Български (България)English (United Kingdom)
Problem 417: Ivan Skoba - Fairy (Vogtlaender Chess, MOA)

skoba(28.06.2014) Interesting fairy problem which Ivan Skoba dedicated to his grandson Simon for his Birthday which was few days ago. Best wishes to him and his mother Tereza!






1.Kxa3 2.Kb2+ MOc2 3.Kxc3 4.Kd2 5.Kxd1 6.Kc1+ MOg1 7.Kxc2 8.Kxd3

9.Ke2+ MOf2 10.Ke3 11.Kf4 12.Kg4 13.Kh3+ MOh2 14.Kg4 15.Kf3 =

White King will visit all the fields on the third row from a3 to h3 except g3 (Author)



Vogtlaender Chess = a side is in check only if it threatens to capture the opposing King

Moa (MO): Moves as a knight, but the diagonal square intervening between its points of departure and arrival must be vacant (e.g. MOa1-c2 requires b2 to be vacant).



+1 #1 Seetharaman Kalyan 2014-06-28 05:54
This definition Vogtlaender Chess is a little confusing. What "threatening to capture the opposing King" ? Is it not same as checking your opposing king? How is mate given?
+3 #2 Nikola Predrag 2014-06-28 09:43
You must completely forget the orthodox meaning of "check".
Playing a move which would attack the opposing King is simply forbidden, it would actually be a selfcheck.

1st player (on the move) can come under the attack by the opposing piece. 2nd player must not play a move which would leave the King of 1st player under attack. 2nd player must un-attack the opposing King.

In some way it is a "game of courtesy",
when a white King steps in front of a black gun it would be impolite to leave him under attack/threat and Black immediately turns that gun away from wK.
If Black can not turn away that gun or if the removal of that threat would result with some other threat, White will say: Ha, you can't avoid being impolite, so I win.
+2 #3 Nikola Predrag 2014-06-28 10:02
When 1stplayer plays a move after which his King will be attacked and 2nd player can't remove/disable the attack on 1st King, 2nd player loses, so this is a "mate" to 2nd King.

Here, the "check" is not an attack on the opponent's King but on the opponent's "courtesy" :-)

If I understood the condition well, it is not clear why 1.Kxc3 would be illegal. It would be a check, because MOe2 does not attack c3, for d3 is occupied. Without MOd3 1.Kxc3# would be a mate, not an illegal move.
This would not be a double selfcheck of wK as it was suggested, but a double check to bK.
Also, 1.Kb2 MOa3-c2??? is illegal because b2 is occupied and MOa3 would be able to play only to b5 and c4 via b4. Without MOc3, even 1.Kb2 MOa3-c4??? would be illegal, due to the "imploite" attack on wK via c3.
0 #4 Ivan Skoba 2014-06-28 13:00
Thanks Nikola, you are right, I was totally blind.

Move 1.Kxc3? isn't illegal, there is no double-check here because of presence MOd3. On the contrary, after 1.Kb2+ the move 1...MOa3-c2 is illegal, square b2 is now occupied!

Both tries could be removed, solution is C+ by Popeye Windows-32Bit v4.61 (1024 MB)

Protocol py.txt
White Kb3
Black MOa3 MOc3 MOd3 MOe3 MOf3 MOg3 MOh3 MOe2 MOd1 Kh1
Stipulation pser-=15
Condition VogtlaenderChess
+1 #5 Nikola Predrag 2014-06-29 22:42
You're welcome Ivan!
Few remarks for the less experienced.
To understand the strategy of the idea, note that it's not a help-play. Black must be forced to play the convenient check-parrying moves. wK must capture 5 Moas and 4 Moas+bK will be immobilized.
After 2.Kb2+, wK is attacked twice, so it's a double-check to Black and only interference on c2 can disable both attacks on wK. After 6.Kc1+, to remove the attack on wK, MOe2 can escape only to g1.

After 9.Ke2+, MOg1 can't escape via h2 because h3 is blocked by MO which therefore must interfere on f2. Now MOg1 can't escape via blocked f2, so 13.Kh3+ can be parried only by interference on h2 by MOf3.

Now, two Moas (g1,h2) are imprisoned, they are blocked by each other and by Moas f2/g3 which are pinned in the end when wK is on f3.

Note that bK can't play 15...Kg2???, not because wK attacks g2, but because bKg2 would attack wKf3 and it would be a selfcheck :-)

Add comment

Security code



site for chess composition

 General editor:

Diyan Kostadinov


Seetharaman Kalyan

Recent comments