World Chess Solving Championship 2012
Report by David Friedgood
For the first time in its history, the annual congress of the World Federation
for Chess Composition (formerly the FIDE Commission for Chess Composition) took
place in Japan, in the city of Kobe. All the activities were beautifully organised
and run and it was a pity that the attendance was down on recent years, no doubt
as a result of trying economic times combined with the expense of flying to
Japan from many European locations.
The congress format includes two official solving events, an Open tourney and
the World Chess Solving Championship (WCSC). In the Open, individual solvers
are given 12 problems to solve in three hours. Of course, use of computers of
any kind is banned. Two problems out of each of six problem types challenge
the competitors: Mate in two; Mate in three; Mate in n (‘moremovers’);
Endgame studies; Helpmates; Selfmates.
The results of the Open were as follows (the convention in most solving competitions
nowadays is that each problem is marked out of five points): 1. Ofer Comay (Israel)
50.5/60; 2. Martynas Limontas (Lithuania) 49; 3-4. Marjan Kovacevic (Serbia)
and Kacper Piorun (Poland) 47. This was a fine result for Limontas in particular,
clearly a man on the rise, although he didn’t fare so well subsequently
in the WCSC. World Champion Piotr Murdzia (Poland) only managed to share 8th-9th
places with former world champion Michael Pfannkuche (Germany) on 40.5 points.
The total number competing was 65. In both the Open as well as the WCSC the
long selfmate proved completely unsolvable within the time limit.
Director Axel Steinbrink (Germany) with the top three in the Open Solving
section: Martynas
Limontas, Ofer Comay, Marjan Kovacevic [Photos by the Japanese Chess Problem
Society]
In the WCSC, there are six rounds of three problems each, spread over two days.
There are different time limits for each type, as follows: two-movers 20 minutes;
three-movers 60 minutes; studies 100 minutes; helpmates 50 minutes; moremovers
80 minutes; selfmates 50 minutes. Teams comprise two or three solvers –
if three, the team score in each round is the best two scores. The championship
doubles as an individual as well as a team competition. Under certain rules,
individual solvers who are not members of teams may additionally compete for
the individual championship. In both competitions, ties are broken by the amount
of time used – the less, the better.
The results of the team championship were as follows: 1. Poland (Alexander
Mista, Piotr Murdzia, Kacper Piorun) 155/180; 2. Germany (Michael Pfannkuche,
Boris Tummes, Arno Zude) 144.5; 3. Russia (Aleksandr Feoktistov, Anatoly Mukoseev,
Andrey Selivanov) 136.5. 15 teams took part.
The winning Polish team: Alexander Mista, Piotr Murdzia, Kacper Piorun
The individual championship was a much closer affair at the top. It was won
for the sixth (!) time by Piotr Murdzia with 77/90. Second was Arno Zude with
76 and third was the holder, Kacper Piorun with 75. In fact, Piorun will no
doubt be kicking himself daily for a very long time – he was in the lead
going into the final round and all he had to do was solve a selfmate in 2 and
a selfmate in 3 to win the title, as the third selfmate remained unsolved by
all 52 competitors. But he blundered on the relatively easy two-mover, dropping
the full 5 points and allowing Murdzia and Zude to overtake him – a real
tragedy!
I’ll end this summary with a couple of sidelights. The top French playing
GM, Maxime Vachier-Lagrave was visiting Kobe for an exhibition of chess and
shogi – the Japanese version of chess, which has a large following in
the country. He took part in the Open solving, coming equal 13th and narrowly
outscoring his compatriot Michel Caillaud, who is a former world solving champion.
Maxime then took part as a member of the French team for just the first day
of the WCSC, scoring a creditable 35/45, including 100% on the studies –
a distinction shared only by Piorun. His result contributed to the French overall
score of 117/180 and a good fifth place. One wonders how much solving experience
he has had – especially of selfmates, which might well be anathema to
an active professional player!
The British team lacked former world champions Jonathan Mestel and John Nunn,
as well as the current British champion Colin McNab, but Michael McDowell’s
efforts on the second day of the WCSC raised the team to seventh place. Michael’s
team-mates, Roddy McKay and Ian Watson achieved an unusual coincidence: their
scores were identical in both the Open and the WCSC! That means that, not only
did they get the same total points for their solving – despite scoring
differently on some problems – but they also took exactly the same amount
of time.
It’s high time we looked at a couple of the problems that tested the
mettle of the solvers in these two events. You have to bear in mind that the
organisers have to select problems for their difficulty rather than their aesthetic
or thematic appeal. Nevertheless there were some that could be enjoyed by aficionados.
Let’s look at the first – and easiest – study from the WCSC:
[Event "2-3 Prize Schachmaty v SSSR"] [Site "?"] [Date "1989.??.??"] [Round
"?"] [White "R Tavariani"] [Black "White to play and draw"] [Result "*"] [Annotator
"Friedgood,David"] [SetUp "1"] [FEN "3K4/8/8/6R1/8/3k4/2p5/1r2B3 w - - 0 1"]
[PlyCount "15"] [EventDate "1989.??.??"] {In this situation White can afford
to give up even his rook for the threatening black pawn, as long as the bishop
remains:} 1. Rg3+ {Driving the king away from the support of the pawn} Ke4 $1
(1... Kc4 $2 2. Rc3+) (1... Ke2 2. Rg2+) 2. Rg4+ ({It's still not easy for White:}
2. Rc3 $2 Rd1+ 3. Ke7 (3. Kc7 c1=Q 4. Rxc1 Rxc1+) 3... Rxe1 4. Rxc2 Kd3+ {neatly
winning the rook}) (2. Bd2 Rd1) 2... Kf3 $1 (2... Kf5 3. Rc4 Rd1+ 4. Bd2 $1
Rxd2+ 5. Kc7 Ke5 6. Kc6 { is a theoretical draw}) 3. Rg3+ ({Again White must
be careful:} 3. Rc4 $2 Rd1+ 4. Bd2 Rxd2+ 5. Kc7 Ke2) 3... Kf4 4. Rc3 Rd1+ 5.
Kc8 $1 {We'll soon see why White avoids c7} c1=Q 6. Bg3+ Kg4 7. Rxc1 Rxc1+ 8.
Bc7 {and White saves the bishop at the same time as escaping the check! A pleasing,
precise ending.} *
Those readers who have not had experience of solving studies will see from
this illustration that they are really composed combinations – highly
tactical and usually yielding their pretty secrets to careful analysis. The
next one is for you to solve and enjoy. It is White to play and win, and you
need to find the unique winning combination, after noticing that Black’s
queen is defended by a knight fork on f4. There are hardly any variations to
worry about, just find the forcing line leading to a completely won position
for White.
White to play and win
Solution
[Event "3 HM Kommunisti"] [Site "?"] [Date "1973.??.??"] [Round "?"] [White
"Ernest Pogosyants"] [Black "White to play and win"] [Result "*"] [Annotator
"Friedgood,David"] [SetUp "1"] [FEN "6k1/5Np1/4n3/2Qq2PK/8/8/8/8 w - - 0 1"]
[PlyCount "17"] [EventDate "1973.??.??"] 1. Nh6+ $1 Kh7 (1... Kh8 2. Qc8+ {transposes
into the main line a move early}) (1... gxh6 {allows} 2. Qxd5 {as the black
knight is now pinned and can't fork on f4}) 2. Qc2+ Kh8 (2... g6+ 3. Qxg6+ {mates
next move}) 3. Qc8+ Nf8 (3... Kh7 4. Qg8#) (3... Nd8 4. Qxd8+ Qxd8 5. Nf7+ {wins})
4. Qxf8+ Kh7 {Now it seems that Black is hanging on, as the white pawn is pinned
and the knight threatened. If White extricates the knight then Black will have
a perppetual check.} 5. Qg8+ $1 {A queen sac to get the pawn unpinned!} Qxg8
6. g6+ Kh8 7. Nf7+ Qxf7 8. gxf7 g6+ 9. Kh6 $1 ({Avoiding the last trap} 9. Kxg6
$11 {A pretty little study, but Black lacked any significant counterplay.})
*
The next diagram is taken from the WCSC and represents a return to the two-mover,
but of a rather special category. It is known as a try-play problem. This means
that the focus is on attempts by White (‘tries’) to find the key-move,
which forces mate on White’s second move. The play that arises from the
tries is often related to the play that occurs after the key, giving rise to
all sorts of interesting effects.
[Event "2nd Prize, Suomen Shakki"] [Site "?"] [Date "1990.??.??"] [Round "?"]
[White "Herbert Ahues"] [Black "Mate in 2"] [Result "*"] [Annotator "Friedgood,David"]
[SetUp "1"] [FEN "1Q5B/1N1p4/bp1p4/1P1k1B1K/R2P4/n2N4/1Pp1r2b/8 w - - 0 1"]
[PlyCount "1"] [EventDate "1990.??.??"] {The solver's eye will quickly be attracted
to the possibility of a Novotny on e5, where the lines of Black's rook and bishop
on h2 intersect. If} 1. Be5 $2 { threatening both Qg8# and Qxd6#, Black has
1...Nxb5! protecting d6 as well as giving the black king a flight square on
c6, without incurring any weakness for White to exploit.} ({So we try} 1. Ne5
$2 {with the same two threats - note that the knight protects c6, so that 1...Nxb5
no longer prevents 2.Qg8#. However, this time Black has the cunning 1...Nc4!
to defeat the double threat, giving the king a flight square on d4 while defending
d6.}) ({Now the solver could try a different tack, thinking that the black rook
and bishop are meant to provide mutual interferences on e5 - the Grimshaw theme.
With} 1. Qc7 $2 { c4 becomes guarded so as to threaten 2.Nb4#. Black has to
defend by cutting off the guard of d4 by the Bh8, but 1...} Re5 {allows} (1...
Be5 $1 {on the other hand defeats the threat with impunity, as White has given
up the possibility of 2. Qg8#}) 2. Qxd6# {by interfering with Bh2.}) ({Threatening
2. Nb4# with} 1. Qc8 {reverses this situation. Now 1...} Be5 {allows} ({but
instead} 1... Re5 $1 {refutes the try as 2.Qxd6# is not on}) 2. Qg8# {by interfering
with the rook}) ({Finally, the solver will realise that all these tries have
drawbacks and that there needs to be a key move that does not shoot White in
the foot! It is} 1. b3 $1 {again threatening} -- (1... Be5 2. Qg8#) ( 1... Re5
2. Qxd6#) 2. Nb4# {In a competition the experienced solver, pushed for time,
will probably bypass much of the above by noticing that the b2 pawn has no apparent
function and will soon arrive at the key move. But such a solver will return
to the problem afterwards to enjoy the artistry of the composer, particularly
the Novotny and Grimshaw theme combination.}) *
The final diagram, also from the WCSC, is a try-play problem for you to solve.
Try-play problems are known to have caused a number of casualties in these competitions
– even though a two-mover should not detain an experienced solver for
very long, such problems can be quite effective when you have just 20 minutes
under very tense conditions to solve three of them!
White to play and mate in two
You have to find the unique key move that forces mate on White’s second
turn. Notice the tries made by the Bd5 and the Rf4; their threats and the moves
used by Black to defeat all but one of the attempts, which is therefore the
solution.
Solution
[Event "1st Prize Suomen Shakki"] [Site "?"] [Date "1994.??.??"] [Round "?"]
[White "Vasyl Dyachuk"] [Black "Mate in 2"] [Result "*"] [Annotator "Friedgood,David"]
[SetUp "1"] [FEN "2r5/5Q1p/3p2p1/3Bk3/5R2/bNr2pp1/K2N1n2/B2n3q w - - 0 1"] [PlyCount
"1"] [EventDate "1994.??.??"] {Any move of the bishop on d5 puts an extra guard
on d5 and introduces the threat 2.Qf6#. Let's see how Black deals with the possible
destinations of the bishop:} 1. Bc4 $2 {Rf8! escapes mate on Move 2, because
White can't take advantage of Black's loss of control of c4 by 2.Nc4# as the
bishop is blocking that square (White obstruction).} (1. Bxf3 $2 {similarly
is a self-obstruction as 1...Qh4! refutes the try, as now 2.Nxf3# is impossible})
({Yet another self-obstruction occurs after} 1. Be4 $2 {enabling the defence
1...Ng4! leaving White to rue the loss of 2.Re4#}) (1. Be6 $2 {is met by a different
stratagem: 1...d5! giving the king a flight square on d6 that is now not guarded
by the threat, 2.Qf6+ as the bishop cuts off the queen's line (anticipatory
white interference)}) ({Moves by the bishop to the north-west e. g.} 1. Bb7
$2 {are met more simply by 1...Rc6!, which cuts off the bishop's protection
of d5 without incurring any weakness.}) ({It's time to give up on the bishop
then, and try the rook. Any move of the rook places an extra guard on f4 and
thus releases the queen to threaten 2.Qe6#. Let's see whether Black can cope
with all the possibilities:} 1. Rc4 $2 {suffers from a similar self-obstruction
as 1.Bc4?: 1...Re8! and again 2.Nc4# is off the menu.}) ({The same goes for}
1. Rxf3 $2 {which is met by 1...Qh3! and again 2.Nxf3# is impossible.}) ({Moving
the rook to the left by} 1. Ra4 $2 {is met by 1...Bb4! cutting off its guard
of f4 without doing any damage}) ({...while moving it to the right by} 1. Rh4
$2 {can be countered similarly with 1...Ng4!}) ({Finally, having eliminated
all tries, we come to the key:} 1. Rf6 $1 {and at last Black has run out of
answers. A modern work of art, constructed with excellent economy, the lack
of white pawns underscoring this achievement.}) *
Any queries or constructive comments can be addressed to the author at david.friedgood@gmail.com.
Copyright
in this article David Friedgood 2012/ChessBase
The
British Chess Problem Society (BCPS), founded in 1918, is the world's
oldest chess problem society. It exists to promote the knowledge and enjoyment
of chess compositions, and membership is open to chess enthusiasts in all countries.
The Society produces two bi-monthly magazines, The Problemist and
The Problemist Supplement (the latter catering for beginners), which
are issued to all members. Composers from all over the world send their problems
and studies to compete in the tourneys run by the society.
The BCPS also organises the annual British Chess Solving Championship, and
selects the Great Britain squad for the World Chess Solving Championship. The
Society holds an annual residential weekend, with a full programme of solving
and composing tourneys and lectures; this event attracts an international participation.
Members are also entitled to use the resources of the BCPS library, and the
Society book service, which can provide new and second-hand publications.
