Selection from Herbert Hultberg Memorial Tourney
C 30.10.1998 - logical problems

1.Nd3+? Kb5! 2.Rb1?
1.Bc3+? Kc5 2.Bf6+ Kxd5! and Qxc1!
1.Nd8+! Kb5 2.Bc6+ Kb4 3.Ba4+ Ka5 4.Ng2+ Kb4 5.Rc4+ Ka5 6.Rc2+ Kb4 7.Nd8+ Ka5 8.Bc6+ Kb4 9.Bf3+ Kb5 10.Nf7+ Kb4 11.Bc3+ K~ 12.Bf6+ Kb4 13.Nd8+ Kb5 14.Bc6+ Kb4 15.Ba4+ Ka5 16.Ng2+ Kb4 17.Rc4+ Ka5 18.Rc1+ Kb4 19.Nd8+ Ka5 20.Bc6+ Kb4 21.Bd5+ Kb5 22.Nf7+ Kb4 23.Nd3+ Kb5 24.Rb1+ Qxb1#

AU (judge): "Some composers claim that single line forced play in s# is not good and in general sense I concur with that view. But, whereas single-line play is quite all right and accepted in serial movers I cannot see why the basic principle of single-line play cannot be transformed into other forms. The fact that all moves are checks is a way for the composer to work with economical positions, and thus this should be well observed. In this problem it is obvious that white must very very carefully, or black would immediately strike back! So to me this is forced play at it's very very best. It is a form of serial play which is controlled by the other side. So what have we prepared by 1.Nd3+ Kb5 but falls only on the fact that b1-b5 is closed by Bb2. So white must remove Bb2 while black is kept busy (this is called Beschäftigung). 1.Bc3+? Kc5 2.Bf6+ Kxd5! and Qxc1! So white must improve his position by Rc1-c2 and Bd5-f3, moves called Führung. To do so under Beschäftigung requires white to set up various batteries firing towards black K from several angles and at different fields! For this purpose the Nightrider is a piece with great potential and that makes the play surprising."

1.Bc8? th. 2.Bxb7+, 1...e2!
1.Be2! Ke6 2.Sd4+ Kd5 3.Sb5! (3.Se2??) Ke6 4.Bg4 Kd5 5.Sc3+ Kd4 6.Se2+ Kd5 7.Bc8! ~ 8.Bxb7+ Ke6 9.Sd4#

AU (judge): "Another strictly logical problem with Führung during Beschäftigung.
...
Finally, one should not forget that there is - not accidentaly I should think - a very nice touch in the Rundlauf ending at d4!"

1.Qb2+? Rxb2!, 1.Qxb5!? c2!
1.Qa3+! Kc2 2.Qa4+ Kc1 3.Qf4+ Kc2 4.Qf2+ Kc1 5.Qf1+ Kc2 6.Qxb5! Kc2 7.Qb2+! bxc2#

AU (judge): "I would think it must be difficult to make a respectable selfmate miniature with a strictly logically presented idea. So it was nice to find this problem, which shows Beugung of the black K (from c1-c2) so as to block for the good defence c3-c2. The second, to remove the other logical obstacle (Rb5) might be slightly simpler in form, but so what!? Nothing more needs to be said, only to express a hope that no anticipations will be discovered!"

1.Sc4? th. 2.Sxd2#, 1...f1S!
1.Kg5? th. 2.Bxf5#, 1...f1Q!
1.f7! th. 2.Sf6+ Ke3, Kf4 3.Sbd5#
1...f1S 2.Kg5! Se3 3.Sf6#
1...f1Q 2.Sc4! Qf4 3.Sf6#

AU (judge): "Perhaps one could say that this is a way to show the Dresden theme - where the good defense by one piece is replaced by weaker defence by another piece - though one could also have a good argument whether Sf1 and Qf1 are two different pieces or one and the same piece?! So maybe it shows Roman theme. Apart from all that: To my mind there is a flaw in this problem that, after 1.Kg5 f1Q 2.Sc4? Qf4! has double action (check and guard) and 1.Sc4 f1S 2.Kg5? white has no threat. Something seems to be lacking."