You are on page 1of 2

Dr Ian Shanahan

57 Yates Avenue
Dundas Valley NSW 2117
AUSTRALIA
e-mail: ian_shanahan@hotmail.com
Sydney, 29 August 2007.
Mr Jim Grevatt
Lazybed, Headley Fields
Headley, Hants GU35 8PS
ENGLAND

Dear Mr Grevatt,

Although I have been a member of the British Chess Problem Society now for nearly 30
years, I have not yet submitted any original three- or moremovers to The Problemist (i.e. to the
main magazine itself: a number of my miniature moremovers have appeared already within The
Problemist Supplement). Anyway, I offer you the 9 miniature diagrammed below on the left (A).
Granted, its contents are rather old hat yet, despite extensive searching, I have not been able to
unearth any complete anticipations. (Just to detail my hunt for precursors, here are the texts from
my problem library wherein I looked: American Chess Nuts [electronic PDF edition]; Ideal Mate
Review [#1#102, 19832006]; Eugene Alberts Ideal-Mate Chess Problems [1966]; Karl
Fabels Kleinkunst im Schachproblem [1963]; Hilding Frberg & Herbert Hultbergs Svenska
Miniatyer i urval [1978]; Wadysaw Rosolak & Jan Rusineks Najpikniejsze polskie miniatury
[1986]; Colin Russs Miniature Chess Problems From Many Countries [1987]; Werner
Speckmanns Das Schachproblem: Pikante Miniaturen Ein Leitfaden fr Anfnger und
Kenner [1981]; and A. Tishkov & Victor Chepizhnys - [1987].)

Without any further ado, lets now proceed to the problem itself together with two variants of
it:

A. Ian Shanahan, The Problemist,


November 2007 {C10495}. B. Ian Shanahan, ORIGINAL C. Ian Shanahan, ORIGINAL
________ ________ ________
[wdwdwdwd] [wdwdwdwd] [wdwdwdwd]
[dwdwdwdw] [dwdwdwdw] [dwdwdwdN]
[wdwdwdwd] [wdwdwdwd] [wdwdwdwd]
[dwdwdwdw] [dwdwdwdk] [dwdwdwdw]
[wdwdwiNI] [wdwdwdNd] [wdwdwiNI]
[dwdwdwdp] [dwdwdwIw] [dwdwdwdw]
[wdwdPdwd] [wdwdPdwd] [wdwdPdw0]
[dBdwdwdw] [dBdwdwdw] [dBdwdwdw]
-------- -------- --------
9 (C+) 7 (C+) 11 (C+, thanks to Peter Wong)
1.Kh3! Kg5 2.Kg3 Kh5 1.Pe4/Kf4? Kg6/Kh4! 1.Sg5! Ph1Q+ 2. Sh3+! Qh3+
3.Bh7! (Pe4/Kf4? Kg6/Kh4!) Kg5 1.Bh7! Kg5 2. Pe4 Kh5 3.Kh3 Kg5 4.Kg3 Kh5
4.Pe4 Kh5 5.Pe5 Kg5 3.Pe5 Kg5 4.Pe6 Kh5 5.Bh7! (Pe4/Kf4? Kg6/Kh4!) Kg5
6.Pe6 Kh5 7.Pe7 Kg5 5.Pe7 Kg5 6.Pe8R! Kh5 6.Pe4 Kh5 7.Pe5 Kg5 8.Pe6 Kh5
8.Pe8R! (Pe8Q? stalemate!) Kh5 7.Re5. 9.Pe7 Kg5 10.Pe8R! Kh5
9.Re5. 11.Re5.

~1~
B, a 7, was the first step; its thematic content comprises (i) an anticritical key, followed by (ii)
an excelsior with (iii) stalemate-avoidance by means of an underpromotion, concluding with (iv) an
ideal mate. Of course, as you may well imagine, there are already several miniatures displaying
elements (ii)(iv) the simplest (and very probably the earliest) being No.36 from Eugene Alberts
collection Ideal-Mate Chess Problems, by the late-19th-century American(?) composer Frank M.
Teed, Source and Date unknown: 6K1 / 8 / 7k / 8 / 5PP1 / 8 / 4P3 / 8, 6; 1.Pe4! Kg6 ... 5.Pe8R
Kg6 6.Re6. However, it is Bs quite surprising anticritical key that, according to my necessarily
restricted investigation, endows it with some degree of originality, and thereby gives it (hence also
its extensions, A and C) a right to exist in my view.

All of my miniature moremovers to date embrace a single line of play in which I have striven to
avoid any unprovided-for defences either (1) by beginning with Black in stalemate, or (2) by
ensuring that set-play continuations are present. Alas, neither of these two options has proven
feasible here. In A, the need for the bPh3 is a tragedy the problem is cooked in 8 without it, by
1.Pe3+ or 1.Pe4 (C+) because it robs us of my tactic (1): so, what could have been a pure gift
key must instead be give-and-take. Still, I do prefer A above its two alternatives since it is the
most economical not temporally, but in the sense that the White force works harder to corral the
bK (e.g. wPe2 guarding f3 initially; the wK is no longer static; both wS and wB crucially attack
extra squares); and it is certainly less violent than C. Moreover, in C, White is shockingly
confronted by a set 2: 1...Ph1Q+ 2.Sh2 Qh2! Still, perhaps this ugly blemish can be justified
by the Black promotion and White cross-check? (And at least 1.Sh2 here looks tempting...)

It has to be said that by no means am I a moremover expert; so perhaps you might with good
reason favour the brutal C over A. If such is the case, then I wont argue with you! If you decided
to publish C rather than A (despite my being most partial to it), I shant complain. But maybe Im
being presumptuous, and you dont find any of these problems acceptable for The Problemist.
Would The Problemist Supplement then be a suitable outlet? Please let me know your
thoughts; if it is more convenient for you, do feel free to e-mail me...

I look forward to hearing from you. All the very best to you, Mr Grevatt; and Cheers!

Yours faithfully,

Ian Shanahan.

~2~

You might also like