Website founded by
Milan Velimirović
in 2006

9:37 CET



Remember me

Forgot your
Click here!
to create your account if you don't already have one.

New look


MatPlus.Net Forum X-Files: Anticipations Arthur Mosely, 1 Prize, Northern Whig 1912
You can only view this page!
(1) Posted by Geoff Foster [Wednesday, Mar 6, 2019 22:34]

Arthur Mosely, 1 Prize, Northern Whig 1912

Arthur Mosely
1 Prize, Northern Whig 1912
(= 10+8 )
1.Se4! (>2.Re8)
1...Kxe4 2.Re8
1...Scxe4 2.Rxd5
1...dxe4 2.Bd4
1...Bxe4 2.d4
1...fxe4 2.Qe6
1...Rxe4 2.Qxf5
1...Sfxe4 2.Sxd3
1...Qxe4 2.Qh8

An 8-fold sacrifice. This famous problem is in the PDB (P1036804), where in 2012 Dr. Heiko Voß claimed it was completely anticipated by Thomas Taverner, 1 Prize, Pen & Pencil 1899 (position reflected left/right). Surely this must be a mistake? Does anyone have more information, or know how to contact Heiko Voß?
(Read Only)pid=17072
(2) Posted by Siegfried Hornecker [Thursday, Mar 7, 2019 07:51]; edited by Siegfried Hornecker [19-03-07]

The mirrored position is indeed found in Thomas Taverner's book: "Chess Problems Made Easy", page 71, no. 126 (in electronic reprint Thulin 2005).

It is attributed to A. Mosley (not Mosely) from Brisbane there, however.

If Taverner really would have anticipated it, it is very unlikely that he would attribute it to "A. Mosley, Brisbane".
According to the other sources I find, the name should be "Mosely", as you wrote it, it is misspelled in Taverner's book.

For your convenience, I found the link to the book here:

The link in there:

PS: I see your Problemist article with Bob Meadley.
Do you have the original "Northern Whig" source somewhere to confirm Taverner had both the name and position [mirrored] wrong?
(Read Only)pid=17073
(3) Posted by Geoff Foster [Thursday, Mar 7, 2019 09:46]

"The Northern Whig" is available at the British Newspaper Archive:" target=_blank>

They have a search facility, but I'm having trouble finding the Mosely problem.
(Read Only)pid=17074
(4) Posted by Anders Thulin [Thursday, Mar 7, 2019 16:31]; edited by Anders Thulin [19-03-07]

I'm afraid that the 'Mosley' misspelling is due to poor proof-reading from my side: the original book has 'A. Mosely, Brisbane'. If I still can, I will try to correct it.

I do find I have a note of a Northern Whig tourney, saying:

1912, Northern Whig (1 pr. A. J. Mosely #2) [C1 71]

C1 is Chlubna: Versunkene Schätze.

but nothing by Mosely that could match a Pen and Pencil tourney in 1889. (The only Pen and Pencil 1889 1 pr #2 I have noted is by Heathcote, but I don't have complete notes.)
(Read Only)pid=17075
(5) Posted by Michael McDowell [Thursday, Mar 7, 2019 23:53]

Many years ago I examined the Northern Whig column in the Newspaper section of Belfast Central Library (the Northern Whig being the leading Belfast newspaper of the time). My recollection is that Mosely's problem won 1st Prize in a formal tourney for tasks. I don't think the Northern Whig had an informal award.

Mosely may have been inspired by a problem by R.G.Thomson published in the Chess Amateur in 1911, which has a similar matrix and key, but only 7 captures. The attribution to Taverner must be incorrect. The Mosely was reprinted many times, and Taverner himself would surely have drawn attention to any anticipation.
(Read Only)pid=17076
(6) Posted by Geoff Foster [Friday, Mar 8, 2019 09:06]

Here is the Thomson problem

Robert G. Thomson
1 Prize, Chess Amateur 1911-12
(= 10+12 )

1.Sd4! (>2.Rd7)
(Read Only)pid=17077
(7) Posted by seetharaman kalyan [Friday, Mar 8, 2019 21:34]

Wonderful. Adding a thematic mate, Arthur Mosely actually economises ! Use of the white queen is great. A problem to quote many times
(Read Only)pid=17079
(8) Posted by Joost de Heer [Saturday, Mar 9, 2019 12:12]; edited by Joost de Heer [19-03-09]

In Mosely's composition, Kxe4 doesn't defend against the threat (and in Thomson's Kxd4 doesn't), so why is it a variation?
[/#2 ignoramus]
(Read Only)pid=17080
(9) Posted by Miodrag Mladenović [Saturday, Mar 9, 2019 13:46]

Joost wrote:
In Mosely's composition, Kxe4 doesn't defend against the threat (and in Thomson's Kxd4 doesn't), so why is it a variation?

Some problemists consider move by bK to the free square as a variation regardless if it defends threat or not. Personally I do not consider this as variation but for this task it does make problem more thematic. When I say more thematic, I mean if there are two problems with a 7 thematic variations but one of them has this additional non-variation capture by bK it's a better position (in my opinion). Of course if someone finds position where this move by bK is additional variation it would be great.
(Read Only)pid=17081
(10) Posted by seetharaman kalyan [Saturday, Mar 9, 2019 15:46]

The task was 8 different captures of the Se4 after a thematic key. No one did it before
(Read Only)pid=17082
(11) Posted by Joost de Heer [Saturday, Mar 9, 2019 17:54]

So this would be also an 8-fold rendition of the task?
(= 4+12 )

(Read Only)pid=17083
(12) Posted by Hauke Reddmann [Saturday, Mar 9, 2019 20:00]

"Sarcasm" font exists. Internet board use should be mandatory ;-)
(I.e., of course different mates are wanted, if not outright
written into the task definition explicitly.)
(Read Only)pid=17084
(13) Posted by Geoff Foster [Saturday, Mar 9, 2019 22:59]

The task is sacrifice of a white piece with 8 captures of that piece, each resulting in a different mate. Capture by the bK still counts as a sacrifice with a different mate, even though the mate is the threat. In any case, a bK move is usually counted as a different variation.

If a checking key is allowed then the record is 9, as below.

J.C.van Gool, Le Journal de Geneve 1976
(= 13+10 )

1...dxe5 2.Qb7
1...fxe5 2.Sxg5
1...Bxe5 2.Qxd3
1...Qxe5 2.Bg2
1...Rexe5 2.Sxd6
1...Rgxe5 2.f3
1...S7xe5 2.Sxf6
1...S3xe5 2.Rxd4
1...Kxe5 2.fxe8=Q

This problem also shows 8 self-blocks on a single square.
(Read Only)pid=17085

No more posts

MatPlus.Net Forum X-Files: Anticipations Arthur Mosely, 1 Prize, Northern Whig 1912