Website founded by Milan Velimirović in 2006
22:53 UTC
 
MatPlus.Net Forum Endgame studies Corrected studies 



You can only view this page!
  (1) Posted by Arpad Rusz [Friday, Aug 3, 2007 19:09]  Corrected studies Many masterworks, which now are proved to be incorrect, can be and deserve to be corrected. So you can post here new corrections or cooked studies for which we should find the correct form.
Gurgenidze,Tavariani
Merani1991 sp.Pr.
(= 3+3 ) draw(cooked)
1.Nc8+ Ke5 2.Nb6 Bd3 3.Nd7+ [dual 3.Bh1! Be4 4.Nc4+ Kd4 5.Nd2 Bxh1 6.Nf1=] 3...Kf4 4.Nc5 [dual 4.Nf6! Be2 5.Bh1 Bf3 6.Nd5+ Kg3 7.Ne3 Kf2 8.Nf1!+] 4...Be2 5.Ne6+ Kg3 6.Nd4 Bf1 7.Nf5+= [dual 7.Bh1! Bg2 8.Nf5+ Kf2 9.Ne3! Bf3 10.Nf1!=]
A very nice systematical movement, but with 3 duals. A correction is possible by moving the wK from a1 to e8.
Gurgenidze,Tavariani
Merani1991 sp.Pr.
correction
(= 3+3 ) draw
1.Nc8+ Ke5 2.Nb6 [2.Ne7? Bd3 3.Bh1 Be4 4.Nc6+ Kf4–+] 2...Bd3 3.Nd7+ Kf4 4.Nc5 [4.Nf6? Be2 5.Bh1 Bf3 6.Nd5+ Kg3 7.Ne3 Kf2 8.Nf1! Bh5+! 9.Ke7 Kxf1–+] 4...Be2 5.Ne6+ Kg3 6.Nd4 [6.Ng5? Kg4–+ ] 6...Bf1 7.Nf5+ Kf2 8.Nh4 Kg3 9.Nf5+ Kf2 10.Nh4 positional draw
J.Bán
Magyar Sakkszövetség1959 2nd Pr.
(= 3+6 ) draw(cooked)
1.Nd6+ Kg5 2.Rxh7 d2 3.Rd7! Ne3 [3...d1Q 4.Ne4+ Kf4 (but 4...Kf5! 5.Rxd1 Nxd1 6.Kg3 Nde3 7.Nd6+ Kg6! 8.Ne4 Nd4 9.Kf4 Ndf5 10.Nf2 g3–+) 5.Rxd1 Nxd1 6.Nf6 g3+ 7.Kg1! Kf3 8.Nh5 g2 9.Nf4!= chameleon echo] 4.Nf7+ Kf4 5.Rxd2 Nf1+ 6.Kg2 Nxd2 7.Nh6 g3 8.Nf5!= chameleon echo
A true masterpiece! The correction is possible by inverting the colors.
J.Bán
Magyar Sakkszövetség1959 2nd Pr.
correction
(= 5+3 ) win
1.d7 Rd1! 2.d8Q [2.Ne6? Nf2+ 3.Kf5 Rxd7 4.Nf8+ Kg7 5.Nxd7 Nh3 6.g6 Nf4!= chameleon echo] 2...Ne5+ 3.Kf4! [3.Kf5? Rxd8 4.Nxd8 Nf3! 5.g6+ Kg8! 6.Kf6 Nh4 7.g7 Nf5!= chameleon echo] 3...Rxd8 4.Nxd8 Kg6 5.Nde6! [5.Nce6? Nd3+ 6.Ke3 Nc5! 7.Kf4 Nd3+ positional draw] 5...Nd3+ 6.Kg3! Ne5 7.Nd5 Kf5 8.Ndf4 Nf7 9.g6 1–0   (2) Posted by Siegfried Hornecker [Sunday, Aug 5, 2007 15:42]; edited by Siegfried Hornecker [070805]  I'd love to propose the following study for correction (a better than mine, at least):
(= 5+3 )
S. and R. Tsurtumia
Krikheli MT 1990, 1st prize
Win
1.Sc5 Ree2 2.Sa4+ Ka1! 3.Be4! Rcd2+ 4.Kc1 Ra2! 5.Sc3 Re1+ 6.Sd1 Rxe4
(= 4+3 )
7.c8R! Ree2 8.g8R! wins
But sadly the Tsurtumia family left us alone with the question how white wins after 7...Rg4. Most probably they overestimated the bad position of the black king but 7...Rg4 8.g8Q Rxg8 9.Rxg8 Re2/Rg2/Rh2 is drawn.
Is it possible to save the end without additional material? The best I found is +wPh3 +bPh4 but it takes some of the fascination. However, then the study works as it should always have.   (3) Posted by Arpad Rusz [Monday, Aug 20, 2007 17:09]  I have corrected two studies by A.Ivanov. They had very nice cooks!
A.Ivanov
Shakhmaty v SSSR, 1989
2nd hm
(= 5+5 ) win(cooked)
1.Ka3 Ne5 2.b4+ Ka6 3.Be2+ Nd3 4.Ka4 Bb7 5.Bxd3+ exd3 6.b5+ Ka7 7.c6 Rb8 [but 7...Kb6! 8.Rxb7+ Kc5 9.Kb3 Rd8 10.c7 d2! 11.cxd8Q d1Q+ 12.Qxd1 stalemate] 8.Ka5 d2 9.b6+ Ka8 10.cxb7+ Rxb7 11.Ka6 d1Q [11...Rb8 12.Ra7#; 11...Rxb6+ 12.Kxb6 d1Q 13.Rc8#] 12.Rc8+ Rb8 13.b7#
A.Ivanov
Shakhmaty v SSSR, 1989
2nd hm
correction
(= 5+5 ) draw
1.Ne4 b5+ 2.Ka3 Be7+ 3.Nd6 Ka5 4.Bb2 Bxd6+ 5.exd6 b4+ 6.Ka2 c3 7.Kb3! [7.Rb1? Ka4 8.Ka1 b3! (8...Rd2? 9.Bc1 Rxd6 10.Bf4 Ra6! 11.Ka2 Re6! 12.Rh1! (12.Rg1? b3+ 13.Kb1 b2 14.Kc2 Kb4–+) 12...b3+ (12...Re2+ 13.Kb1 Kb3 14.Bc1=) 13.Kb1 b2 14.Ka2 Kb4 15.Rh6 Re1 16.Rb6+ Kc4 17.Rxb2 cxb2 18.Kxb2 Re2+ 19.Ka3!=) 9.d7 (9.Bxc3 Ra2#) 9...cxb2+ 10.Rxb2 Ka3 11.d8Q (11.Rxb3+ Kxb3 12.d8Q Rc1#; 11.Rb1 Ra2#) 11...Rc1+ 12.Rb1 b2#] 7...Rxb2+ 8.Kc4 Kb6 9.Rd1 c2 10.d7! cxd1Q 11.d8Q+ Qxd8 stalemate
A.Ivanov
Shakhmaty v SSSR, 1959
1st comm.
(= 4+5 ) win(cooked)
1.h5 Nf4 2.h6! Bxd4 [2...Bxh6 3.Ng3+ Kg5 4.Bf6#; but 2...Bh8!! 3.Bxh8 Nxe2 4.h7 Nf4 5.Be5 Ng6=] 3.Nxd4+ Kg5 4.h7 Ng6 5.Kg7 g3 6.Nf3+ Kh5 [6...Kf5 7.Nh4+ Nxh4 8.h8Q g2 9.Qh5+ Kf4 10.Qxh4++] 7.Nh4! Kg5 [7...Nxh4 8.h8Q+ Kg4 9.Qc8++] 8.Nxg6 g2 9.Nh4! g1Q 10.Nf3+ +
A.Ivanov
Shakhmaty v SSSR, 1959
1st comm.
correction
(= 5+6 ) draw
1.Kxf4 [1.Bxd5? g2! 2.Bc4+ Kg1 3.Nf2 Kh2–+] 1...g2 [1...Ng6+ 2.Ke3 g2 3.Ng3+ Ke1 4.Bxg2 Bxg2 5.Nxh5=; 1...h4 2.Nxg3+ hxg3 3.Bxd5=] 2.Ng3+ Kf2 3.Bxg2 h4 4.Nf5 h3! 5.Bh1!! [5.Bxh3? Ng6+ 6.Kg4 Bf3#; 5.Bxd5? Nxd5+ 6.Kg4 h2 7.Ng3 Kg2 mutual zugzwang 8.g6 Nf6+ 9.Kh4 (9.Kf4 Nh5+ 10.Nxh5 h1Q 11.g7 Qh4+–+) 9...Nh5! 10.Kg4 Nxg3 11.g7 Nh5! 12.g8Q Nf6+–+] 5...Bxh1 6.Nxe7 h2 7.Nf5 [7.g6? Bd5! 8.Nxd5 h1Q–+] 7...Bd5 8.Ng3 =   (4) Posted by Siegfried Hornecker [Saturday, Nov 13, 2010 18:40]; edited by Siegfried Hornecker [101113]  I made a nice idea today but found it was anticipated. However, it still can serve as a correction then since the original study was defect. So at least this time we have an useful accidental recomposition. (See more, mainly by me, and an interesting  or not  theory in my thread at chessproblem.net: http://chessproblem.net/viewtopic.php?f=24&t=447)
(= 3+2 )
Vitaly Halberstadt
"Problem" 1959 (no.074)
White to move and draw
1.Sf6+ Kg6 2.Sg4 Qe6 3.Rd3 Qe4+ 4.Kh2 Qe2+ 5.Kh1 Qxg4 6.Rg3 Qxg3 stalemate
John Nunn found: 1...Kg5 wins (cook published in hhdbiii; tablebases confirm it)
Yes, of course you could let the first move away. So my correction might or not have an existence right. Depends on if it can be developed.
(= 3+3 )
Vitaly Halberstadt
Correction by SH
1.Sg4+ Kg6 2.Kxh2 Qe4! 3.Rd3!! Qe2+ 4.Kh1 Qxg4 5.Rg3 Qxg3 stalemate
Sadly I was not able to add a white knight promotion for a correct line.
(= 4+3 )
Vitaly Halberstadt
Correction attempt by SH
1.e8S+ Ke7 2.Sf5+ Kf8 3.Sf6 Qh1 4.Rd7! Qg1+ 5.Kf4 Qc1+ 6.Kg4 Qg1+ 7.Kf4 Qc1+ 8.Kg4 Qc4+ 9.Kg5 is a correct line with positional draw, but 1...Qxe8 2.Sg4+ Kg6 3.Kxh2 is not unique (3.Rd6+; 3.Rd1)   No more posts 
MatPlus.Net Forum Endgame studies Corrected studies 


