THE LEPUSCHÜTZ THEME

by Hans Peter Rehm, Germany
IV. Combining the theme with other ideas

Nr.29: In this beautiful early example a Roman follows our theme: 1.Sa6? Rd7, 1.Kh6? too slow. 1.Kg7 [2.Qb7+ 3.Qb8+] Rg4+ 2.Kh6 Rd4. Now 3.Sa6? Rd7 4.?. Wee need the rook to block b7, hence: 3.Rb4: Rb4: (Roman decoy) 4.Sa6 Rb7 5.Qe8. The type is: K/R-unpin.

Nr.30: 1.Rc2? d3, 1.Se5:+? Be5: 2.Rc2 g6+!! 3.Kg8 e3. 1.Ra8 Ra8:+ 2.Kh7 Ra4 3.Se5: Be5: 4.Rc2 e3 5.Qf5#. Type: K/R-walk out of (later) check. The theme is combined with a black decoy opening the line Df2-f5. This fine composition has a very subtle black check g6+: first g6+ is deep because it is not obvious in the diagram: white only makes it possible when he forces the necessary line opening; secondly, this check by Be5 is only good because it wins a tempo to guard f5. White wins a tempo by allowing a check in order to prevent black to win a tempo by checking. One admires that such a deep idea has been realized in such a wonderful light position.

Nr.31: 1.Ka5 [2.Sd7:+ 3.Sf6+ 4.Se4+ 5.Sc3+ Kc6 6.Qc8] Bb6+ 2.Kb5! Rb2+ 3.Ka4 Re2 4.Sd7:+ Kd5 5.Qc4+ Kc4: 6.Sb6. Type K/R-walk out of check. The theme begins after 1.Ka5 [2.Sd7:+ 3.Sf6+ 4.Se4+ 5.Sc3+ Kc6 6.Qc8] Bb6+ (decoy, wakening b6) 2.Ka4? is too slow for black can for example retract his decoy (2... Bb6-g1). Hence 2.Kb5! Rb2+ 3.Ka4 Re2 and now the main plan 5.Sd7:+ Kd5 5.Qc4+ Kc4: 6.Sb6:# succeeds. The correctness of this position with the strong queen and Siers battery must have been very difficult to achieve in a time when computers were barely invented and everybody believed that a machine playing chess or testing problems would be impossible. The logic of this problem is unique: A Führung (here Ka4-a5) is not interesting in itself but used "only" to force a black decoy. But it weakens also the white fundamental attack (here by putting the wK into check, but other motives would be also very welcome) such that has to be taken back. But if White takes it back (Probespiel of the thematical Führung) Black also takes back his decoy. That's why our theme is called for. Writing this article I thought it would be very nice to have more presentations of this logic. In fact, I wrote a short article about this question in "Die Schwalbe", feb. 1997 (Eine seltene logische Kombination).

Nr.32: The Probespiel 1.Sg6+? Rg6: 2.Bf4+ Kf5 3.Bd7+ Bd7: shows that White would prefer the black bishop on h3. This is readily achieved by 1.Bd1 [2.Rf5+ Kf5: 3.Bg4+ Ke5 4.f4#], but the white bishop i also away from d7. If White takes back this move (2.Ba4?) Black can do the same (2... Bc8! or Be6!). That is why our theme is now needed: 2.Ra7: [3.Re7+ or 3.Rg7:] Ra7:+ 4.Ba4! Rg7! (not Ra4:+? 4.Kb1 5.Sg6 or Sf7) and we have what we want (4.Sg6+ Rg6: 5.Bf4+ Kf5 6.Bd7#). If 1... d2 then after 2.Bd2: [3.Rae3+ 4.Bc3] Sb3 the threat is enough (3.Rf4+ etc.). Type K/R-retraction of partially bad move.

Nr.33: In this composition the theme is combined with the Dresden theme which is apparent already in the Probespiel: The good defence (1.Qc7?) Rb1 is replaced after 1.Bb5? ab5 2.Qc7 by the worse 2... Ra7:. But the pin hinders white to use the block on a7. So, in addition, our theme - type K/R-walk out of (later) pin - is necessary: 1.Kg8? too slow, 1.Rh2 [2.Rd2:] Rh2:+ 2.Kg8! Rd2 3.Bb5 ab5 4.Qc7 Ra7: 5.Qc8.
The same finale is used in the next problem to combine our theme with a pendulum manoeuvre.

Nr.34: One can try to move the king at once to avoid the later pin (1.Ba7? Ra7: 2.Qc8??): 1.Kd6? too slow. A la Lepuschütz 1.Kc6? Rc1+ 2.Kd6 Ra1 3.Ba7 would be very good, but 2... Rc7: destroys White's dreams. So a preparation is necessary to get Kc6-d6 sound. 1.Qc8 [2.Bc7+ 3.Qb8+] Rb1 2.Bc7+ Ka7 3.Kc6 Rc1+ (3.Kd6? too slow) 4.Kd6! Rb1! and returning to the original position finishes the job: 5.Bb8+ Ka8 6.Qc7 Ra1 7.Ba7 Ra7: 8.Qc8. Type K/R-walk out of pin. A pendulum in order to shield a piece (here white queen) is very unusual. Only a master of the logical school can have thought to combine this with our theme. Such a deep idea has been realized in an incredibly economical position.

Nr.35: 1.Sba5? Ra5: 2.Ba4 Ra4: 3.Kd1 Rc4:, 1.Kd3:? too slow. 1.Ke3 Re7+ 2.Kd3: Sb4+! 3.Kd2 Ra7 4.Sba5 Ra5: 5.Ba4 Ra4: 6.Kd1 7.Sd2. Type K/R-capture. The theme is marginal here but unusual is that not the Führung Kd3: is the final aim, but the move Sb4 which is forced by the threat on c2. The guarding duty is transformed from Pd3 to Sb4 which closes the line a4-c4.

Nr.36: 1.Se2? g5 2.Sc3 f6 3.Se4 stalemate. The theme is here executed using Indian unpinning of the black thematical piece: 1.Bd1! g6! 2.Se2 Rc4:+ 3.Sc3+ Rg4 4.Se4 g5 5.Sf6:, 2... g5 3.Kb1 f6 4.Ka1!!. A strange form of the theme: White does not win a tempo but Black loses time such that he cannot prepare his stalemate. Type R/S-black loses a stalemate. By the way, this position is a good argument against those who contend the purpose of the Indian critical move is to avoid stalemate.
I hope the reader has seen from this article that in the logical school, even in just one theme, a lot remains to be done. For our theme most of the types are missing! And many types have been shown only once and only one matrix has been explored (in which other field of chess composition is a similar statement nowadays correct?). There are, of course, reasons for the missing types. The wP as a thematical piece is perhaps absent because schemes for it look too easy and trivial at first sight. But it is not forbidden to invent a wonderful problem using the pawn thematically. Doublings of the theme are very rare. In single presentations (only one variation) one can try to follow Lepuschütz and make deeper combinations. Promising is the idea to hide the theme more by adding a foreplan such that the possibility to allow the black check appears only after the foreplan. I recommend especially what has been said to Grasemann's Nr.31 for further study.

Home