One Setting, Many Concepts

[Z Kornin]

The question seems to be quite simple - a practical chess player will look and think "If white plays, is mate on the move by 1.b6-b7; OR, if black plays, then 1...axb6 and wins" - Right. Right?! - No, wrong! If we apply... ... a droplet of Retrograde Analysis, soon will be revealed that we should consider a single possibility - Thus, following - a correct Chess Problem:

R. J. Darvall
"Fairy Chess Review" 1949

Who wins?

Solution: black, by 1...axb6 Got it? Now You're ready for throwing away the position as dead-solved, but... wait a minute, please:

B. Larsson
"Feenschach" 1954

White retracts one move, then #1

Solution: retract Kc7 x Nc8 then 1.b7 mate

Fantastic, this is already a completelly different puzzle! ... And, absolutelly marvellous to relate, that in almost eighty years since the position appeared for the first time... (and here what the DNA test shows...)
A. H. Kniest
"Deusche Märchenschachzeitung" 1932

h#2 (*)

Solution: 1.a6 b7+ 2.Ka7 b8Q mate

...more than thousand stipulations are recorded, by hundreds of authors, in other hundreds of forms .. A quick search for "Vielväter" (the German for 'many fathers'), adding "Ebert", "Gruber" and/or "Kuhlmann" (composers), and even a list of Fairy modalities will be found... Another keyword is "Sower Sows" ... ( recess... ...after this please return here, in the next post.. in 20 minutes... new and original material...)

[Z Kornin]

The form is of a Replacer (also a new word?!) , kind of a construction exercise - the quartet is original - note that "correct" here means just - a solution without cooks, or duals, that 'drawn position' is one in which a draw would be proclaimed (no tricks like 50-moves-rule etc) :

Z. Kornin
"chessproblem.net" 2009

Replace both Pawns for pieces of their same colour, for a correct:

(a) #2 - Mate in Two

(b) h#1(*) - Helpmate in One, With Set-Play

(c) A Drawn Position, Without Check

(d) An Illegal Position



* (thanks also for checking for antecipations!)

[Z Kornin]

Solutions and notes:

(a) Queen and Queen a check in 'c6' and take in 'b7'

(b) Rook and Rook the set-mate, indicated by (*), prevents cooks: Qa7- Q or Bb6 , and black mates in 'b7' after Q or B to 'd8' ... if some of the avoided cooks had a single set-mate, this one would be a "duplex" .

(c)Bishop and Bishop no mate is possible here, not even a helpmate - "without check", otherwise Ba7 and Nb6 would also be a solution.

(d) Knight and Knight both Kings are in check!


* The expression "Replace FOR" seems to be quite frequent (it corresponds, for instance to the Portuguese 'substitua POR') and used not only by Latins - nevertheless, and without any change, better as English writing would be "Replace BY" (or even "Replace WITH")

** On (b) - I'm realizing that newly it's becoming usual add "1 solution" in helpmates' enunciates, but I'm still adhering to the traditional (and for me both elegant and efficient) way of letting additional indication just if more than one solution is required

*** A neologism, and perhaps a good motto, could be "Allumväter" - as it's a complete set of double transformations, similar to promotions, the Babson idea is also suggested... But the quartet is far away from a 'task', where a whole should work under a single enunciate !