 1999. Again my
it is not difficult to realise, but yet again original setting was faulty.
nobody has brought a prior appearance to
my attention. 6.10 Variant Chess 56, February 2008, an
earlier setting of 6.10d having appeared in
6.2 Originally sent to be pinned up at the The Problemist in November 1989.
international problemists’ 1995 meeting as One reader was kind enough to describe
a good-will message, with promotion to 6.10d as one of my best efforts: “pointed,
GQRBN implicitly assumed and stipulation beautifully set, and not too difficult either”.
“Shortest mate” (there were complications “Pointed”, yes; I always try to produce
in part (b) after 1 Kf1 Ga8 2 bxa8Q+ into something with point, and since I try to
which I did not feel like going). Paul Byway realise it as simply as possible “not too
quoted it as a problem in Grasshopper Chess difficult” is a natural consequence. But
in Variant Chess 20, Summer 1996, which “beautifully set” is in the lap of the gods.
enabled the stipulation to be simplified to We may call ourselves “composers”, but in
“Win”: a great improvement, in my opinion. truth we are merely discoverers; all possible
“compositions” within a game were created
6.3 British Chess Magazine, July 1987. when the rules of the game were laid down,
and all we are doing is digging them out.
6.4 British Chess Magazine, April 1992. Sometimes we are lucky.
My inspiration for “it’s not chess, it’s
draughts” was a problem by Dunsany in 7.1 According to David Pritchard, this
Fairy Chess Review in August 1948. The was a game invented by T. Sturgeon and
draughts position itself is of course ancient; patented in 1890. His burglar started on c3
for example, William Payne’s Introduction and moved first, and there were six
to the Game of Draughts (1756) has White policemen on a1, c1, e1, a5, c5, and e5. The
kings d4/f2 (2), Black king c1, man b4 (2), demonstration that only five policemen
play 1 d4-c3 b4^d2 2 f2-e1. were needed appeared in Variant Chess 53,
October 2006.
6.5 Chess Braintwisters (subsequently
reissued as Outrageous Chess Problems), 7.2 Variant Chess 53, October 2006.
Burt Hochberg, 1999.
7.3 The Games and Puzzles Journal 30,
6.6 Blue Danube Joke Tourney, 1993 (an December 2003 (with the knight on c1
event held at the international problemists’ instead of g1). George Jelliss, who was the
meeting that year). magazine’s editor, attributed it to myself
without qualification, but it owed a lot to a
6.7 British Chess Problem Society problem by him in The Problemist in
weekend, Oxford, 1993, reported in The November 1989 and to his exposition of
Problemist, May 1993. Neither “promotion chessboard hypercubes in up to six
to king” nor “promotion to a Black piece” dimensions in Chessics 13 (January-June
was a new idea, though the combination in 1982) and 14 (July-September 1982).
this form may well have been. When quoting it in diagrammes I gave its
authorship as “GPJ, version JDB” on the
6.8 Original to this book. My original grounds that all I had done was make a
setting was faulty, and Harold van der cosmetic alteration to the presentation, but
Heijden suggested a fix. I hope I have when I quoted it again with this attribution
remembered it correctly. in Variant Chess 45, George demurred, and
on reflection I think “JDB after GPJ” is which was mentioned in connection with
more accurate. My contribution may have 3.3 above), and the David Fawcett who
been merely cosmetic, but the cosmetics of composed the problem mentioned there was
a problem are important. surely the same as the “D. Fawcett” who
The pattern in the diagram is that of a made at least one excellent contribution to
two-dimensional projection of a four- Bizalion’s solitaire columns.
dimensional hypercube, and the problem
provides an illustration of how a figure 9.2 A puzzle embodying this board and
which at first sight is quite abstruse can turn giving two of these problems with others
up perfectly naturally. was on sale in London in the late 1980s or
early 1990s under the title “The Crystal
8.1 The Games and Puzzles Journal 30, Palace Wheel Puzzle”. I have seen only a
December 2003, with a decorative text. 8.2 photocopy of an eight-page descriptive
the same. booklet (A6 size) which contains neither
solutions nor acknowledgement, but it it
8.3 Colson News Volume 4 Number 3, possible that there was a separate leaflet or
August 1989. Colson News was a magazine booklet containing these. All the problems
edited by Cedric Smith, and although were in fact supplied by myself.
primarily devoted to the idea of “two-way
numbers” (the digits 9, 8, 7, 6, and 9.3 Original to this book.
sometimes 5 are replaced by upside-down
digits representing –1, –2, and so on) it 10.1 The Games and Puzzles Journal 4,
carried a fair bit of recreational material. March-April 1988. I was inspired by a hand
The next issue carried not only my official from Bridge in the Menagerie, where the
solution but a tour-de-force version in verse Hog bluffs his opponents into continuing
by Blanche Descartes, which according to clubs against 3NT, unblocks an obstructive
Richard Guy was a nom-de-plume adopted AK of diamonds from dummy, and runs off
by Smith, Leonard Brooks, Arthur Stone, six diamonds from hand to land an
and Bill Tutte. These were the four who first impossible contract.
solved the problem of dissecting a square
into smaller squares no two of which were 10.2 The deal itself was published in
the same size. Richard gives the formal Bridge World in 2004, but the editor
reference for this as “Duke Math. J., 1940”, rewrote the text to take account of what
but I think most of us know it through the would be assumed by the magazine’s
“as it happened” story in one of Martin readership and to conform to its house style
Gardner’s early books. (which was fair enough) and then printed
a version greatly reduced even from that
9.1 Original to this book. The general which I had approved. This is the first time
idea of using marked pegs, and stipulating that my original text has been published.
that these and no others are to be the pegs The gimmick of overlooking the opening
left on the board at the end, seems to me to bid and imagining that partner’s Two Club
enrich small-board solitaires even more than overcall was a Two Club opener had of
it enriches ordinary solitaire. The first writer course already been exploited by the Rabbit,
to have suggested their use appears to have with markedly better results.
been C. Bizalion in the Gentleman’s
Journal Recreation Supplement in 1870-71 10.3 Original to this book as far as
(this was a monthly puzzle and pastime publication is concerned, though I have sent
supplement to the Gentleman’s Journal it informally to various like-minded friends.
The scene is a cafe table, anywhere from Vancouver to Vladivostok.
Around it, a group of chessplaying friends; on it, such refreshment as their
taste and the time of day may dictate, and a board and men. One of the
group puts a few men on the board, and turns it so as to face the others:
“White to play and win,” he says, or “White to play and mate in four,”
or perhaps he asks some question such as “What was the game to this
position?”
This is the word of chess fantasy. It is not the accident-dominated world
of normal play, where the occurrence of a brilliancy depends not just on
the winner’s insight and experience but also on the loser’s inadvertent
co-operation in making the right blunder to create the opportunity; rather,
it is the chess equivalent of the novel or short story, where the characters
have been placed just where they need to be and every man on the board is
there for a purpose. And it is a world of pure enjoyment, untarnished by the
sorrow of defeat (except for the poor old Black king, who always seems to
get the worst of it).
So forget about rating points, give yourself a rest from trying to find a
new twist in your next opponent’s favourite opening, take out a bottle and a
glass, settle yourself down in your favourite armchair, and start reading.
You will find endgame studies, problems that have been set in national or
international solving competitions, studies and problems in variant forms of
chess, “how did we get here” problems, jokes and curiosities ranging from
Thomas à Becket to the Loch Ness Monster, and a small selection of
puzzles and oddities from fields other than chess. This is chess for fun,
chess for pleasure; chess as it should be.
ISBN 978-0-9555168-1-8
Originally printed by MediaPRINT Ltd, The Print Cabin,

381 Luton Road, Harpenden, Herts AL5 3NF
Published by the author at 7 St James Road, Harpenden, Herts AL5 4NX
June 2009 (version with minor corrections April 2011)
John Beasley
51 Flights
of
Chess Fancy
rdwdw4kd
dp0pdp0p
pdwdwhbd
dwdwdwdw
wdwdwdwd
dPdwdwdw
wdP)P)P)
dwGwdwIw
and a few other frolics

51 Flights of Chess Fancy - Beasley - 2009

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

51 Flights of Chess Fancy - Beasley - 2009

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

John Beasley

2 Creating a study from a game position 25

4 Variant forms of chess 33

5 How did we get here ? 41

7 Three knight puzzles 55

9 Three thirteen-hole pegboard puzzles 59

10 Three bridge frolics 61

Sources and technical notes 64

Author’s copyright notice. I have no authority to waive any rights that

Typeset by the author

Harpenden, Hertfordshire, England, June 2009.

1.2 1.2 was composed to show the

noticed what I had put on the board. 1.3

1.3b This little study grew from the

and an immediate 3 d5 is needed even which occurred in a bishop-and-pawn

1.4 (“Festina lente!”) have 3...Kd4 4 Kf3 (to release the

1.5 There is in fact no win from 1.5a,

1.5a and how will White prevent ...a4 and

1.8 But what a curious set of

1.11 (version by Christopher Jones) A plausible try is now 3 Nb4

1.11, like 1.2 and 1.5, was composed 1.12

1.11, like 1.2 and 1.5, was composed 1.12

1.14 Indeed it is, and in fact it is better,

1.15 This was based on what we might

1.16 This wasn’t too bad for a first

1.17 This was a spin-off from attempts to

1.18 a discovered check, 2...Kd5 allows

1.19 (Richard Gare de Lyon) 1.20 (Thomas à Becket)

2.1 or 8...c3 9 Kd4 b5 10 f6 b4 11 Kc4 Kc1

3.2 (after K. Mortsoch) 3.2 was used in the French national

3.1 attention, and I subsequently produced

three by 1 Kg6; I merely extended the 3.4 (with Michael McDowell)

3.4 (with Michael McDowell) leading solver approaches a challenge

4.1 (by Gyorgy Evseev, my version) 4.2

4.1 (by Gyorgy Evseev, my version) 4.2

4.6 4.7 (after J. E. H. Creed)

In Cylindrical Chess, the a and h files In a maximummer, Black always plays

4.6 defence. So the move 1 a6, needed to

4.9 (by Kurt Smulders, my version) 4.10 (after J. E. H. Creed)

5.2a (by Hiroshi Nagano) 5.4

In four moves only: 1 e4 Nf6 2 Qf3 We met maximummers in Chapter 4.

6.2 In 6.3, the men have had a little too

6.1 As set, 1 a8G mate, and no “perhaps”

6.4 (April Fool) In one of the early hands in Victor

If Black’s king is somewhere in the wiwdwdwd

6.9 (version by Noam Elkies) 6.10a

6.6 6.7 (version by Noam Elkies)

Well, we did say you were playing 6.10b

6.10c In ordinary chess, e5xd6 e.p.+,

8.3 Given eleven coins of which at

9.1 On the solitaire pegboard above,

On a 5x5 board, White has five dwdwd

dwdwdwd 7.3 (after George Jelliss)

9.1 (“Star Peg”) 12-4, 13-8, 9-11, 2-10, 8-1-6-13-8-6.

9.2 (“Wheel Peg”) 9.3 (“Diamond Peg”)

10.2 The Ultimate Disaster reading my Two Diamonds as a cue bid

Originally printed by MediaPRINT Ltd, The Print Cabin,

and a few other frolics

You might also like