Подведены итоги конкурса памяти двух уральских этюдистов (PDF PGN). 110 лет назад родился Павел Бабич (в Украине), а 80 лет назад – Бронислав Олимпиев.
Победил в конкурсе замечательный этюд Александра Ставриецкого. Автор придумал и привел в движение громадную позиционную махину.
Тоже мне практик))
А что? Надо весело играть!
Было и такое: однажды угодил в дьявольскую патовую ловушку соперника, и это при анализе отложенной партии! Вот это был шок. Понял, что как игрок ничего не добьюсь и вовремя переключился на этюды)
Here is a study based on Stavrietsky’s work. Maybe it is original enough to participate in the Malyshko MT. It has a rare feature: there is not a single capture during the whole solution (not even in the variations)! The only regret: I wish I could have borrowed the 5…Qh7 move from the first prize study.
[Event “?”][Site “?][Date «2017.??.??»][Round «?»][White «Rusz, Árpád»][Black «?»][Result «1/2-1/2»][SetUp «1»][FEN «b6k/7q/1P5p/2N2n1p/8/2N2p1P/5P2/B1K5 w — — 0 1»][PlyCount «17»][EventDate «2017.??.??»]
1. Nd5+ Ng7 2. Ne7 $1 h4 3. Bc3 $1 h5 4. Bd2 Be4 $1 (4… Nf5 5. Bc3+ Ng7 6.Bd2 Bb7 7. Kb2 $1 Nf5 8. Bc3+ Ng7 9. Bd2 {positional draw}) 5. Nd3 $3 (5. Bf4$2 Bb1 $1 {Bristol Theme} 6. b7 Qc2#) (5. Kb2 $2 Bb1 $1 {Bristol Theme} 6. b7Qc2+ 7. Ka1 Qa2#) 5… Bc6 $1 6. Nf4 $1 (6. Nc5 $2 Ba4 $1 7. b7 Qc2#) 6… Qe47. Nfg6+ Kh7 8. Nf8+ Kh8 9. Nfg6+ {perpetual check} 1/2-1/2
Главное начинается в следующей позиции:
В ней три! лишние пешки – не нужны. За лишние пешки я бью в морду.
Without the f-pawns you cannot force the black bishop to go to e4. It will go to f3 and will sacrifice itself on d1 even if one relocates the c5 knight to f2.
The extra h-pawn is a small price to pay for the natural and captureless intro but I would be glad to see a more economical version.
Who cares about Bishop not going to f3 or e4??? Do you ever separate the most important things from garbage ideas? Don’t spoil main ideas by extra pieces because you have a sick desire to add some stupid subtleties!
And learn at last together with Pervakov and Zinar what «лишняя фигура» means! And why it is such a big crime.
If Bishop doesn’t want to go to e4, you should bring it there with capture instead of adding extra-pawns. The captured piece is called additional (used for making introduction only) — it doesn’t spoil the main position because it disappears.
I know what an additional piece is and I strongly suspect that Pervakov and Zinar also knows. In a study whose main idea is a picturesque position it would be a crime to have some additional piece on the board. If the main idea is the “flow” additional pawns may be tolerated if they improve the logic or clarity of the play. I don’t like dogmatism so I presume that even in the first case there are studies where additional pawns can be justified.
It never crossed my mind that I could have a capture on e4. Without the f-pawns there is no Bristol (the bishop can go via f3-d1 to attack the c2 square) and there is no study.
1) Additional is not extra. 2) Flow is not idea. 3) Bristol is kept without f-pawns. 4) It’s not dogmatism, it’s principles.
1) Additional is not extra. You are right, I was confusing them. Now it is clear: additional pieces were the wQh5 and the two black rooks, one white and one black bishop from the Stavrietsky study. That seems to be enough material for another study…
2) By “flow” I meant “play” or “moves”.
3) 5.Bf4? is refuted by 5…Bb1! (Bristol). If the extra f-pawns are missing, 5…Bf3 followed by 6…Bd1 is also a refutation. Probably I am dogmatic in following the principle that the tries should be refuted in only one way.
1) Yes. Stavrietsky used a lot of additional pieces. He is a heavy-weight composer. 2) I know what is flow. It’s a Legniano battle. 3) Remove extra pawns in the position above and play 5.Nd7. The only refutation is Bristol move Bb1.
I didn’t write you’re dogmatic. You can’t be dogmatic because you like every primitive idea you meet.
Okay, you have convinced me to try to build a new version with a capture on e4. I will start from the following scheme:
wKc1,Nc5,e7,Bd2,Pb6,e2,h4/bKh8,Qh7,Ng7,Be4,Ph5 BTM
1…Bb1! 2.e4 Bxe4 3.Nd3! etc.
Here’s a new version. I still prefer the previous one.
[Event “?”][Site “?”][Date “2017.??.??”][Round “?”][White “Rusz, Árpád”][Black “?”][Result “1/2-1/2”][SetUp “1”][FEN “4n2k/4N2q/1P5p/8/NB2b2p/7P/4P3/2K5 w – – 0 1”][PlyCount “17”][EventDate “2017.??.??”]
1. Bc3+ Ng7 2. Nc5 h5 3. Bd2 Bb1 $1 (3… Ne6 4. Bc3+ Ng7 5. Bd2 {positionaldraw}) 4. e4 (4. b7 $2 Qc2#) 4… Bxe4 5. Nd3 $1 (5. Nd7 $2 Bb1 $1 6. Nf8 Qc2#)5… Bf3 $1 6. Nf4 $1 (6. Nc5 $2 Bd1 $1 7. Kxd1 Qb1+ $19) 6… Qe4 7. Nfg6+ Kh78. Nf8+ Kh8 9. Nfg6+ {perpetual check} 1/2-1/2
Poiskal v baze partii s korolem na h8-a8-a1-h1, nashel 30 partij. Vot odna iz nix.
[Site “Baile Herculane”][Date “1982.??.??”][Round “7”]
[White “Ribli, Zoltan”][Black “Inkiov, Ventzislav”][Result “1/2-1/2”]
[ECO “D52”][WhiteElo “2590”][BlackElo “2495”][PlyCount “69”]
1. c4 Nf6 2. Nf3 e6 3. Nc3 d5 4. d4 Nbd7 5. Bg5 c6 6. e3 Qa5 7. Nd2 Bb4 8. cxd5
Nxd5 9. Nce4 e5 10. a3 Bxd2+ 11. Qxd2 Qxd2+ 12. Kxd2 O-O 13. Nc3 exd4 14. Nxd5 cxd5 15. exd4 Nb8 16. b4 Nc6 17. Be3 Be6 18. Bd3 Rac8 19. Rhc1 Nb8 20. b5 Nd7 21. Bf4 Nb6 22. Bd6 Rfe8 23. Bc5 Nc4+ 24. Bxc4 dxc4 25. Bxa7 Bd5 26. f3 Re6 27.a4 Rce8 28. Kc3 Ra8 29. b6 Re3+ 30. Kb4 Rb3+ 31. Kc5 Bc6 32. Kd6 Rd8+ 33. Kc7 Rd7+ 34. Kb8 Rd3 35. Ka8 1/2-1/2
Спасибо, Ильгам!
Лучше выкладывать партии и этюды на форуме, а здесь давать ссылку. PGN текст вставляете между тэгами
[pgn] и /pgn]
и получаем доску с ходами. Если что неясно, на форуме есть инструкция.
Пока не придумал, как это сделать здесь.