Website founded by
Milan Velimirović
in 2006

16:37 CET



Remember me

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

Rating lists


MatPlus.Net Forum Liga Problemista 2007 2nd Round (#2), judge: Dragan Stojnić (Serbia)
You can only view this page!
(1) Posted by Administrator [Monday, Feb 12, 2007 16:20]

2nd Round (#2), judge: Dragan Stojnić (Serbia)

2nd Round (#2) - Announcement

Direct mates in 2 moves are required with the theme: At least one changed mate or threat from the same white battery in at least three phases.

Dragan Stojnić (Serbia)

Closing date: May 1st, 2007

Send problems to:
Milan Velimirović, Milentija Popovića 35/6, 11070 Novi Beograd, Serbia

or by e-mail to: (with subject LP2/2007)

or online: fill the input form Originals..LP2 on this site - ensure that correct section (LP2007, Round 2) is selected!

Note that entries should be sent to new address, not to tourney director Slobodan Šaletić. This is done for practical reasons while as soon as the term for sending the entries expires the director takes care about everything.

More in Liga Problemista 2007: Theme for 2nd Round.

If you have any question regarding the theme, please post it in this thread!
(Read Only)pid=454
(2) Posted by Darko Šaljić [Tuesday, Feb 13, 2007 15:37]

I have one question.
Is it allowed to create a thematic white battery from a halfbattery system?

(Read Only)pid=456
(3) Posted by Administrator [Tuesday, Feb 13, 2007 21:25]

Yes, provided that the same battery is created at least three times, i.e. that another front piece from halfbattery plays three first moves (e.g. two tries and key).
(Read Only)pid=457
(4) Posted by Hauke Reddmann [Wednesday, Feb 21, 2007 16:38]

I have a question on example 5.
After Kg5-f4, is it really the *same* battery?

Likewise, assume (random scheme) 1.Sc5xe6? 2.Se6-d4# and 1.Sg5xe6! 2.Se6-f4#
Is that the *same* battery? (Same question arises with the checking unit!)

(Read Only)pid=469
(5) Posted by Administrator [Wednesday, Feb 21, 2007 17:04]

I cannot access the judge via Internet, but I will meet hom on Saturday (24th) and discuss with him your question. Similar question was asked by Boško Milošeski (via email).

My opinion:
- batteries created by 1.Sc5xe6 and 1.Sg5xe6 are not the same batteries;
- for king (or pawn) move along the battery line I also thought that it was not the same battery, but my second thought was "Why not?"; anyway, the judge's opinion will be decisive, so you have to wait until Sunday.

P.S.: Almiro Zarur already has three thematic phases with static king, so we cannot conclude if 1.Kf4 is thematic or only additional try ... Unfortinately :)
(Read Only)pid=470
(6) Posted by Administrator [Sunday, Feb 25, 2007 01:52]

Explanations by the judge:
Q: Is it thematic if front piece moves along the battery line on the first move (try or key)
A:Yes. The battery is considered to be the same if front or even rear piece moves on the first move along the battery line, or if rear piece arrives to battery line on three different squares.
Q:Is it required that actual play is a thematic phase. For example, if there are three tries with changed threats from the same battery and the key establishes a block (zugzwang) position?
A:No, it is not required that actual play is a thematic phase. The form described as example is thematic.
P.S.: Second answer is re-phrased after the warning by Miodrag Mladenovic!
(Read Only)pid=472
(7) Posted by Miodrag Mladenović [Sunday, Feb 25, 2007 06:54]

The answer to the second question is very confusing. The question was starting with "Is it required..." but answer is "Yes, it is thematic.". It's almost like answer is to the second part of the question that is describing details. So it looks like the real answer should be "No, it's not required." instead of "Yes, it is thematic.".
(Read Only)pid=473
(8) Posted by Administrator [Sunday, Feb 25, 2007 11:45]

Thanks Misha. The confusing answer has been replaced by another.
(Read Only)pid=474
(9) Posted by Hauke Reddmann [Wednesday, Feb 28, 2007 11:52]

I have two variants after Qxc7; unluckily, in the third
the captured object runs away and the defense is Qc7.
Should I add a bit of material to avoid?

(Read Only)pid=482
(10) Posted by Administrator [Wednesday, Feb 28, 2007 16:35]

The question is not related to proposed theme. However, without the illustration there are three possible answers: "yes", "no" and/or "maybe" :)
(Read Only)pid=483
(11) Posted by Hauke Reddmann [Wednesday, Feb 28, 2007 17:45]

The question is relevant as far as, if Qxc7 and Qc7 are considered
NOT to be the "same" move, of course no change in the sense of the
theme has happened. (Of course the question generally may apply to
any problems with changed mates.) For a somewhat related problem
(Re3 with R from different field) see a recent thread.

In any case, the answer is "I couldn't care less now" since
I already thrown out that ambiguity without loss :-)

(Read Only)pid=484

No more posts

MatPlus.Net Forum Liga Problemista 2007 2nd Round (#2), judge: Dragan Stojnić (Serbia)