www.arves.org - Nielsen 45 JT 2020

Studies awarded for the 45 birthday jubilee tournament of

Slumstrup Nielsen, Steffen 1975

[Event "1st prize, Nielsen 45 JT"] [Site ""] [Date "2020"] [Round ""] [White "O. Pervakov & K. Sumbatyan"] [Black ""] [Result "1-0"] [Annotator ""] [SetUp "1"] [FEN "7N/N7/7P/4n3/2p2k1P/8/7K/8 w - - 0 1"] [PlyCount "17"] [EventDate "2020"] 
 {An absolute masterpiece. The introduction is pleasant, subtle and eventful and with a number of likely tries that just fail. But the climax is just amazing. Black plays for either capturing White's last pawn or for stalemate, and at the very last move of the study White has the option between stalemate.. . and a sudden mate! Despite Harold van der Heijdens database showing a fair share of studies with three knights against a queen, I have not been able to find anything resembling a significant predecessor to this study. The move 8. . .Kh5!!? might have been the perfect candidate for Ed van de Gevel's recent Disadvantage of the advantage tourney. Advantage: Stalemate. Disadvantage: Mate :-) A (cooked) study by Argunov, CM, Selivanov 30 JT, 1997  (HHDBV #16702) shows a somewhat comparable mechanism, the thematic move being 3..Ka2 hoping for 4. Rxf1 stalemate, but allowing 5. Ra8+ Kb1 6. Ra1+ winning the queen (see appendix).} 1. h7 $1 ({Try} 1. Kh3 $2 c3 2. Nb5 c2 3. Nd4 c1=N $1 {Black underpromotion} 4. Nc6 $5 Ncd3 $1 5. h7 Kf5 6. Ng6 $5 Nf7 $1 $11 ( 6... Nxg6 $2 7. Ne7+ $1 $18)) (1. Nc6 $2 Ng4+ 2. Kh3 Nxh6 3. Ng6+ Kf5 $11) 1... c3 (1... Kf5 2. Kg3 c3 3. Nb5 c2 (3... Kf6 4. Nxc3 Kg7 5. Kf4 $1 Nd3+ 6. Ke3 Ne5 7. Ke4 $18) 4. Nd4+ Kf6 5. Nxc2 Kg7 6. Kf4 $1 Nd3+ 7. Ke3 Ne5 8. Ke4 $18) 2. Nc6 $1 {Sacrifice...} (2. Nb5 $2 c2 3. Nd4 Nf3+ $11) 2... Nf3+ $1 (2... c2 3. Nxe5 $18) 3. Kh3 Ng5+ $1 {...but counter-sacrifice!} 4. hxg5 c2 5. Nd4 $1 ({ Thematic try} 5. Nb4 $2 c1=Q 6. Nd3+ Kxg5 7. Nf7+ Kg6 8. h8=N+ Kh5 $1 9. Nxc1 $11 {Stalemate} (9. Nf4+ $4 Qxf4 $19)) 5... c1=Q 6. Ne2+ Kxg5 7. Nf7+ (7. Nxc1 $2 Kh6 $11) 7... Kg6 8. h8=N+ $1 {Now White underpromotion!} Kh5 $5 9. Ng3# { Model mate} (9. Nxc1 $2 $11 {Stalemate}) 1-0

[Event "2nd prize, Nielsen 45 JT"] [Site ""] [Date "2020"] [Round ""] [White "A. Avni & M. Minski"] [Black ""] [Result "1/2-1/2"] [Annotator "stjef"] [SetUp "1"] [FEN "8/3pk2P/6PP/3P4/QP6/3r1n2/7p/5K2 w - - 0 1"] [PlyCount "50"] [EventDate "2020"] 
 {While I had no doubt about which study to award first prize, I found it very difficult to distinguish among the next five studies. Judges with diffirent tastes would certainly have put them in another order. To gain a draw White must sacrifice the queen five times. All five sacrifices are accepted. It sounds like a task study, but infact it plays out with a natural flow. This study really grew on me. The first time I played it through I found the queen sacs a bit brutal. But take a look at the initial position. And then try to convince yourself that 5 queen sacs are needed to gain a draw! One most admire the technical skill of achieving this from a (fairly) natural starting position.} 1. Kg2 $1 (1. d6+ $2 Rxd6 $19) (1. h8=Q $2 h1=Q+ 2. Ke2 Rd2+ $19) 1... h1=Q+ $1 2. Kxh1 Rd2 $1 {With the lethal threat 3.. .Rh2#. From now on, white will have to fight heroically to thwart the fall of his King; no less than five white queens will be sacrificed in the process!} 3. d6+ $1 Kxd6 (3... Ke6 $2 4. Qb3+ $18) 4. Qa6+ Ke7 {only move} 5. Qf6+ $1 {first queen sacrifice} Kxf6 6. h8=Q+ Kg5 7. Qe5+ $1 {second queen sacrifice} (7. Qb8 $2 d6 8. Qxd6 Rxd6 9. h7 Rd1+ 10. Kg2 Nh4+ 11. Kf2 Nxg6 $19) 7... Nxe5 {for a moment black abandons the mating net, which gives white time to promote yet another queen.} 8. g7 Nf3 (8... Rh2+ $2 9. Kxh2 {simplest} Ng4+ 10. Kh3 Nxh6 11. b5 $18) 9. g8=Q+ Kh4 10. Qg1 $1 {third queen sacrifice} (10. Qg2 $2 Rd1+ $19 (10... Rxg2 $4 11. Kxg2 $18)) (10. Qb8 $2 Kh3 $1 $19 (10... d6 $2 11. Qd8+ Kg3 12. Qg8+ $11 )) 10... Nxg1 {It is now the turn of the h-pawn to shine.} 11. h7 Nf3 12. h8=Q+ Kg3 {White's troubles are not over yet, as he has to keep an eye on both h2 and d1 squares.} 13. Qg7+ Kf2 14. Qa1 $1 (14. Qg2+ $2 Ke3 $19) 14... Kg3 15. Qg7+ Kf2 16. Qa1 d5 {Throwing his last trump into the battle.} 17. b5 d4 18. Qc1 $1 (18. b6 $2 Kg3 $1 $19) 18... Re2 19. b6 Kg3 20. Qc7+ Kf2 21. Qc1 d3 22. b7 (22. Qc5+ $2 Re3 23. b7 d2 24. Qxe3+ Kxe3 25. b8=Q {White is the first to promote, but...} d1=Q+ {leads to a forced mate} 26. Kg2 Qc2+ 27. Kh1 Qh7+ 28. Kg2 Ne1+ 29. Kg3 Qg6+ $19) 22... d2 (22... Re5 23. Qb2+ d2 24. Qxd2+ $1 Nxd2 25. b8=Q $11) 23. Qg1+ $1 {fourth queen sacrifice} Nxg1 24. b8=Q d1=Q (24... Nf3 {will be met by the same response}) 25. Qg3+ $1 {fifth queen sacrifice} Kxg3 {stalemate. All five queens' offers were clean, without a capture.} 1/2-1/2

[Event "3rd prize, Nielsen 45 JT"] [Site ""] [Date "2020"] [Round ""] [White "I. Malyi"] [Black ""] [Result "1-0"] [Annotator ""] [SetUp "1"] [FEN "8/4R3/b1PK4/3P1k2/5B2/7n/5p2/8 w - - 0 1"] [PlyCount "23"] [EventDate "2020"] 
 {6. Be3-d4+!! may at first seem like a simple standard sacrifice, but infact in it an ingenious device to get on the right side of a future zugzwang brought about by the switchback 11. Bd4-e3.} 1. Be3 ({Logical try} 1. Bg3 $2 f1=Q 2. Rf7+ Ke4 3. Rxf1 Bxf1 4. c7 Ba6 5. Kc6 Kf5 6. d6 Ke6 7. d7 Bb5+ 8. Kxb5 Kxd7 9. Kb6 Kc8 $11) 1... f1=Q (1... f1=Q 2. Rf7+ Kg4 3. Rxf1) 2. Rf7+ Ke4 3. Rxf1 Bxf1 4. c7 (4. Kc5 $2 Kxe3 5. c7 (5. d6 Ng5 $1 6. d7 Bh3 $1 7. d8=Q Ne6+ $11) 5... Ba6 6. d6 Bc8 7. Kc6 Nf4 8. d7 Bxd7+ 9. Kxd7 Nd5 $1 10. c8=Q Nb6+ $11 ) 4... Ba6 5. Kc6 $1 Ke5 (5... Kf5 6. Kd7 Ke5 7. d6 $18) 6. Bd4+ $3 ({Logical try} 6. d6 $2 Ke6 7. d7 Bb5+ $1 8. Kxb5 Kxd7 9. Kb6 Kc8 10. Kc6 Ng5 {/ f4/g1/f2 } 11. Bxg5 {stalemate}) 6... Kf5 7. d6 Ke6 8. d7 Bb5+ $1 9. Kxb5 Kxd7 10. Kb6 Kc8 11. Be3 $1 Ng5 {/f4/g1/f2} 12. Bxg5 $18 1-0

[Event "4th prize, Nielsen 45 JT"] [Site ""] [Date "2020"] [Round ""] [White "P. Kiryakov & P. Arestov"] [Black ""] [Result "1/2-1/2"] [Annotator "stjef"] [SetUp "1"] [FEN "6K1/8/3N4/5P2/3kp3/8/3r3p/7N w - - 0 1"] [PlyCount "25"] [EventDate "2020"] 
 {There are plenty of studies featuring White piece sacrifices to secure the draw of a single f or h pawn against a Black queen. My own favourite is Timman's tactical study from Brieger MT 2014 Strategems 2014 (HHDBV#840). But here the theme is doubled (and even quadrupled when including sidelines) in a most elegant and condensed fashion. To top it all there is a fine logical try where the White king needs to go to the corner to avoid a future pin along the seventh rank.} 1. f6 e3 (1... Rd3 2. f7 Rf3 3. f8=Q Rxf8+ 4. Kxf8 e3 5. Nf5+ Kd3 6. Nh4 $1 e2 7. Nf3 $1 Ke3 8. Ne1 Kd2 9. Nf3+ {= positional draw}) 2. f7 Rg2+ 3. Kh8 $3 ({Logical try} 3. Kh7 $2 Rf2 4. Nxf2 exf2 5. Nf5+ Ke5 6. Ng3 f1=Q (6... h1=Q+ 7. Nxh1 f1=Q 8. Nf2 $1 {= see solution}) 7. Nxf1 h1=Q+ 8. Nh2 $1 Qb7 $3 (8... Qxh2+ {=}) 9. Kg8 Qd5 $1 10. Kg7 Qd7 11. Nf3+ Ke6 12. Ng5+ (12. Nd4+ Qxd4+ {in the solution Queen is on b7 and Qxd4 is not possible}) 12... Kf5 13. Nf3 Qa7 $1) 3... Rf2 4. Nxf2 exf2 5. Nf5+ (5. f8=Q h1=Q+ {+-}) 5... Ke5 6. Ng3 f1=Q (6... h1=Q+ 7. Nxh1 f1=Q 8. Nf2 $1 {[%eval 32766,0] N sacrifice} Qxf2 9. Kg8 {=} (9. Kg7 {=})) 7. Nxf1 h1=Q+ 8. Nh2 $1 {Sacrifice #2 Position X1 with Kh8} (8. Kg7 Qb7 $1 (8... Qg2+ 9. Ng3 $1 {[%eval 32762,0] = Sacrifice}) 9. Kg8 Qd5 10. Kg7 Qd7 11. Kg8 Kf6 12. f8=Q+ Kg6) 8... Qa8+ 9. Kg7 Qb7 (9... Qg2+ 10. Ng4+ $1 {[%eval 32760,0] = Sacrifice}) (9... Qa7 10. Kg8 Qa2 (10... Qg1+ 11. Ng4+ {=}) 11. Kg7 Qa7 (11... Qg2+ 12. Ng4+ {=}) 12. Kg8 {= Positional draw} ) 10. Nf3+ Ke6 (10... Kd6 11. Ng5 $1 {=}) 11. Nd4+ $1 {now Qd7xd4 isnt possible, unlike in the Logical try} (11. Ng5+ Kf5) 11... Kd6 12. Nf5+ Ke6 13. Nd4+ {Positional draw.} 1/2-1/2

[Event "5th prize, Nielsen 45 JT"] [Site ""] [Date "2020"] [Round ""] [White "M. Minski"] [Black ""] [Result "1/2-1/2"] [Annotator ""] [SetUp "1"] [FEN "5B1K/2kP2P1/4p3/3b2n1/5qP1/5N2/8/8 w - - 0 1"] [PlyCount "23"] [EventDate "2020"] 
 {The play in the 5th prize study is fascinating throughout. It is hard to believe, that White can actually hold a draw with his queen constantly about to be lost. The middle part of the study is visually very similar to my study for Sinfonie Schachistiche 2018, 2./3. prize. But infact the play is quite different, and in the end there is a small logical element, to put the Black king too far from the action} 1. Bd6+ $1 (1. d8=Q+ $2 Kxd8 2. g8=Q Nf7+ $19) ( 1. g8=Q $2 Nf7+ $19) 1... Qxd6 2. g8=Q Nf7+ $1 (2... e5 $2 3. Qc8+ $18) 3. Qxf7 e5 $1 {opens two lines} 4. d8=Q+ $1 (4. Qg7 $2 Bxf3 5. d8=Q+ Kxd8 6. Qg8+ Ke7 $19) (4. Qe8 $2 Qh6#) 4... Kxd8 5. Nxe5 $3 {The point. The white queen is untouchable thanks to the forks.} Qh6+ (5... Qxe5+ 6. Qg7 Qh2+ 7. Qh7 $11) ( 5... Bxf7 $2 6. Nxf7+ $18 {fork}) 6. Kg8 $1 {self-pin} (6. Qh7 $2 Qf8+ $19) 6... Be6 $1 (6... Bxf7+ $2 7. Nxf7+ $18 {fork}) (6... Qd2 7. Nc6+ $1 Bxc6 $11 ( 7... Kc8 $2 8. Ne7+ $1 $18 {fork})) 7. g5 $1 (7. Nc6+ $2 Kc8 8. Na7+ Kb8 9. Nc6+ Ka8 $19) 7... Qh3 $1 (7... Qxg5+ 8. Kf8 Qh6+ (8... Bxf7 9. Nxf7+ $11 {fork }) 9. Qg7 Qf4+ 10. Nf7+ $11) 8. Nc6+ Kc8 9. Na7+ $1 ({logical try} 9. g6 $2 Bxf7+ 10. gxf7 {position X with bKc8} Qg4+ $1 11. Kh7 (11. Kf8 Kc7 $1 $19) 11... Qf5+ {/Qh5+} 12. Kg7 Qg5+ 13. Kh7 Qf6 14. Ne5 Kd8 $1 15. Nc6+ Kc7 $1 ( 15... Kd7 $2 16. Kg8 $1 Qg6+ 17. Kh8 $1 Qxf7 18. Ne5+ $11 {fork}) 16. Ne5 Kd6 $19) 9... Kb8 10. Nc6+ Ka8 11. g6 Bxf7+ 12. gxf7 $11 {position X with bKa8; The black king is far enough away.} 1/2-1/2

[Event "6th prize, Nielsen 45 JT"] [Site ""] [Date "2020"] [Round ""] [White "A. Avni & V. Tarasiuk"] [Black ""] [Result "1/2-1/2"] [Annotator ""] [SetUp "1"] [FEN "8/2k2p1P/K7/2B1N3/1P3b2/7q/3rp3/4Q3 w - - 0 1"] [PlyCount "22"] [EventDate "2020"] 
 {A tactical study in classical style with both White and Black playing and sacrificing. The study has my favourite material of tactical studies: 3 vs 3 pieces. A small weakness of the study – the exchange on a5 – is nicely camouflaged by a thematic try, The} 1. Bb6+ Kb8 $1 (1... Kd6 $2 2. h8=Q Qxh8 3. Nxf7+ $18) 2. Nc6+ (2. Nd7+ Rxd7 3. Qxe2 Bc7 $19) 2... Ka8 (2... Kc8 3. Qb1 (3. Qf2 $11 {with enough counter-play})) 3. Qa1 $1 {after pushing BK to the corner, white creates a double threat: 4. h8=Q+ and 4.Kb5+} Qd3+ $1 4. b5 Qxh7 5. Qa3 $1 (5. Bd8 $2 {intending 6.Kb6+} Rd1 6. Qa3 (6. Qa2 Be3 7. Qxe2 Ra1+ 8. Ba5 f5 9. b6 Qb7+ $19) 6... Bd6 7. Qa2 Qh3 $1 8. Kb6+ (8. b6 $4 Qd3+) 8... Qa3 $19) 5... Qh6 $1 (5... Bd6 6. Qe3 $1 $11) 6. Qe7 $1 (6. Qf3 $2 e1=N $1 7. Qe4 (7. Qg4 Qf8 $19) 7... Qe6 {only moves, but sufficient} 8. Qxe6 fxe6 $19) 6... Ra2+ {[#]} 7. Ba5 $1 ({Thematic try:} 7. Na5 $2 Rxa5+ 8. Kxa5 e1=Q+ $1 9. Qxe1 Bd2+ 10. Ka6 Qxb6+ $1 (10... Bxe1 $2 $11) 11. Kxb6 Bxe1 $19) 7... Rxa5+ 8. Kxa5 e1=Q+ $1 (8... Bc7+ 9. Ka6 $11) 9. Qxe1 {switchback} Bd2+ 10. Ka6 $1 Bxe1 ( 10... Qxc6+ $4 11. bxc6 Bxe1 12. c7 $18) 11. b6 Qxc6 {stalemate} 1/2-1/2

[Event "Special prize, Nielsen 45 JT"] [Site ""] [Date "2020"] [Round ""] [White "G. Costeff"] [Black ""] [Result "1-0"] [Annotator ""] [SetUp "1"] [FEN "4b3/1p4p1/6p1/pP2P1p1/Bp4P1/kP4P1/p3Pp2/K4Nb1 w - - 0 1"] [PlyCount "19"] [EventDate "2020"] 
 {A study from the realm of chess problems. The position is barely legal and everything but elegant. But the idea shown is original and ambitious: White, by capturing a Black pawn, makes sure that Black has an extra tempo to avoid stalemate at a later point. In fact I am highly curious how anyone could a) get the idea for this and b) actually make it work in two separate promotion lines.} 1. e6 b6 (1... Bh2) 2. e3 $3 {White must control d4 - see move 9 in the 1st main variation.} Bf7 ({2nd main variation:} 2... Bd7 3. exd7 Bh2 4. d8=Q $1 (4. d8=R Bxg3 5. Re8 Be5+ 6. Rxe5 {stalemate.}) (4. d8=B Bxg3 5. Bf6 Be5+ 6. Bxe5 {stale mate.}) (4. d8=N Bxg3 5. Nc6 Be5+ 6. Nxe5 {stalemate.}) 4... Bxg3 5. Qxg5 $1 Be5+ 6. Qxe5 {a black tempo has been created, so white wins.}) 3. exf7 Bh2 4. f8=N $1 (4. f8=Q Bxg3 5. Qxg7 Be5+ 6. Qxe5 {stalemate.}) (4. f8=R Bxg3 5. Re8 Be5+ 6. Rxe5 {stalemate.}) (4. f8=B Bxg3 5. Bxg7 Be5+ 6. Bxe5 {stalemate.}) 4... Bxg3 5. Nxg6 $1 Bd6 (5... Bc7 6. Nd2 f1=Q+ 7. Nxf1 Bd8 8. e4 Bf6+ 9. e5 Bxe5+ 10. Nxe5 $1 g6 11. Nc4#) (5... Be5+ 6. Nxe5 $1 {no stalemate}) 6. Nd2 f1=Q+ 7. Nxf1 Bc5 8. Ne5 $1 {a black tempo has been created} Bd4+ 9. exd4 {this capture explains why 2.e3!! was necessary} g6 10. Nc4# { In each of two main variations, all four promotions can stop the threatened mate, but only the correct promoted piece can reach e5 while creating a black tempo for stalemate avoidance.} 1-0

[Event "1st HM, Nielsen 45 JT"] [Site ""] [Date "2020"] [Round ""] [White "P. Panaiotov"] [Black ""] [Result "1-0"] [Annotator ""] [SetUp "1"] [FEN "2b5/1k6/8/1p6/P1p5/1P2p1Q1/2qrBPPP/4K2R w K - 0 1"] [PlyCount "29"] [EventDate "2020"] 
 {The opening position looks like a regular middlegame position (from the Botvinnik Variation of the Semi Slav Defense perhaps). The highlight of the study is undoubtedly the move 6. Qh4!!, foreseeing the classical drawing device 8...Bh3! With the Black king on c3 instead of c4, White now has the winning plan 10. Kf2 and 11. Ke3, when Blacks king is unable to reach h8 in time. There is a minor dual with 10. Ke2 that the composer failed to mention. The 8...Bh3 idea was first shown by Greco in 1621! (hhdbv #85538). For the next 399 years noone thought of adding a logical refutation of the idea. But then this study came along.} 1. Bf3+ (1. Qf3+ $2 Kc7 $1 2. Qf4+ Rd6 $1 3. fxe3 cxb3 4. axb5 Qd2+ 5. Kf2 Bg4 $1 6. Rc1+ Qxc1 7. b6+ Kb7 8. Qxd6 Bxe2 9. Kxe2 b2 10. Qe7+ $1 $11) 1... Ka6 2. axb5+ $1 (2. O-O $2 exf2+ 3. Rxf2 Rxf2 4. axb5+ Ka5 5. Qxf2 cxb3 $11) 2... Kxb5 3. O-O $1 (3. Qb8+ $2 Ka5 $1 4. Qc7+ Kb4 5. Qxc4+ Qxc4 6. bxc4 Rxf2 $11) 3... exf2+ 4. Rxf2 (4. Kh1 $2 Bf5 $11) 4... Rxf2 5. bxc4+ Kxc4 6. Qh4+ $1 (6. Qxf2 $2 Qc1+ 7. Qf1+ Qxf1+ 8. Kxf1 Bh3 9. Kf2 (9. gxh3 Kd4 10. h4 Ke5 11. h5 Kf6 $11) 9... Bxg2 $11) 6... Kc3 7. Qxf2 $1 Qc1+ 8. Qf1 Qxf1+ 9. Kxf1 Bh3 10. Kf2 $1 ({or} 10. Ke2) 10... Bxg2 11. Ke3 $1 Bh3 ( 11... Bxf3 12. Kxf3 Kd4 13. Kf4 $18) 12. Kf4 $1 Be6 13. h4 Bf7 14. Kg5 Kd4 15. Bh5 $18 1-0

[Event "2nd HM, Nielsen 45 JT"] [Site ""] [Date "2020"] [Round ""] [White "J. Mikitovics"] [Black ""] [Result "1-0"] [Annotator ""] [SetUp "1"] [FEN "2r2k2/8/1Pn3P1/7p/1p6/R2N2K1/8/8 w - - 0 1"] [PlyCount "25"] [EventDate "2020"] 
 {I fascinating, but difficult battle. In the natural opening position we have material equality. White's only advantage seems to lie in the fact that his pawns are more advanced and that he is on the move. The study is very difficult (the line with 6...Ne5!? is extremely difficult and certainly downgrades the study)and not for human solving. There is a bunch of interesting stuff going on in the sidelines and solvers would be lured into these blind alleys. Luckily the main point of the study, certainly one of the most stunning moves of recent years, is of such a nature that other lines move to the background.} 1. b7 $1 (1. Ra6 $2 Nb8 {/d8=} (1... Rb8 $2 2. Nc5 Kg7 3. Kh4 Kh6 4. b7 Ne5 5. Re6 $18)) 1... Rb8 2. Ra6 $1 Nd8 $1 (2... Rxb7 3. Nc5 $1 Nb8 4. Rd6 $1 (4. Ra8 $2 {pin} Re7 $1 5. Rxb8+ Kg7 $11) 4... Rb5 5. Ne6+ Ke7 6. g7 $18) (2... b3 3. Nc5 $18) 3. Nc5 $1 {thr. 4. Sd7+} ({Thematic try with mutual pins} 3. Kh4 $2 Rxb7 $1 $11 (3... Nxb7 $2 4. Rb6 $1 Rd8 5. Nf4 Rd4 $1 { pin} 6. Kg5 $1 Nd8 7. Rb8 {pin} Ke7 (7... Rd6 8. Kh6 $1 h4 9. Kh7 Rd7+ 10. Kh8 $1 Ke7 11. g7 Nf7+ 12. Kh7 $18) 8. g7 Kf7 (8... Rxf4 9. g8=N+ $3) 9. Kh6 Rxf4 10. Rxd8 Rg4 11. Rf8+ Ke6 12. Rf4 $3 Rg1 13. Rxb4 Kf7 14. Rf4+ $1 $18 (14. Rb7+ $2 Kf6 15. Kh7 h4 $1 $11))) (3. Ra8 $2 Rxb7 4. Rxd8+ Kg7 5. Nf4 b3 $1 $11 (5... Kf6 $2 6. Kh4 $1 b3 7. Kxh5 b2 8. Rf8+ Ke5 (8... Ke7 9. Rf7+ $18) 9. Nd3+ $18)) 3... Kg7 $1 4. Ra8 $1 Nc6 (4... Nxb7 5. Ne6+ $1 $18 (5. Rxb8 $2 Nxc5 $11)) 5. Kh4 $1 (5. Ra6 $2 Nd8 6. Ra8 {loss of time}) (5. Kf4 $2 b3 $11) 5... Kh6 (5... b3 6. Ra6 $3 Nd8 (6... b2 7. Rb6 Kh6 8. Na6 $18) 7. Kg5 b2 8. Rb6 $18) (5... Kxg6 6. Ra6 $18) 6. Ra6 $1 Nd8 (6... Ne5 7. Re6 $1 Nc4 $1 8. g7+ Kxg7 9. Re7+ $1 (9. Kg5 $2 b3 $1 10. Re7+ Kh8 $3 11. Nxb3 Nd6 $1 $11) 9... Kg8 10. Kxh5 b3 11. Nxb3 Nd6 (11... Kf8 12. Rc7 $1 Nd6 13. Nc5 Ke8 14. Rh7 $3 Nf7 (14... Nxb7 15. Nxb7 Rc8 16. Nd6+ $18) 15. Kg6 $18) 12. Nc5 $1 Nxb7 13. Nd7 $1 Rc8 14. Kg6 $1 Rc6+ 15. Nf6+ $18) 7. Nb3 $3 (7. Ne4 $2 Nxb7 $1 (7... Rxb7 $2 8. Nd6 $18 { thr. 9.Sf5#}) 8. Ng3 {thr. 9.Sf5#} Nd6 $3 (8... Rf8 $2 9. Nxh5 Rd8 10. g7+ Kh7 11. Ra7 Rb8 12. Kg5 b3 13. Ra6 $1 $18) 9. Rxd6 Rb5 10. Rf6 Kg7 11. Rc6 Kh6 $1 12. Rf6 Kg7 {positional draw}) 7... Nxb7 $1 (7... Rxb7 8. Nd4 {thr. 9.Sf5#} Rf7 9. gxf7+ $18) 8. Nd4 $1 {thr. 9.Sf5#} Rf8 9. g7+ $1 Kxg7 10. Ne6+ Kf7 11. Nxf8 Kxf8 12. Ra8+ Kf7 13. Ra7 $18 {pin [Keywords: mutual pins, switchbacks, sacrifices, forks]} 1-0

[Event "5th HM, Nielsen 45 JT"] [Site ""] [Date "2020"] [Round ""] [White "G.S.T. Østmoe"] [Black ""] [Result "1-0"] [Annotator ""] [SetUp "1"] [FEN "7k/p1p4N/3p1P1K/8/2P1P2b/3P4/2R2p2/3n4 w - - 0 1"] [PlyCount "33"] [EventDate "2020"] 
 {A study of a few interesting moments. Unfortunately the most interesting of these occur allready on the second move. Somehow I feel this great shot is wasted on the follow up. The rest of the study is fairly interesting with many precise moves, but still I lack a little something to round it off. Most of all I feel that 2. Nf8!! is more suited as a decisive move of a study and not as an introductory device.} 1. f7 Be7 2. Nf8 $3 (2. Rxf2 $2 Nxf2 3. f8=Q+ Bxf8+ 4. Nxf8 {is better for Black.}) 2... Bxf8+ (2... f1=Q 3. Ng6#) 3. Kg6 Bh6 $1 { Umnov.} (3... f1=Q 4. Rh2+) (3... f1=N 4. Rg2 {(simplest) and there is no defense against Rg5-h5.}) 4. Rxf2 $1 (4. Kxh6 $4 f1=Q {wins.}) 4... Nxf2 5. Kxh6 Ng4+ 6. Kg6 Ne5+ 7. Kf6 Kh7 $1 (7... Nxf7 8. Kxf7 a5 9. d4 a4 10. e5 dxe5 11. dxe5 a3 12. e6 a2 13. e7 a1=Q 14. e8=Q+ Kh7 15. Qg8+ ({or} 15. Qe4+) 15... Kh6 16. Qg6#) 8. d4 $1 (8. f8=Q $2 Nd7+ 9. Ke7 Nxf8 10. Kxf8 a5 {and now Black wins because White does not queen with check.}) 8... Ng6 9. c5 $1 (9. e5 $2 dxe5 10. dxe5 Nxe5 $1 11. Kxe5 (11. f8=Q $4 Nd7+) 11... Kg7 {draws.}) 9... a5 ( 9... dxc5 10. e5 $1 {wins.}) 10. e5 dxe5 11. d5 $1 (11. dxe5 $2 Nxe5 $1 {draws. }) 11... Nf8 $1 (11... a4 12. d6 cxd6 13. c6 $1 {wins.}) 12. c6 $1 (12. d6 $2 c6 $1 {draws.}) 12... e4 13. d6 e3 14. dxc7 e2 15. c8=Q e1=Q 16. Qh3+ Qh4+ 17. Qxh4# 1-0

[Event "6th HM, Nielsen 45 JT"] [Site ""] [Date "2020"] [Round ""] [White "M. Hlinka & L. Kekely"] [Black ""] [Result "1/2-1/2"] [Annotator ""] [SetUp "1"] [FEN "8/8/3p3b/3R4/1p6/1kN4B/2r5/K7 w - - 0 1"] [PlyCount "26"] [EventDate "2020"] 
 {A very elegant study leading to a double pin model stalemate. The try 3. Rd4+ adds significantly to the study, allthough it still appears somewhat mechanical.} 1. Be6 $1 Rc1+ (1... Kxc3 2. Rxd6 Bg7 3. Kb1 Rb2+ 4. Kc1 $11) ( 1... Rxc3 2. Rd2+ Ka4 3. Rxd6 Bg7 4. Kb1 $11) 2. Nb1 Bg7+ 3. Re5+ $1 ({them. try} 3. Rd4+ $2 Ka4 $1 (3... Kc2 $2 4. Bb3+ $1 Kxb3 {stalemate}) (3... d5 4. Bxd5+ Ka4 5. Kb2 $1 Rc8 6. Nc3+ $1 Rxc3 7. Rd2 $11) 4. Bb3+ Kb5 $19) 3... Kc2 4. Bf5+ (4. Bb3+ $2 Kd3 $19) 4... Kd1 5. Bg4+ Kc2 6. Bf5+ {swithcback} Kb3 7. Be6+ {switchback} d5 $1 (7... Ka4 8. Bb3+ $1 Kxb3 {stalemate}) 8. Bxd5+ Kc2 9. Be4+ Kd1 10. Bf3+ Kc2 11. Be4+ {switchback} Kb3 12. Bd5+ {switchback} Ka4 13. Bb3+ $1 Kxb3 {stalemate. Meredith. Battery. Switchbacks. Double pin stalemates. } 1/2-1/2

[Event "Special HM, Nielsen 45 JT"] [Site ""] [Date "2020"] [Round ""] [White "J. Timman"] [Black ""] [Result "1-0"] [Annotator "stjef"] [SetUp "1"] [FEN "8/PPP1P3/2R1pR2/p6Q/1pP1P1P1/2bBp1P1/1r4k1/K7 w - - 0 1"] [PlyCount "29"] [EventDate "2020"] 
 {A classic case of White sacrificing the main part of his army to deal with a Black threat of perpetual. Compared to the 2nd prize draw study, the mass sacrifice is done in a far less natural position. The first time I played through the solution it appeared a little mechanical or even childish... But there are plenty of delicacies, when delving into the mechanics. I appreciate, for instance, how both long diagonals are cleared by a total of four pieces to make the final mate appear. Black also gets to play with the defensive ressource 3...e5. In the end the mating move falls on the square occupied initially by the Black king. The scheme with WKa1, Brb2 and Bc3 and queen sacrifices on h8 also features in a study by Gurgenidze (commendation, Chervoni Girnik 1978, HHDBV #36128), but this study is far more ambitious.} 1. Bf1+ (1. Rf2+ exf2 2. Bf1+ Kxf1 $11) 1... Kg1 2. Rf2 $3 exf2 (2... Rxf2+ 3. Kb1 b3 4. Bd3 Ra2 5. Kc1 (5. Qxa5 $18) 5... e2 6. Qc5+ Kg2 7. Qe3 $18) 3. Qh8 $1 e5 (3... Bxh8 4. c8=Q $1 Bc3 5. Qh8 $1 Bxh8 6. e5 Bxe5 7. Rxe6 Bc3 8. Re3 Bd4 9. Rd3 Bg7 10. e8=N $1 Bh8 11. g5 $18) 4. Qxe5 Bxe5 5. e8=Q Bc3 6. Qh8 $1 Bxh8 7. c8=Q Bc3 8. Qh8 $1 Bxh8 9. e5 Bxe5 10. b8=Q Bc3 11. Qh8 $1 Bxh8 12. Rh6 Bc3 13. Rh1+ $1 Kxh1 14. a8=Q+ Kg1 15. Qg2# {A tale of two long diagonals} 1-0

[Event "1st CM, Nielsen 45 JT"] [Site ""] [Date "2020"] [Round ""] [White "M. Gromov & O. Pervakov"] [Black ""] [Result "1-0"] [Annotator ""] [SetUp "1"] [FEN "8/N3q2p/p3N3/1P1P3P/8/4k1K1/1P6/4B3 w - - 0 1"] [PlyCount "33"] [EventDate "2020"] 
 {This study shows a sudden mutual zugzwang with the material NNB vs Q plus two pawns a side. I am not sure I find this domination exciting enough.} 1. Bf2+ ( 1. Nc8 $2 Qf7 $11) (1. Nc6 $2 Qd6+ 2. Kg4 Qxd5 3. Ncd4 axb5 $11) 1... Ke4 (1... Ke2 2. Nc6 Qf6 3. Nf4+ $18) 2. Nc8 $1 {Beginnig domination over queen} (2. Nc6 $2 Qd6+ 3. Kg4 Kxd5 4. Ncd4 axb5 $11) 2... Qf6 $1 (2... Qb4 3. Nc5+ Kf5 (3... Kxd5 4. Nb6+ Kd6 5. bxa6 Qxb6 6. Ne4+) 4. Nd6+ Kg5 5. Nde4+ Kxh5 6. bxa6 $18) 3. Nd6+ Kxd5 4. Nc7+ $1 Ke5 (4... Kxd6 5. Ne8+) 5. Kg2 $1 (5. bxa6 $2 Qg7+ 6. Kh2 Qxc7 7. a7 Qc6 $11) 5... axb5 6. Be1 $1 ({Thematic try} 6. b4 $2 h6 $1 { zz Mutual zugzwang} 7. Be1 Qf8 $1 8. Bg3+ Kf6 $1 9. Bh4+ Ke5 $1 10. Bg3+ Kf6 $11 {Positional draw}) (6. b3 $2 b4 $1 $11) 6... b4 (6... Qf8 7. Bc3+ Kxd6 8. Bb4+ $18) 7. Bf2 $1 {zz Sudden mutual zugzwang in rare material!} Qf8 $1 { The best chance} (7... b3 8. Be1 $1 Qg5+ (8... Qg7+ 9. Bg3+) 9. Bg3+ Kd4 (9... Kf6 10. Ne4+) 10. Ne6+) (7... h6 8. b3 $1 {zz Mutual zugzwang} Qf8 9. Bd4+ Kxd6 10. Bc5+ Kxc5 11. Ne6+) (7... Qe7 8. Bg3+ Kd4 9. Nf5+) 8. Bd4+ $1 (8. Bg3+ $2 Kf6 $1 9. Bh4+ Ke5 $11) 8... Kxd6 (8... Kxd4 9. Ne6+) 9. Bc5+ $1 Kxc5 10. Ne6+ Kc4 11. Nxf8 Kb3 12. Nxh7 Kxb2 13. Nf6 b3 14. Nd5 $1 (14. Nd7 $2 Ka1 $1 15. Nc5 b2 16. Nb3+ Kb1 $11) (14. Ne4 $2 Kc2 15. Nd6 Kc3 $1 16. Nb5+ Kb4 $11) 14... Kc2 15. Nb6 $1 (15. Ne3+ $2 Kd3 $1 $11) 15... b2 16. Nc4 b1=Q 17. Na3+ 1-0

[Event "3rd CM, Nielsen 45 JT"] [Site ""] [Date "2020"] [Round ""] [White "P. Arestov & D. Keith"] [Black ""] [Result "1-0"] [Annotator "stjef"] [SetUp "1"] [FEN "k7/8/3P3q/4R3/4K3/n4NP1/8/7B w - - 0 1"] [PlyCount "39"] [EventDate "2020"] 
 {A two phase study with a nice tactical point in the first part (square vacation sacrifice). In the second part we have a long precise battle of knight + pawns vs knight. This is of a more technical/precise nature. While I think this would be a fine miniature, I don't think the two parts of the study mix well.} 1. d7 Qh7+ 2. Kf4 $1 (2. Ke3 $2 Qxd7 3. Ra5+ Kb8 4. Ra8+ Kxa8 5. Ne5+ Qb7 $1 6. Bxb7+ Kxb7 7. g4 Kc7 8. g5 Nb5 $10) 2... Qxd7 {pos.X with wRe5, no 3. Ne5+??} 3. Ra5+ $1 (3. Nd4+ $2 Kb8 $10) 3... Kb8 4. Ra8+ Kxa8 {pos.X1 without wRe5} 5. Ne5+ Qb7 6. Bxb7+ Kxb7 7. g4 Kc7 (7... Nb5 8. g5 {transposes}) 8. g5 Nb5 9. g6 (9. Kf5 $2 Nd4+ 10. Kf6 Kd6 11. g6 Ne6 $10) 9... Nd4 10. Nc4 $1 (10. Ke4 $2 Ne6 11. Kf5 Kd6 $10) (10. Ng4 $2 Kd6 $1 $10 (10... Kd7 $2 11. Ke5 $18)) 10... Kd7 (10... Ne6+ 11. Ke5 Kd7 12. Nb6+ $18 {transposes}) 11. Ke5 Ne6 12. Nb6+ $1 (12. Nd6 $2 Ng7 13. Kf6 Ne6 {/Nh5+=}) 12... Ke7 13. Nd5+ Kd7 14. Nf4 (14. Kf6 $2 Kd6 $10) 14... Ng7 15. Kf6 Ne8+ 16. Kf7 Nd6+ 17. Kg7 $1 (17. Kf8 $2 Nf5 18. Kf7 Ne7 {/Nh5=}) 17... Ke7 $1 (17... Nf5+ 18. Kf6 Nd6 19. Nd5 Ne8+ 20. Kf7 Kd8 21. Nf6 $18) 18. Nd5+ Ke6 19. Kh7 $1 (19. Kf8 $2 Nf5 20. Ne3 Kf6 $10) (19. Kh8 $2 Ne8 $10) 19... Ne8 (19... Nf5 20. Ne3 $1 $18) 20. Nc7+ $1 1-0

[Event "4th CM, Nielsen 45 JT"] [Site ""] [Date "2020"] [Round ""] [White "B. Djuraševic"] [Black ""] [Result "1/2-1/2"] [Annotator "stjef"] [SetUp "1"] [FEN "3K3n/3P2pq/k6p/4P3/4P3/7R/8/8 w - - 0 1"] [PlyCount "27"] [EventDate "2020"] 
 {The idea of 7. e5 is pleasant and clear: To vacate the e4 square for the future arrival of the White king. Such a device has been shown in a number of studies, and I am not sure this particular study adds much new to this tale. Furthermore, the position before 10. e7 (shifted one rank) is already known from van Reek 1995 (HHDBV #18918).} 1. Kc7 $1 (1. Kc8 $2 Nf7 2. e6 Qg8+ $19) 1... g5 $1 (1... Nf7 2. e6 Qg6 3. exf7 Qxf7 4. Rc3 $1 Kb5 5. Rc6 $1 $11) 2. e6 $1 (2. Rxh6+ $2 {Too early.} Qxh6 3. d8=Q Qb6+ 4. Kd7 Qxd8+ 5. Kxd8 Nf7+ $19) 2... Qe7 $1 (2... Ng6 3. Ra3+ $1 Kb5 4. Kc8 Ne7+ 5. Kc7 Nc6 6. Rb3+ Kc4 7. Kxc6 Qxe4+ 8. Kd6 Qd4+ 9. Ke7 $1 $11) 3. Rxh6 $1 Qc5+ (3... g4 4. Rxh8 $11) 4. Kd8 ( 4. Kb8 $2 Qb6+ 5. Kc8 Ka7 $19) 4... Qf8+ 5. Kc7 Qxh6 6. d8=Q Qh2+ $1 7. e5 $3 ( {Thematic try:} 7. Qd6+ $2 Qxd6+ 8. Kxd6 Ng6 9. e7 Nxe7 10. Ke5 Kb5 11. Kd4 Nc6+ $19) (7. Kd7 $2 Qd2+ $1 8. Ke8 Qxd8+ 9. Kxd8 Ng6 10. e7 Nxe7 11. Kxe7 g4 12. e5 g3 13. e6 g2 $19) 7... Qxe5+ (7... Qc2+ 8. Kd7 Qd3+ 9. Ke8 Qxd8+ 10. Kxd8 Ng6 11. e7 Nxe7 12. Kxe7 g4 13. e6 g3 14. Kd8 $11) 8. Qd6+ Qxd6+ 9. Kxd6 Ng6 10. e7 $3 Nxe7 11. Ke5 $1 Kb5 12. Ke4 {now e4 is empty!} Kc5 13. Kf3 Kd5 14. Kg4 $11 1/2-1/2