1. d3+! Kf1! 1... axb4 2. h7 +- 2. Kh2 Rxh6+ 3. Kg3 Ra6 4. Bb5! Rxa7 5. d4+ Kg1 6. Bc5! Ra8! 7. d5+ Kh1 8. Bc6! 8. d6? Be4! = 8... Ra6 9. d6+ 9. Bb7? Rd6! = 9... Rxc6 10. d7! Rxc5 11. d8=Q +-
1... gxf6! 2. axb3! fxe5! 3. bxc4! (3. dxe5? cxb3 -+) 3... exd4! (3... dxc4 4. dxe5 Kd7 5. Kf3 Kc6 6. Ke4 Kc5 7. h4 =) 4. cxd5! (4. cxd4? dxc4 -+) 4... dxc3! (4... exd5 5. cxd4 =) 5. dxe6! cxb2! (5... fxe6 6. bxc3 =) 6. exf7! b1=Q 7. f8=Q+ =
1. dxe3 fxe6 2. exd4 (2. fxe6? dxe3 =) 2... exf5 3. dxe5 fxe4 (3... dxe5 4. exf5 +-) 4. exd6 exf3 (4... exd6 5. fxe4 Kb6 6. Kg2 +-) 5. dxe7 fxe2 6. e8=Q +-
1. Be7+ Kg3 2. Bxf8 Qxf8 3. gxh3+ Kh4 4. hxg4+ Kg5 5. gxh5+ Kh6 6. hxg6+ Kg7 7. gxh7+ Kh8 8. Rg8+ Qxg8 9. hxg8=Q+ Kxg8 10. Rb1! Nc7 11. Rb8+ Kf7 12. Rb7 +-
White wins
1. bxc3+ Kc5 1... Kc4 2. Qb3+ +- 2. cxd4+ Kd6 2... Kxd4 3. Qb2+ Ke3 4. Qd2+ Kf3 5. Qd3+ +- 3. dxe5+ Ke7 3... fxe5 4. Qd3+ +- 4. exf6+ Kf8 5. fxg7+ Kg8 6. gxh8=Q+ Kxh8 7. Qb2+ Kg8 8. Qxe2 +-
1. c6! 1. a4? h6! 2. c6 h5 3. a5 h4 4. a6 h3 5. a7 h2 6. c7 h1=Q# 1... h6! 2. a3! h5 2... Kc7 3. a4 Kxc6 4. a5! Kb5 5. Kb7! Kxa5 6. Kc6 h5 7. Kd5= Réti manoeuvre 3. a4 h4 4. a5 h3 5. a6 h2 6. a7 h1=Q stalemate 6... h1=R 7. c7 Rh8 stalemate
1. Kxe1 Qa1 2. h3!! (2. h4? Qa2 3. h5 Qa1 4. h6 Qa2 5. h7 Qa1 6. h8=N Qa2 7. Nf7 Qa1 8. Nd8 Qa2 9. Ne6 Qa1 10. Nxc5 Qa2 11. Nd7 Qa1 12. Ne5 Qa2 13. Nxc4 Qa1 14. Na5 Qa2 =) 2... Qa2 3. h4 Qa1 4. h5 Qa2 5. h6 Qa1 6. h7 Qa2 7. h8=N! Qa1 8. Nf7 Qa2 9. Ne5 Qa1 10. Nd7 (10. Nxc4? Qa2 11. Na5 c4! 12. Nxc4 Qa1 13. Na5 Qa2 =) 10... Qa2 11. Nxc5 Qa1 12. Nd7 Qa2 13. Ne5 Qa1 14. Nxc4 Qa2 15. Na5 Qa1 16. Nxb3#
A few days after composing and publishing this study, I have discovered a very serious anticipation in the HHdbV. In 2009 Richard Becker published the following draw study: Study 126a. Although it seems that he hasn't found the main line from my work, my study can be considered no more than a version of his. The judge of that 2009 tourney stated that he didn’t award studies that only contained technical play and “database works”. Probably this was the reason the whole community missed to notice the existence of that groundbreaking study.
Thematic try: 1. b4? f5 mutual zugzwang 2. b5 f4! 3. exf4 d4 mutual zugzwang 4. b6 d3 mutual zugzwang 5. b7 d2 mutual zugzwang 6. b8=Q d1=Q mutual zugzwang
7. h5 7. Kc7+ Kf7! 8. Qb4 Qh5! = 7... Qxh5 8. Kd7+ Kh7! = 8... Kf7? 9. Qe8+ +-; 8... Kg7? 9. Qe5+ Qxe5 10. fxe5 +-
The real solution starts with an amazing waiting move:
1. b3!! mutual zugzwang. White is very polite: it voluntarily allows black to be the one who is promoting first!
1... f5 2. b4 mutual zugzwang
2... f4! 3. exf4 d4 4. b5 mutual zugzwang 4... d3 5. b6 mutual zugzwang 5... d2 6. b7 mutual zugzwang
6... d1=Q 7. b8=Q mutual zugzwang 7... Qg4+ 7... Qh5 8. Kd7+ +-; 7... Qd3 8. h5 (8. Qe5? Qh3+ =) 8... Qf5+ 9. Kb7+ Kh7 10. Qe5 +- 8. Kc7+ Kh7 9. Qb1+ Kh6 9... Kg7 10. Qb2+ Kf7 11. Qb3+ Kg7 12. Qc3+ Kf7 13. Qc4+ Kg7 14. Qd4+ +- 10. Qb6+ Kh5 11. Qf6 Qxh4 12. Qxh4+ Kxh4 We are back to another pawn ending although this is much simpler than the initial position of the study. The black king seems to be much closer to the pawn but the chessboard's geometry can be deceiving.
13. Kd6 Kg4 14. Ke5 +-
Update: On move seven, there is a nice try with stalemates discovered by "Paparazzi": 7... Qd5 8. Qe5! +- Try: 8. Qc7? Qf5+! 9. Kb8! Qf6! 10. h5 Qf8+! 11. Qc8
11... Kh7! 12. f5 Qf7! 13. Qc7
13... Kh8! 14. Qc8+ Kh7! 14... Kg7? 15. Qe6! Qxh5 16. f6+ Kh6 17. Qe3+ Kg6 18. Qe8+ +- 15. Qc7 Kh8 16. Qxf7 stalemate
Watch this study on a dynamic board! Click here!
