返回列表 回覆 發帖

[興趣討論] 【國際象棋】(轉貼) 享受棋題(排局)

本帖最後由 誠惶誠恐 於 2014/7/29 18:37 編輯

【誠惶誠恐按】無論「限著殺王棋題」(chess problem)還是「殘局研究」(endgame study),大陸國際象棋界都一律稱之為「排局」。

* * * * *

享受棋題

要享受西洋棋,有很多不同的方法。棋題(Chess Problem)是其中一種有趣的玩法。甚麼是棋題呢?很簡單,就是限著殺王的遊戲:給你一個局面,你必須在限定著數之內以白棋先手把黑棋殺掉,不管黑棋怎麼走。例如下面這個:


M. Niemeijer,兩步殺(一步指一回合,即白一步黑一步為之一步)

白棋的勝利方法有很多,但這樣我們必須在兩步內了結黑棋,就算給黑棋拖延了一兩著也不行。答案是:

1.Kb3!

很明顯是把王移開,為了 2.Re8#。把王移到別處黑棋會拖延時間:1.Kd1 Qh1+ 2.Bxh1 這樣白棋就用完了兩步

1...Qg8+!

想利用將軍拖延時間。1...Qxg7 2.Re7#!。

2.Re6#!

漂亮殺了黑棋,用了兩步,不多不少。

棋題的確很有趣。那麼,棋題有甚麼技巧的呢?首先我們學些名詞:

鍵著(Key):答案的第一著
從剛才的例子看,1.Kb3 就是「鍵著」。

脅著(Threat):能直接引致下著或下幾著殺棋
再看剛才的例子,1.Kb3 就是「脅著」,威脅 2.Re8#。

等著(Waiter):毫無威脅但迫黑棋移動,完成殺棋


Lev I. Loshinsky, Tijdschrift v.d. Nederlandse Schaakbond 1930,兩步殺

鍵著:1.Bb3!無論黑棋怎麼走也要被殺:
1...Bb7 2.Re7#;
1...Rb7 2.Rc6#;
1...Bg7 2.Qxf7#;
1...Rg7 2.Qe5#;
1...Bf6 2.Qg4#;
1...f6 2.Qe4#;
1...f5 2.Qd6#;
1...Bxd4 2.Nxd4#;
1...Rxc7 2.Nxc7#

設著(Set-play):先假設是黑棋先手,看看他會怎樣走,從而得到靈感。

看看下例:


Dimitry Banny, =1st Prize, Moscow 22 Olympiad, 1980,兩步殺

就這樣看很難知道答案,我們可以用「設著」的技巧試試。假如黑棋先走的話:

1...exd3 2.Qf3;
1...f1=Q 2.Qxd2;
1...f1=N 2.Qe2

那麼我們可否利用「等著」來迫黑棋行呢?1.Nc5? (威脅 2 Qxe4) f1=N! 或 1.Qf1? (威脅 2 Qe2) exd3! 都不行。那可以怎麼做?既然黑棋只有 f 兵可動,我們只好剷除黑 f 兵了!

1.Nxf2!
    1...Kf4 2.Qxe4#
    1...gxf2 2.Qg5#
    1...Nxf2 2.Qxg3#

看了那麼多理論,是時候看些例子,不過之前講解一下尋找答案的大概方法:

  • 運用「設著」,看看黑棋先手的話黑棋會不會輸。如果會,設法尋找「等著」。
  • 若沒有「等著」研究一下黑王的位置。如果沒有逃走格,則設法用最短著數計劃殺棋。如果有逃走格,則可以找方法諸塞再將,或者塞不盡的話,可以以將軍迫黑王到其他地方去。
  • 然後再看看白王的位置。因為黑棋任何將軍也可以拖延時間。
  • 研究一下黑王周圍的棋子,看看有甚麼白棋可以最快「投入服務」,由有影響的看到不太有影響的。
  • 每下了一著,要看看有甚麼變化,也要看看黑棋有甚麼方法回應。這一部分不容易,需要很大的想像力和計算力。
  • 留意特別著法如吃過路兵或易位,使用它們前要看看有否違法。
  • 當計算一個「鍵著」失敗,不要立即放棄它,試試放棄原有的想法,再看清楚一下它,看看有沒有新的主意。
以下是一些例子:


S. Chyrulik, 1st Pr. Zvyazda, 1975,五步殺

要五步才殺好像很長很難,但老實說,這十分容易。同樣我們先用「設著」:

黑棋只有兩著:...Kb1 和 ...Bb1,他設法升變 b 兵,但兵給白后串著了。他的可能計劃是 ...Kb1-c1、...b1=Q,假如白后在 d4,則可以阻步這計劃(1.Qd4 Kb1 2.Qd1#)。黑棋也可以 ...Bb1-c2、...Ka2 和 ...b1=Q,但假如黑王由 a 線而上,白后有機會在 a 線殺,「鍵著」很可能要先啟動白后。

所以我們試試 1.Qd4。不難發現,1.Qd4 Bb1 2.Qg1 Ka2,假如白王不在 a7,可以下 3.Qa7 殺。由於還有兩步未用,我們還能把王移開試試成不成。1.Kb6 Kb1!  2 Qc3 (阻止 ...Kc1 或 ...Kc2) Ka1 3 Qd4 Bb1 4 Qg1 Ka2 白王仍阻著了。1 Kb7 Bb1! 2 Qh1 Ka2 也行不通。所以只有 1.Kb8! Kb1 2.Qc3 Ka1 3.Qd4 Bb1 4.Qg1 Ka2 5.Qa7#


M. Vukcevich, Politika Meredith Tourney, 1998,兩步殺

運用設著,很明顯黑王有位逃走,白棋要主動出擊。我們甚麼方法可以兩步殺棋呢?最快很明顯是移動后。1.Qa5 (威脅 2.Qf5#) 看起來可以一試。黑棋沒有甚麼方法逃避:1...Ke4? 2.Qe5# ; 1...Kg4? 2.Be6# ; 1...Bxh4? 2.Be2#,不過,黑棋可以延遲殺棋:1...Bc5!。既然如此,只有另一個移后殺棋的方法:1.Qa3! Ke4 ( 1...Kg4 2.Be2# ; 1...Bxh4 2.Be6# ; 1...Bxb4 2.Qf3#) 2.Qe3#


F. Amelung, Duna-Zeitung, 1897,兩步殺

這是個狡猾的問題。不論你怎麼看,最快的殺棋也要三步,例如:1.f7 g4 2.Qf8+ Kxh5 3.Rxh7#。原來今次我們還要問多一個問題:黑棋上一步是甚麼?

很明顯黑棋上一步不是移 h 兵。也不是黑王,因為走進 h6 要經由 g7 或 g6 。唯一可能是移了 g 兵。那麼從 g6 還是 g5 呢?如果上一步是 ...g6-g5,那麼黑棋不是正將著白王嗎?所以一定是 ...g7-g5。所以答案是吃過路兵殺:1.hxg6 Kh5 2.Rxh7#


S. Loyd, New York Albion 1857,三步殺

運用「設著」:假如黑棋先手會輸,1...Kxg3 2.Rhg1+ Kh4 (2...Kh2 3.Rg8 Kh3 4.Rh1#) 3.Rf8 Kh5 4.Rh8#。很明顯要找「等著」。不過唯一的「等著」1.Ke2 會用超過三步:Kxg3 2.Rhg1+ Kh4 (2...Kh2 3.Kg8 Kh3 4.Rh1#) 3.Rf8 Kh5 4.Rh8#。我們要另在找其他方法,很大可能是移車。1.Rh8 Kxg3 2.Rg8+ Kh2 3.Rf7,用完了三步。我們可以試改移 f 車,但 1.Rf8 Kxg3 (1...Kxh8 2.Kf2!) 2.Rg1 Kh2 也行不通。原來我們看漏了白棋王車易位的可能性!答案是:1.Rf4! Kxg3 (1...Kxh1 2.Kf2!) 2.O-O!! Kh3 3.R1f3#

看了這麼多,想不想小試牛刀?以下有四題讓你試試,試的時候不要忘了上的技巧和法則!

(一)

J. Rosberger,兩步殺

按下滑鼠左鍵掃出答案:
1.Qb8!
  1... Kc3 2.Qb2#
  1... Kc5 2.Qb6#
  1... Ke3 2.Qe5#
  1... Ke4 2.Qf4#


(二)

R. Lincoln,兩步殺

按下滑鼠左鍵掃出答案:
1.Rf2!
  1... kxe1 2.Rf1#
  1... dxe1=Q 2.Bc2#
  1... dxe1=N 2.Rd2#


(三)

E. Cook, Illustrated London News, 1855三步殺

按下滑鼠左鍵掃出答案:
1.e8=B!(若 1. e8=Q??則欠行和棋)
  1... Ke6 2.f8=B Kf5 3.Bd7#


(四)

Samuel Loyd, Boston Globe, 1876三步殺

按下滑鼠左鍵掃出答案:
1. e8=N+!
  1... Kxh8 2.d8=N N any 3.Nf7#
  1... Kh6 2.d8=N N any 3.Ndf7 #
  1... Kf8 2 d8=N N any (or Ke7) 3.Ng6#


做以上四題,你也許發現棋題的思考技巧在實戰下棋也用得著呢!如果喜歡,你可以下載一本電子棋題集(PDF 格式,用 Acrobat Reader 看)。其實,棋題除了以上那種「標準型」以外,還有兩種:「自殺型」(self-mate)和「助殺型」(help-mate),「自殺型」是「標準型」相反,你替白棋先手,無論黑棋怎麼走也會殺白棋。「助殺型」時你同時控制黑白兩方(先手),在限著內殺黑棋。不過這兩種由於較少見,所以不介紹了,儘管我認為它們也很有趣。

(全文完)

原文轉自:http://hk.geocities.com/goodchessclub/ltr-problem.html(網頁已停)
另可參考:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chess_problem
大量電子棋題集鏈結:http://www.anders.thulin.name/SUBJECTS/CHESS_PROBLEMS


第一例車吃后不就殺了?
不在沉默中爆發,就在沉默中滅亡
第一例車吃后不就殺了?
火柴 發表於 2009/11/14 07:25
請參閱<【國際象棋】基本玩法>:
和棋
行棋方未受到將軍,但卻無有任何合乎規則的著法可行,對局結果作和。這種局面被稱為「無子可動」(stalemate)。 中國象棋則「無子可動」以 「欠行」判負。

四個黑先和例子:




誠惶誠恐 發表於 2009/10/29 16:12
另外,<【國際象棋】(轉貼) 基本殘局殺法>有云:
當快要殺時,大家要小心因欠行而逼和,如:



...

由於后移動力更大,所以更要小心以下的那些欠行逼和:





...

誠惶誠恐 發表於 2009/11/4 22:53
本帖最後由 誠惶誠恐 於 2014/6/20 15:00 編輯

有一題不難的兩步殺棋題,我很喜歡出。因為雖然容易,但很有意思,其殺法在中國象棋也常用到。

Eric Manfred Hassberg (1918-1987, UK)
New York Post, April 21, 1945
兩步殺




答案:

1.Qc2! > 2.Qh7#
   1... Rxc2 2.Rh7#
   1... Rxg7   2.Qxh2#
本帖最後由 誠惶誠恐 於 2014/6/20 14:47 編輯

【注:以下一文用的記譜法,馬(騎士Knight)的代號是「S」(騎士德文Springer的第一個字母)而非「N」,這是棋題界的習慣】

What is a Chess Problem?
by Peter Wong

The best games of chess are considered beautiful. They are admired, and replayed around the world by enthusiasts for that reason, apart from the practical use of studying such games. Yet when we play a game, the only real consideration is how to win it, never mind whether the method of winning is attractive or not. What if we devise a position specifically to demonstrate a beautiful or artistic chess idea? That, in fact, is what occurs in the composition of a chess problem. When you solve such a problem, its composer’s aesthetic intent is revealed in the play of the solution.

So chess problems – also known as chess compositions – are enjoyed on two levels. On a basic level, they work as challenging puzzles. You are given a position and an accompanying task, such as “White to play and mate in two moves”, that must be fulfilled. On a higher level, problems are aesthetic works designed to show an interesting theme – the composition’s main idea. How exactly are themes artistic? It varies, but important factors include subtlety, elegance, economy, paradox, and unity of play. The latter concept of unity is especially noteworthy; most good problems have multiple variations that are related to each other in some way, to create a harmonious impression.

Chess problems come in a variety of genres, the most common of which is the directmate. In this type of problem, White plays first and forces mate in the specified number of moves, against any Black defence. Only one of White’s first moves is able to achieve this, and the solver’s task is to discover this unique move, called the key. If another move, unintended by the composer, solves the problem too, that alternative move is called a cook, and the problem becomes unsound. Such faulty problems, however, are rarely seen nowadays (especially in directmates) because of the practice of computer-testing, which ensures that cooks are eliminated.


1. Otto Wurzburg
American Chess Bulletin 1942
3rd Hon. Mention
Mate in 2
2

Let us consider our first example, 1, a two-mover. The problem’s stipulation or task is given next to the diagram as “Mate in 2”, indicating it’s a directmate and White must mate by the second move. The solution begins with 1.Kc2! – the '!' signifies the key – after which the threat is 2.Sb3 mate. Black can parry this threat with various defences, but these moves enable White to mate in other ways. For example, 1…bxc3 2.Bxc3 – the two moves here, Black’s defence and White’s correct response, constitute a variation. The main variations of this problem are 1…Bf5+ 2.Se4, 1…R1g2+ 2.S1e2,and 1…R5g2+ 2.S3e2. These lines represent the thematic play because they share a number of elements: Black checks, but unguards a white piece (rook or bishop) that’s training on the black king, allowing White to answer the check by interposing a knight, and discover mate at the same time. Such a tactic, in which White stops a check by interposition, and gives check as well with the same move, is known as a cross-check, and its recurring use is the theme of this problem.

Various conventions apply to key-moves in directmates, and knowing them will assist you when solving this type of problem. The desired feature of subtlety means that keys are very unlikely to be checks. Keys that capture a piece are almost unheard of, for the same reason, though the capture of a pawn is acceptable. In contrast to obviously aggressive keys that are frown upon, keys that apparently weaken White or strengthen Black are viewed as good in the artistic sense. Though not all directmates are successful in incorporating them, you should keep in mind the possibility of such paradoxical keys. A perfect illustration is 1, which has an excellent key because it exposes the white king to numerous checks.


2. William Shinkman
The Problemist 1944
Mate in 2


Another major consideration when analysing a problem is whether the key creates a threat or sets up a block position. The former is already exemplified by 1, a threat-problem. In a block-problem, the key carries no threat but is a waiting move that puts Black in zugzwang. In such a position, every possible move by Black entails a weakness, which is exploited by White due to Black’s compulsion to move. Problem 2 is an example. Its key 1.c5! doesn’t threaten an immediate mate, but all moves by the black knight commit some kind of error that allows a mating reply. The variations 1…Sd4 2.Rxd4, 1…Sf4 2.Rxf4, 1…Sg5 2.Rxg5, and 1…Sg7 2.Sxg7 are similar – White discovers check and captures the knight to stop it from interfering with the bishop mate. 1…Sxc5 2.Rc4 and 1…Sxf8 2.Rg8 see the white rook pinning the knight, to prevent its return to e6. In the remaining two lines, 1…Sc7 2.b7 and 1…Sd8 2.Sd6, the errors committed by the knight are called self-blocks: a black piece obstructs a square next to the black king, freeing a white piece that was guarding it to give mate. When a black knight makes its maximum number of eight moves in a problem and induces eight different white responses, as here, the knight-wheel theme is produced.

Looking at the problems in this article, you may be struck by how the positions seem “artificial” and far removed from an actual game of chess. That only highlights how problem composition is a field distinct from the competitive game and also from game-position exercises. Chess problems are constructed in accordance with their own principles. A particularly important one of such principles is economy of force, which holds that for any given idea shown in a problem, the number of pieces used should be minimised, and that every piece should serve to bring about that idea or to ensure soundness. That the resulting problem positions do not resemble game situations is regarded as irrelevant. Nevertheless, another convention of problems links them directly to the game. Problem positions are required to be legal, i.e. they could have arisen from the opening array, however unlikely the players’ moves may have been in reaching these positions.


3. Charles Ouellet
The Problemist 1987
Mate in 2


A pawn on its starting rank has the potential to make four different moves – two forward steps, and two captures. If a white pawn plays each of these four moves in turn during the course of a problem’s solution, the Albino theme is shown. Problem 3, using only eight pieces, is a very economical demonstration. It is solved by a waiting move, 1.Rbb5!, after which the black rook has to release the white pawn. 1…Rb3 2.cxb3, 1…Rd3 2.cxd3, 1…Rxc5 2.c4,and 1…Rc4 (or to e3, etc.) 2.c3. There is also by-play, i.e. non-thematic or secondary variation(s): 1…Rxc2+ 2.Bxc2.


4. Alain White (version by R. Cabral)
Good Companions 1918
1st Prize
Mate in 2


Problem 4 has rich play involving pins and unpins. The white queen has the black queen pinned, and the latter in turn is pinning the white bishop, which could otherwise mate on d4 or g5. The key is 1.Qe7!, threatening 2.Qc5. Each move by the black queen defeats the threat, but also unpins the white bishop, hence 1…Qxe7 2.Bd4 and 1…Qe5 2.Bg5. After 1…Qe4, however, neither bishop mate works because the black queen has shut off the white rook’s guard of d4. But this defence permits 2.Rg3, because the pinned queen has also cut off the black bishop’s access to f3. Two further thematic variations are 1…d6 2.Qa7 and 1…d5 2.Qa3. In each case the black pawn interferes with the black queen’s control of a defensive line, enabling the white queen to unpin its counterpart with impunity in the mate.


5. Godfrey Heathcote
Norwich Mercury 1907
1st Prize
Mate in 2

Problem 5 is famous for its brilliant key that self-pins multiple white pieces simultaneously. After 1.Ke5!, the four previously mobile pieces next to the white king are all pinned by Black. The threat of 2.Kd4 induces Black to unpin these white pieces, which are then free to deliver mate; thus four matching variations are created, 1…Ra8 (or to b8, etc.) 2.Bg4, 1…Qa7 (or to b7, etc.) 2.Qf5, 1…Bf2 2.Rf5, and 1…Se3 2.Sxg3. The key also allows Black to give three more checks by capturing the pinned pieces, in addition to 1…Qxf6+, and in all cases the white king recaptures to give a discovered mate, 1…Rxe6+ 2.Kxe6, 1…Bxf4+ 2.Kxf4, 1…Rxe4+ 2.Kxe4, and 1…Qxf6+ 2.Kxf6. Also, 1…Qxg6 2.Qxg6, 1…Bh4 2.Rxh4.


6. Lev Loshinsky
The Problemist 1930
Mate in 2


Problem 6 is for you to solve. The thematic play involves self-interference, when a black piece cuts off the line controlled by another black piece.

Problem 6 solution (To display, hold down your mouse button and select the text below.)
>1.Qf2! (threat: 2.Qxa7). Black has five unified defences that occur on one square, d4. In each case the black piece interferes with a defensive line controlled by the rook on h4 or the bishop on a1. 1…d4 2.Bc4, 1…Rd4 2.Rh6, 1…Bd4 2.Qxe2, 1…Sed4 2.Qa2, and 1…Sfd4 2.Ra3.
返回列表
高級模式 | 發新話題
B Color Image Link Quote Code Smilies
換一個