|
|
| (1) Posted by Eugene Rosner [Monday, Mar 9, 2015 00:43] |
Karlstrom Fleck in a #2
Is there a minimum number of variations needed that defeat all threats in order to call the problem's theme Karlstrom Fleck? Is it enough for only one defense/variation to defeat all the threats?
|
|
| (2) Posted by Ian Shanahan [Monday, Mar 9, 2015 06:19] |
If there are n threats, then there needs to be at least n defences which lead to new mates for it to be called a Karlstrom-Fleck.
|
|
| (3) Posted by Eugene Rosner [Tuesday, Mar 10, 2015 16:02] |
thanks Ian-
is this according to the Velimirovic/Valtonen encyclopedia?
|
|
| (4) Posted by seetharaman kalyan [Tuesday, Mar 10, 2015 17:15] |
Yes :)
|
|
| (5) Posted by Harry Fougiaxis [Tuesday, Mar 10, 2015 19:49] |
I don't think that the KV/MV encyclopedia asks for n total defences that are met with new mates.
KV/MV: White threatens 3 or more mates each of which is accurately forced by black thematic defences. Black moves, which allow more than one mate are not permitted, while total defences, which prevent all threats but allow new mates, are allowed (these are called "Karlström" defences).
The definition of WinChloe matches: Separation of at least three threats by black first moves, there is no dual after each black move, and at least one black move defeats all the threats (and is answered by a new mate of course).
|
|
| (6) Posted by seetharaman kalyan [Tuesday, Mar 10, 2015 20:17]; edited by seetharaman kalyan [15-03-10] |
I quote from the book:
"Fleck-Karlstrom" theme: Fleck theme or seprtion of three or more threats with at least the same number of total defences which prevent all threats and yield new mates. (alias: Krlstrom-fleck)
My interpretation:
It is a combination of Fleck theme with equal no. of moves which allow new mates.
|
|
| (7) Posted by Harry Fougiaxis [Tuesday, Mar 10, 2015 22:31] |
Yes, my mistake. In the Fleck definition, the encyclopedia mentions "Karlström-Fleck" defences -- not theme.
FIDE Album agrees, "Fleck theme with additional total defences, the number of threats, separating defences and total defences being identical." Poisson's definition is incorrect.
|
|
| (8) Posted by Joost de Heer [Wednesday, Mar 11, 2015 07:03] |
The book apparently mentions 'at least the same number of total defences'. So not 'equal to', but 'equal to or more than'.
So n threats, m defences which refute all threats, m>=n.
|
|
| (9) Posted by Eugene Rosner [Wednesday, Mar 11, 2015 13:26] |
thanks everyone-very helpful. amazing that we have this special community that can chime in on this, a blessing for our artform!
|
|
| (10) Posted by Hauke Reddmann [Sunday, Mar 15, 2015 16:12] |
Note: it's just an agreed-upon definition. Nobody hinders you
to do a Fleck with 7 threats and 6 total defenses (I would be
impressed). In that case you are one total defense short of
a Karlström, but who cares unless it's a theme tourney?
The *esthetic* aspect is a complete other can of worms.
Hauke
|
|
No more posts |
MatPlus.Net  Forum General Karlstrom Fleck in a #2 |
ISC 2024
