﻿﻿ MatPlus.Net

Website founded by
Milan Velimirović
in 2006

23:17 UTC
 ISC 2020
 Headlines Forum* Fellows Members DL Archive Links

Remember me

 CHESS SOLVINGTournamentsRating lists1-Jan-2020
 B P C F

MatPlus.Net Forum General Multiple Dombrovskis

### Multiple Dombrovskis

The discussion started in the thread “The Encyclopedia of Chess Problems” used several examples.
Alfred Dombrovskis himself, as well as Soviet theory, would hardly agree. They say mates are to be provided by the key-move (not to exist in the set-play). This important element of the theme was somehow lost in translation – from Russian to letters A, B, C…
It means only Zhuravlev’s example presents the theme in more than 2 variations. However, the absence of the threat (block with many black duals) makes this example inferior, if thematic at all.

It seems nowadays that the definition of 'Dombrovskis theme' is the formal definition :
1.X[A#] a!
1.Y[B#] b!

and then : 1.Z followed with 1...a 2.A#, 1...b 2.B#

It seems clear that it is not the complete intention of Dombroskis himself who added - as far as I know - conditions about the key of the solution that would bring the changes and a threat.

The Dombrovskis theme have escaped the strict will of Dombroskis himself.

the 4-fold shown are of course weak forms of Dombrovskis, but it seems too much to discard them.

No intention to discard these five examples (I rewarded one of them), but to separate them from multiple presentations of the theme in it's original form.

Perhaps should we call that program "Ideal-D." !? - and the bare formula "The D." (A strict aplication of Dombrovskis will would reduce drastically the number of acceptable D.s! - for instance: most of the lightweights are (sic) Zzw ; or: even in some quite accomplished "Ideal", Try defence finds an empty square, and Real play variation, a white unit that (not incidentally) was the one that played the Try move.) - Or: "Half-Ideal" examples, etc

And the same question about other related themes. In which of them is it considered obligatory that the changes are provided by the key? Is it a matter of common agreement or the originators' will? Or can it be logically substantiated?