Here we go again!

Finding the study by Leonid Kubbel (see "One by Leonid Kubbel") in Tal's Winning Chess Combinations (1979), sent me back into a book that I bought last summer. Genrikh Moiseyevich Kasparian, 888 Miniature Studies (2010) contains fifteen of Kubbel's studies, as well as some background about the composer. Several of these studies feature clever combinations that provoke stalemate to save half a point for the weaker side.

Kubbel's studies are economical and practical. As he states, and Kasparian quotes:

The idea must be implemented, in the conditions of a mutual with active participation, without exception, of all pieces. Black must not wait until White fulfills his plan, but must find counrterplay, combining defense with counter-attack. All phases of this struggle--the entering into the dispute, the central stage and the end--must be connected. Each ide must be expressed using the minimum resources.
As quoted in Kasparian, 888 Miniature Studies, 71.

The idea in one that I worked through last night did not strike me as quite as compelling as in some of the others, but playing it out against Stockfish presented me with a small problem stopping a pawn, and then offered more practice with checkmate using a bishop and knight (see "Bishop and Knight Checkmate").

White to move

From Kubbel, Rigaer Tageblatt 1914.

It is clear that White must win both the bishop and the pawn without exchanges.

Stripes,J -- Stockfish (iPad)
From Kubbel, 15.06.2017

1.Be4

The pin is the only move.

1...Kxa7 2.Nd5

Setting up to attack the bishop and pawn.

2...Bg8 3.Ne7

Now, Black has many possibilities. The main difficulty of this study stems from seeing from the starting position that all Black's options here fail.

3...Bh7

3...Bf7 is given as the main solution. 4.Nc6+ Ka6 5.Bd3+ Kb7 6.Nd8+.

4.Kd6 Ka6

4...Kb8 is given in an alternate solution.

5.Ke6

Comically, it was only at this point that I became fully conscious of the direction that Black's pawn moves. In a study, White always moves first and is on bottom in the diagram. However, I solve enough exercises where the board is flipped that I sometimes need to labor to focus on which way pawns move. I have failed exercises in Chess.com's Tactics Trainer because I thought pawns were moving the wrong way.

5...Kb5 6.Kf6 Kc5 7.Kg7 Kd4

White to move

I solved this exercise on my iPad three times last night, each time trying a different move here. My qust was for a more efficient capture of Black's pawn and subsequent checkmate. I saved only the third effort.

8.Ba8

I played 8.Bb1 on the first effort. Keeping the bishop on the long diagonal seems better. This idea, adopted on my second and third tries, solved the minor problem of eliminating the pawn without exchanges.

8...g5 9.Kxh7 g4 10.Kh6

10.Nf5+ is better. As the king cannot capture the pawn, it might be better to only move it towards the center. Once the pawn is eliminated, the first step in checkmate with bishop and knight is to centralize one's pieces.

10...Ke3 11.Kg5 g3 12.Nd5+ Kf2 13.Nf4

The only winning move, but easy to see.

13...Kf1 14.Kg4 g2 15.Nxg2 Ke2 16.Kf4 Kd3 17.Ne3 Kd4

White to move

18.Be4

It has become gratifying to see over and over, when subjecting my play to computer analysis, that I played the move that lead to the fastest checkmate. Alas, later on, there were some inefficient moves.

18...Kc5 19.Ke5 Kb5

White to move

20.Kd5

20.Kd4 was best. My move adds four moves to the checkmate sequence. Why is d4 the better square?

20...Kb4 21.Kd4 Kb3 22.Bd3 Kb4 23.Bc4 Ka3 24.Kc3

Efficient and correct.

24...Ka4

White to move

25.Nd5

Here we go again. 25.Nc2 was correct. My next few moves reveal that a problem remains in my execution of the bishop and knight checkmate (see "Making my Point").

25...Ka5 26.Bd3 Ka4 27.Kc4?

Adding five moves to the finish. 27.Nc7 was correct.

27...Ka3 28.Ne3 Kb2 29.Nc2 Kc1 30.Kc3 Kd1 31.Bc4 Kc1

White to move

Finally, I have reached a position that I know how to execute efficiently.

32.Ba2 Kd1 33.Nd4 Ke1 34.Kd3 Kf2 35.Ne2 Kg2 36.Be6 Kf3 37.Bf5 Kf2 38.Bg4 Ke1 39.Ke3 Kd1 40.Bf5 Ke1 41.Bc2 Kf1 42.Nf4 Ke1 43.Ng2+ Kf1 44.Kf3 Kg1 45.Kg3 Kf1 46.Bd3+ Kg1 47.Nf4 Kh1 48.Be2 Kg1 49.Nh3+ Kh1 50.Bf3# 1–0

Winning with Knights

Aleksey Alekseevic Troitski

Working my way through the endgame compositions in Genrikh Kasparian, 888 Miniature Studies (2010) has put me in the midst of forty studies by A. A. Troitsky (1866-1942).* Many of these feature clever checkmates with knights. Here is an example.

White to move

Kasparian's solution is presumably the one offered by Troitsky. However, playing the position against a computer reveals an alternate solution. In Kasparian's solution, all of White's moves are the only move leading to advantage.

1.Ne3 g5 2.Kf3 g4

Here the computer played 2...h4, leading to 3.g4 Kh2 4.Nf5 Kg1 5.Nxh6 h3 6.Nf5 Kf1 7.Kg3+-.

3.Kf2 h4 4.Ng2 hxg3 5.Kg1

Black to move

Black's king can no longer move, forcing the pawn forward until the king is wholly trapped. Then, the knight delivers checkmate.

5...h5 6.Kh1 h4 7.Nf4#.


*Kasparian employs the spelling Troitski, while most English language texts use Troitsky.

Two Endgame Compositions

These two compositions were brought to my attention through Genrikh Moiseyevich Kasparian, 888 Miniature Studies (2010), which I acquired last week. This book is an expansion of the author's 555 Miniature Studies (1975). This earlier book, as far as I know, was never translated into English. The present work was left in manuscript at the time of the author's death, but was brought into publication fifteen years later through the assistance of his son, Sergei Kasparian.

White to move

Johann Berger 1888

This study is number 17 in Kasparian. I read through the solution, which is under the diagram, and then proceeded to try making sense of it. When I thought I had reached a reasonable understanding of the ideas, I tried playing it against Stockfish. My first effort led to failure, so I returned to the solution. In my second try against Stockfish, I was able to win easily. I continued working with the problem, however, seeking to develop the ability to explain in plain English to beginning chess players how to understand the solution.

Having given the solution so much attention, I looked in Berger's book, Theorie und Praxis der Endspiele (1890) where I was surprised to find the problem was credited to an obscure publication, Columbia Chess Chronicle III, no. 13 (1888). After some searching, I found the problem on the cover of the issue named, where Berger is confirmed as the composer.

Readers of this blog are encouraged to offer their solutions in the comments below. I will refrain from presenting the solution, except in reply to comments.

White to move

Karl Behting 1894

Kasparian credits C. Behting, Rigaer Tageblatt 1894 (21). Tageblatt translates as "daily paper". I do not know whether that is the name of a specific news publication or a generic term for one or more of several newspapers in Riga. Its use in other publications that I have examined suggets that it is a specific paper.

Karl Behting (Kārlis Bētiņš) was a Latvian chess player and composer. The Latvian Gambit bears its name because he studied it with other Riga players and published an article in St. Petersburger Zeitung (1909). Many of his compositions were published in newspapers in Riga, then were republished in books and magazines that culled problems from other publications. I found a version of this problem in Baltische Schachblätter, Issues 6-8 (1898). Below this point, I am presenting the problem as found there and the solution. Of interest in the solution is a technical chess term that is new to me and worth adding to the lexicon of chess terms: Tempozug.

Tempozug means to waste a tempo; that is, to make a move that does not change the position. A Tempozug places the opponent in Zugzwang.


Solution to Second Problem

Behting's composition in Baltische Schachblätter.

Credit here is given to Johann Behting, Karl's older brother. A 1930 publication, Studien und Problem lists both Johann and Karl as authors, suggesting collaboration. Were there separate publications of this problem by both brothers? The position attributed to Johann begins one move earlier than the version of the same problem that Kasparian credits to Karl. Some insights into the compositions of these brothers is offered by John Beasley, "Some Studies by Johann and Carl Behting," British Endgame Study News 52 (September 2007), www.jsbeasley.co.uk/besn/s52.pdf.

Solution from Baltische Schachblätter.