This booklet – made ready in time for the

59th World Congress of Chess Composition

in Belgrade, Serbia, from 30th July – 6th
August 2016 – is dedicated to the memory of
Milan Velimirović (21.04.1952 – 25.02.2013).
Milan was one of the greatest Grandmasters
of problem chess. His many friends and
admirers will remember him for his truly
outstanding contribution and dedication to
the art of chess composition, as this booklet
serves to show.
 Milan Velimirović 64 Memorial Tourney

Publication Detail

Editor:
The Serbian Chess Problem Society
President: Borislav Gadjanski

Contributors:
Borislav Gadjanski, Technical Editing & Design
Danka Ječmenica, Cover
Marjan Kovačević, Concept

Publisher:
DIGINET ProStudio

Belgrade, July 2016

II
 Milan Velimirović 64 Memorial Tourney

MILAN VELIMIROVIĆ
64
MEMORIAL TOURNEY

The Serbian Chess Problem Society organized the small number of existing examples, all
this memorial tourney dedicated to composed by Milan. The definition and the
Grandmaster Milan Velimirović (21.04.1952– name of the theme were suggested by him, in
25.02.2013). The three sections chosen the article published in Mat Plus Review
covered Milan’s favourite types of chess Summer 2008:
problem composition: direct #2 and #3, “In tries White self - invalidates two out of
without fairy elements. three thematic elements, which are almost
A) Single-phase #2 inevitably white lines. Each try provides
Judge: Barry Barnes compensation for one invalidation so that black
(Great Britain). can utilize only the remaining one to reject the
B) Multi-phase #2 with cyclic combina- try. In this way all thematic tries contain two
tion named Velimirović Attack degrees of attack, i.e. each one is at the same
Judge: Touw Hian Bwee time a correction and an error to be corrected.”
(Indonesia).
C) #3 - free theme Link:
Judge : Hans - Peter Rehm http://matplus.net/pub/VelimirovicAttack.pdf
(Germany). (YOU CAN SEE THE WHOLE ARTICLE IN THIS BOOK)

With the choice of judges, whose work and Group C

friendship Milan especially admired, we tried is the field in which Milan produced some of
to remain faithful to his unique spirit. his best known masterpieces. It is not devoted
to cyclic concepts exclusively, because Milan
Group A
loved all kinds of attractive chess ideas.
is for traditional ideas that Milan loved, and
once proposed in combination for a WCCT7 #2 The closing date was April 21st 2016 which
theme, believing it would give composers marked Milan’s 64th birthday – the milestone
many hours of pleasure. he found to be the most appropriate one for a
Group B chess player or composer.
is devoted to Milan’s inspired cyclic theme, the The method of entering originals for the
Velimirović Attack. Unlike Group A, it was a tourney directly to the Mat Plus website (with
real challenge for composers to compete with automatic confirmation) was created by Milan.

III
 Milan Velimirović 64 Memorial Tourney

PARTICIPANTS
(author + co-author)

Section A Section C
Two-movers (Traditional) Three-movers
Viktor Chepizhny, RUS (1+0) Rauf Aliovsadzade, USA (1+2)
Paz Einat, ISR (1+0) Evgeni Bourd, ISR (0+1)
Maryan Kerhuel, FRA (1+0) Viktor Chepizhny, RUS (0+1)
Emil Klemanič, SVK (1+1) Fedor Davidenko, RUS (1+0)
Marjan Kovačević, SRB (1+0) Arieh Grinblat, ISR (1+1)
Karol Mlynka, SVK (1+0) Chris Handloser, SUI (1+0)
Vyacheslav Pilchenko, RUS (0+1) Vladimir Kozhakin, RUS (1+0)
John Rice, GBR (1+0) Aleksandr Kuzovkov, RUS (1+0)
Piotr Ruszczynski, USA (1+0) Leonid Lyubashevsky, ISR (0+1)
Ladislav Salai jr. , SVK (0+1) Leonid Makaronez, ISR (0+1)
Seetharaman Kalyan, IND (1+0) Mirko Marković, SRB (2+0)
Valery Shanshin, RUS (3+1) Karol Mlynka, SVK (1+0)
Alexander Shpakovsky, RUS (1+0) Valentin Rudenko (†), UKR (0+1)
Dragan Stojnić, SRB (3+0) Vitaly Shevchenko, UKR (0+2)
Sergei I. Tkachenko, UKR (1+0) Vladimir Sytchev, BLR (0+1)
Kari Valtonen, FIN (2+0) Anatolii Vasylenko, UKR (1+0)
Anatolii Vasylenko, UKR (2+0) Viktor Volchek, BLR (0+1)
Daniel Wirajaya, INA (1+0) Alexander Zhuk, UKR (0+2)
Beat Züger, SUI (1+0)

25 problems 16 problems

Section B
Two-movers (Velimirović Attack)
Michel Caillaud, FRA (0+1) Total:
Marjan Kovačević, SRB (1+0) 44 problems
Jean-Marc Loustau , FRA (0+1) 36 authors
13 countries
Dragan Stojnić, SRB (1+0)

3 problems

IV
 Milan Velimirović 64 Memorial Tourney

MILAN VELIMIROVIĆ
(21.04.1952 – 25.02.2013)

to everyone, from an incidental visitor to a

chess club to mature Masters. With his articles
in MAT, and later Mat Plus (from 1994), he
educated all generations of problem
composers, and he became the real successor
to the work of Grandmaster Nenad Petrović
and his problem magazine in Yugoslavia. His
great gift was to offer inspiration to other
composers. Milan could readily suggest ideas
for original thematic combinations, make
detailed classifications, and point out gaps to
be filled by others.
Apart from some 120 issues of magazines,
Milan’s publication ventures included several
books, some partly edited by him, and others
fully edited and written by him. Whatever he
prepared for the press, he enjoyed taking care
of the smallest detail, right down to the final
lay-out. Milan’s publications combined the
deepest understanding of chess composition
Jurmala, September 2008 with a programmer’s skill, and always with his
Photo: B. Gadjanski
subtle requirements for a pleasing design. The
Milan Velimirović was born on April 21st 1952 same personal qualities found their place in
in Niš, Serbia. His early interest in chess took Milan’s chess compositions. He found time to
wings after his family moved to Belgrade, one prepare many collections of problems by his
of the greatest centres of the game, with a friends and colleagues, including Miroslav
fast-growing chess composition community. Stošić (1979) and Touw Hian Bwee (2008). His
Milan used to say that his first Lačný #2, made books about others – his first for Miroslav
in his early ‘teens, changed his life completely. (1975†) a young and immensely talented
As a teenager, he began working for the Serbian friend lost tragically early, and his last
Serbian chess magazine MAT as a technical for his early Indonesian idol, the no less
editor. When he was only 22, he took over the talented Touw Hian Bwee – were typically
problem chess section of MAT. As the chief selfless acts because, sadly, Milan never did
editor during the period 1974-85, he created a find time to publish his own selected works.
world-class problem chess magazine in MAT, As a composer, Milan aimed at ambitiously
and set new standards for the whole of chess high goals and crystal-clear mechanisms
problem composition. (“working like a good machine”). Realising that
Milan’s love for the art of chess was endless. cyclic change was his “Queen of Themes”, it is
His driving force revealed the beauty of chess no wonder that Milan composed the first ever

V
 Milan Velimirović 64 Memorial Tourney

Lačný 3x3 in #3, and the first miraculous Lačný- Chess Problem Society remains grateful to all
Tura #3. The latter problem was composed in the participants, as well as the judges, who
one of the periods of Milan’s near-absence helped lift the level of content of this booklet
from problem chess, 1985-1994. These high above that of normal composing tourneys.
absences were the reason his Grandmaster
Marjan Kovačević
title for composition being awarded much later
than he deserved in 2010.
* After publishing this article in 2008, Milan
Each comeback brought a new enthusiasm, composed another wonderful example of his
and the last one in 2006 was motivated by the eponymous theme, the Velimirović Attack, to
idea to devote the rest of his life to problem demonstrate yet again his sole mastery of the
chess activities. Milan left his profession of an idea at the time – and until this Section B
expert programmer, and turned to various Mat tourney award:
Plus projects, including the Mat Plus website
created for the pleasure and education of the Milan Velimirović
st
whole problem chess world. He rushed to give 1 HM The Problemist 2009
to chess composition as much as he could. Y¤£¤£¤£¤
||||||||
Already ill, he accepted a challenge by the
Chess Informant publisher to create an
||||||||
p£¤£¤£¼£
Encyclopedia of Chess Compositions: Terms and ||||||||
£¼©¤»3¹¼
Themes in only six months. With his Finnish ||||||||
¤»¤£¤©X£
friend, Kari Valtonen, Milan managed to ||||||||
£Z£¤m¤Wº
conclude this monumental work at the end of ||||||||
n»¤G¤£º£
2012 in the last moments before illness so
much reduced his activities.
||||||||
£¤£¤£¤£¬
||||||||
¤£¤0¤£¤£
Milan’s educational work, personal talent and
#2 (11+11)
charisma radically changed the level of chess
composition in Serbia where he became the
first International Judge (1977), the first 1. Rf4? (2. Sf~#), 1. ... h:g5!
International Master of Composition (1982), 1. Sfe7!? (2. Rf4#)
and the first Grandmaster Solver (1984). He 1. ... Bb8 2. Sg8# (2.Qd8?), 1. ... e5 2. Qd6#
1. ... S:g4 2. Qf3# , 1. ... R:e4! (2.Be7?)
was the key solver in many medals won by the
national team in WCSCs, including the gold 1. Sd6!? (2. Rf4#)
1. ... R:e4 2. S:e4#(2.Be7?), 1. ... S:g4 2. Qf3#
medal (1982), and the key composer to many
1. ... e5! (2.Qd6?)
WCCT successes.
1. Sfd4!? (2. Rf4#)
The booklet in front of the reader was 1. ... e5 2. Rf5#(2.Qd6?), 1. ... S:g4 2. Qf3#
prepared for the 59th World Congress of Chess 1. ... Bb8! (2.Qd8?)
Composition in Belgrade, 30th July – 6th August 1. Se3!! (2. Rf4#)
2016, the first ever to be organised in Serbia. 1. ... Bb8 2. Qd8# , 1. ... R:e4 2. Be7#
1. ... e5 2. Qd6# , 1. ... S:g4 2. S:g4#
The awards contain personal tributes to Milan
1. ... h:g5 2. h:g5#
written by the judges, Barry Barnes, Touw Hian
Bwee, and Hans-Peter Rehm. There is a
separate Velimirović Attack article* by Milan, The additional try 1.Rf4? adds nicely to the
reproduced from Mat Plus Review 2008, and correction-play, while the solution introduces
an article by Barry Barnes who kindly polished another closure of a white line (d3-f3) for a
the English text of the booklet. The Serbian neatly changed mate after 1...Sxg4.

VI
 Milan Velimirović 64 Memorial Tourney

MILAN VELIMIROVIĆ
AND
THE BRITISH CHESS PROBLEM SOCIETY

It`s heartening for mere mortals to know that difficult task, with or without fairy units. Only
Grandmaster-to-be Milan’s first contact with later when it was known that Milan was so
the British Chess Problem Society as a young young – about 18 or 19 – could we marvel that
man was to send a cooked problem! His he had already mastered the intricacies of A!
correction was published as A in the Fairy
Section (F154) of The Problemist. It won high
praise especially from the late John Driver who
invented the Edgehog piece in 1966. John
wrote: "Outstanding problem with 5-fold cycle
of mates between try and solution: it’s a very
clever mechanism which makes good use of
Grasshopper power, and there is a well hidden
refutation of the try".

A Milan Velimirović
7th HM The Problemist 11/1971
£¤£¤W¤£P
||||||||
||||||||
¤£¤O¼£¤£
||||||||
O¤Qp£¤£¤
||||||||
¤G¼Q3£¤Q
||||||||
O¤Qp£¤0n
||||||||
¤£¤£¼W¤£
||||||||
£¤£¤»¤£P
||||||||
¤£¤£P£¤£ Milan, end of 70-es
#2 (11+11) Photo: Bernd Ellinghoven

1.Qxc6? (-) It was my good fortune to be two-move editor

1. ... Ke4 2.Rxe3# A; 1. ... Ke6 2.Qxd5# B when Milan contributed his first #2 to The
1. ... 6B~ 2.Rxe7# C; 1. ... dG~ 2.Rf4# D
Problemist. He told me that in the British Chess
1. ... 4B~ 2.Rf6# E, but 1. ... Gf5!
Magazine 8/1972, Lars Larsen had quoted
1.Qxc4! (-)
problem B by Lev Loshinski which showed
1. ... Ke4 2.Qxd5# B; 1. ... Ke6 2.Rxe7# C
1. ... 6B~ 2.Rf4# D; 1. ... dG~ 2.Rf6# E three changed black corrections and a changed
1. ... 4B~ 2.Re3# A. contingent threat (no.126 in FIDE Album
1962/64). Lars Larsen had suggested that, as
The judge (John Rice) of the Fairy Award 1971- the mates 2.Qe4 and 2.Be4 were not distinctly
1972 was less keen on the setting, but he changed, the ideal position had yet to be
freely acknowledged that this was a fiendishly found:

VII
 Milan Velimirović 64 Memorial Tourney

B L. I. Loshinski Yes, Loshinski’s task had been matched and

1st Pr Shakmaty v SSSR 1962 even bettered. At the time, I wrote, “In spite of
£¤©¤£p£¤
|||||||| the WPd7, underused WBb5, and 1...Kxh3 as a
refutation, a truly remarkable task”. Nils van
||||||||
n£¤©¤£¤0 Dijk was no less impressed, and wrote, “Such a
||||||||
£¤«¤¹¤£X task leaves me breathless. I can’t find enough
||||||||
¤¹¤2¤£¤£ superlatives” – and made the helpful
||||||||
£Z£¤£¤W¤ suggestion of removing the WPd7, putting the
WBb5 on d1, and adding a BSe2 to give the WB
||||||||
¤¹¤£¼£¤o a role in both phases.
||||||||
G¤£¤«¤£¤
Such is the measure of the matching tasks that
||||||||
¤m¤£¤£¤£ Loshinski’s and Milan’s problems are both
#2 (11+7) quoted in Sir Jeremy Morse’s Chess Problems:
1.Qc2? (2.Qxc6#) Task and Records (2016) as numbers 662 and
1. ... Sc~ 2.Qf5#, 1. ... Se7!? 2.Qc5# 663.
1. ... Sed4!? 2.Qe4#, 1. ... Se5!? 2.Sb6#
but 1. ... Sc3! The young Milan had made his mark
1.Qa6! (2.Qxc6#)
immediately with his first problems (displaying
1. ... Sc~ 2.Rh5#, 1. ... Se7!? 2.Qd6#, GM tendencies from the start), and his ensuing
1. ... Sed4!? 2.Be4#, 1. ... Se5!? 2.Sf6# work right to the end served to show how
problems should be composed – all to the
benefit of a slightly staid British Chess Problem
C Milan Velimirović Society.
The Problemist 7/8 1973
On a personal note, I was and I remain grateful
£¤£n£¤£¤
|||||||| to Milan who used his composing experience
||||||||
¤£¤¹¤»¤© and innate ability to know when convention
||||||||
£¤£¤£Z£¤ could be ignored by not relegating or
||||||||
¤m¤£¼£¤£ dismissing a problem of mine with a double
||||||||
£¤£¤£¤2¤ refutation of the try:

||||||||
¤£¤£H£¤W Barry P. Barnes
||||||||
£¤£¤£¼£¤ 1st Pr. StrateGems 2002
||||||||
¤£¤£¤0¤£ W¤£¤mn£¤
||||||||
#2 (7+7) ||||||||
¬£¤£¤£¤£
1.Qxe5? (-) ||||||||
£¤£¼£¤£¤
1. ... R~ on rank 2.Rg3#, 1. ... Rf5!?
2.Qg3#
||||||||
¤£¤£¤£¤£
1. ... Rf4!? 2.Qh5#, 1. ... Rf3!? 2.Rh4# ||||||||
»¼£¤£¤£¼
but 1. ... Kxh3!
||||||||
3¹º»¤£¤W
1.Rh5! (2.Sxf6#)
1...Kxh5 2.Qg5#, 1...R~ on rank 2.Bxe2#
||||||||
©¤¹¤£¤£¤
1...Rf5!? 2.Rh4#, 1...Rf4!? 2.Qh3# ||||||||
1£¤£¤£¤£
1...Rf3!? 2.Qg5#
#2 (9+7)

Of C, I asked, "Can it be that Milan Velimirović

1.bxa4? (-) 1. ... Sc6/Sc8! 1.cxb4! (-).
has achieved it [the task] in Meredith"?

VIII
 Milan Velimirović 64 Memorial Tourney

Even after Milan’s death, his work is quoted. In * 1. ... Qh3 a 2.Sxb6+ A 3.Qb5#
The Problemist’s SELECTED PROBLEMS (TP 1. ... Sc4 b 2.Se5+ B 3.Sd3#
9/2013), three-move section editor, Don 1. ... Rxh6 c 2.Sf6+ 3.Se4#
Smedley, wrote admiringly, “D is a reminder of 1.Qg4! (2.Rf6+ Bxf6 3.Qe6#)
the immense talent of Milan Velimirović, 1. ... Qh3 a 2.Se5+ B 3.Sd3#
1. ... Sc4 b 2.Sf6+ C 3.Se4#
which, sadly, we shall see no more. There is a 1. ... Rxh6 c 2.Sxb6 A 3.Qxb4#
magnificent Lačný cycle between set and (also 1...Rxg4 2.Sf7)
actual play, introduced by a dramatic key. The
line-opening/closing and guarding/unguard I will leave Milan’s other friends to list the
effects are well worth careful study: statistics of his incredible, indelible artistic and
sheer physical contribution to the art of chess
D Milan Velimirović problem composition, but I can add that Milan
1st Prize Ostroleka EU-PL 2009 had more than 100 originals and cited
£n£¤m¤0¤
|||||||| problems in The Problemist, and he has 12 of
his task/record/ problems quoted in Sir
||||||||
Xo¤©¤£¤£ Jeremy`s recent (2016) book.
||||||||
£Z2¤£¤£ª
Even as I made my award on this sad occasion
||||||||
¬£º»¤W¼£ of Milan’s Memorial Tourney, I turned for
||||||||
¹¼£¤£¤£Z guidance and confirmation to his and Kari
||||||||
º«¤£º£¤£ Valtonen’s indispensable Encyclopedia of Chess
||||||||
£¤£¤G¼£¤ Problems: Themes and Terms, and thought
||||||||
p£¤£¤I¤£ what a man, what an amazing knowledge of
chess problems, and what a wonderful friend
#3 (12+12)
he was – to everyone!

Barry Barnes

ECSC in Antalia, April 2008

Photo: B. Gadjanski

IX
 Milan Velimirović 64 Memorial Tourney

Section A - AWARD
MATE IN 2 (TRADITIONAL)
by Barry P. Barnes

excluded from the award: WKd7/BKc5 1.Sf4?

1.Sf6! and WKg2/BKc4 1.Kh1? 1.Kh3? 1.Kg1!
The good news is that it was a privilege to be
invited to judge the ‘traditional’ two-movers in
this Memorial Tourney for magnificent Milan!
Not surprisingly, my composing career and
tastes were influenced by the wonderful
‘traditional’ problems of the great Comins
Mansfield. Milan’s ‘traditional’ problems were
no less wonderful, as were his ‘modern’
problems – but, there again, CM’s ‘modern’
problems made in his later years were also
wonderful. The two GM composers much
admired each other’s work. This continued
reference to Comins Mansfield is to help
explain my Award. First consider the
‘traditional’ A veering towards the ‘modern’
made some 50 years ago when Comins
Barry Peter Barnes Mansfield was a mere 71 –
Photo: Jean Barnes

The disappointing news for some entrants is: (A) C. Mansfield

Probleemblad 1967
WKb1/BKe5 1.Sf2! is badly hurt by N. A.
Macleod Commend. Mat 1985-11; WKh3/BKe6 £¤o¤£¤£¤
||||||||
1.Sc6! is anticipated by S. S. Lewmann ||||||||
¤Y¤W¤£¤£
Memorial Halmos – Budapester-Schachklub 2nd ||||||||
£p£¤£¤£¤
Pr. 1933; 4 mates on one square in WKh3/BKe5
1.Sxd5! are exceeded (5) by B. P. Barnes The
||||||||
Z£¤£3£º£
Problemist 1/1980; the aim of WKh6/BKd5 ||||||||
£¼G¤©¤£¼
1.b5! is bettered, with a good key, by G. ||||||||
¬0¼£¤£J«
Källgren Tidskrift för Schach 1976-10; ||||||||
£¤©º£¤£n
surprisingly, the cyclic bi-valves of WKg8/BKd5
1.Se4! have been shown several times, and
||||||||
¤£¤£¤W¤£
bettered (no duals) by F. Fleck Neujahrsgruss #2 (9+11)
(V) 1948; and WKb2/BKd4 1.Qa5! is largely
1.Sc5! (2.Rd5/2.Sd3/2.Qe2/2.Qe6/2.Qd5/2.Qe4/
anticipated by W. B. Rice Chemnitzer Tageblatt
2.Qd4/2.d4# – 8 threats!)
1926(!) – but the entrant’s problem wins a
Commendation for being a noteworthy 1. … Sf2 2.Rd5#, 1. ... cxd2+ 2.Sd3#, 1. ... Rxc5 2.Qe2#
improvement. As a ‘traditional’ two-mover’ 1. ... Rxd7 2.Qe6#, 1. ... Bxc5 2.Qd5#, 1. ... Sf4 2.Qe4#
depends for merit on a key-move and the play 1. ... Bxd7 2.Qd4#, 1...Sxc4 2.d4#
following it, two try-play problems are

X
 Milan Velimirović 64 Memorial Tourney

In this Partial Primary Fleck form, a remarkable Mansfield would have enjoyed the excellent
key-move creates 8 threats, and, with breath- key as well as this clever construction.
taking skill, these are separated by 8 ‘best’
Partial Primary and Secondary Flecks can have
moves by Black. CM achieved this task again in
their drawbacks of defences which do not
1967 in Suomen Shakki. The record for a Total
separate the threats: Total Flecks have always
Fleck (separation of 8 threats by the only 8
presented difficulties for accurate separation
defences) appears to be by S. Štambuk & H.
of multiple threats. Let’s see what comes from
Bartolović (after S.Ekström & G.Rehn) Mat
Effective Flecks which have their own built-in
1976 (problem 605 in Milan’s book with Kari
disciplines, but might offer a different kind of
Valtonen, Encyclopedia of Chess Problems:
freedom to composers.
Themes and Terms 2012). So, the scene is set
for what seems to be another type of Fleck [As a matter of historical interest, Sam Loyd
form – and a worthy 1st Prize in this Memorial came close to an Essential Fleck]
Tourney to that best of men, Milan Velimirović.
Sam Loyd
St.Louis Globe Democrat 1879
1st Prize £¤£¤£¤£¤
||||||||
Kari Valtonen ||||||||
¤£¤£¤£¤»
||||||||
o¤©ª»3£¤ 1.Sb5! (2.Bh5/2.Be2/ 2.Bd1/
(after C. Mansfield)
||||||||
Z£¤£¤£¤£ 2.Be4/ 2.Bd5#)
Milan Velimirović 64 MT, 2016
||||||||
£¤£¤£¤£¼ Many moves give all 5 threats,
£JY¬£¤£¤
|||||||| ||||||||
¤£¬£¤m¤£ but there are not 5 distinct
||||||||
£¤£¤£¤£¤
||||||||
¤Yp£¤£¤£ ||||||||
¤£¤£¤GX0
moves – only groups of moves –
to force each of the 5 threats
||||||||
©¤Gº»¤£¤ #2
||||||||
¤£¤£X£¤£
2nd Prize
||||||||
£¤©º»¤£¤ Paz Einat
||||||||
º2¤£¤£¤» Milan Velimirović 64 MT, 2016
||||||||
»º£¤W1£¤ G¤£¤£¤Y¤
||||||||
||||||||
¤£¤£¤o¬£ ||||||||
¤W¤£¤£¤»
#2 (10+12)
||||||||
£¤£¼»¤£¤
1.Sb6! (2.Qc4/2.Qc3/2.Qc2/2.Qb5/2.Qa4/ ||||||||
¤£p2ª¹¤£
2.Rb5 /2.Sc5#)
1. ... a1~ 2.Qc4#, 1. ... Bxe2 2.Qc3#,
||||||||
£º£º£¤£¤
1. ... Rxb6 2.Qc2#, 1. ... Bxb6 2.Qb5#, ||||||||
¤»¤¹¤£º£
1. ... Bxd6 2.Qa4#, 1. ... Sxe2 2.Rb5#, ||||||||
Y¤©¤Wº£1
1. ... Sxc6 2.Sc5# - and 1. ... e3+ 2.R5xe3#
||||||||
¤£¤£¤£¤£
The point of what might be called an Essential #2 (12+8)
Fleck (a point made clearer by the 1st Hon. 1.Re4! (2.Se3#)
Mention) is that all other defences 1. ... 1. ... Rxg3 2.Ra7#, 1. ... Bxd4 2.Rb5#,
Q~/Ra7/Sf7/h2/Bg2/Sf3 intentionally give all 1. ... dxe5 2.Rd7#, 1. ... exf5 2.Qxg8#,
six threats, and not duals, triples, etc. as in a 1. ... bxc2 2.Qxa2#, 1. ... Rxc2 2.Rb8#
Partial Fleck. A Karlström element creeps in to
cloud the idea, but why suppress the fine total Without explanation, who would see the black
defence 1. ... e3+ for 2.R5xe3? Comins defence/White mate effects of the Domino-
cycle theme? Get the variations in the right

XI
 Milan Velimirović 64 Memorial Tourney

order as above, and the domino-cycle is Introduced by a flight-giving key-move, this is a

clearer: direct guard – a/battery-interference splendidly bizarre setting of two BK-Schiffmann
mate – A; direct guard – a/battery double- defences. White needs to avoid unpinning the
check mate – B; flight- provision - b/battery BBc6 pinned by the thematic BK defences, and
double-check mate – B/ flight-provision – further needs to avoid making other potential
b/direct mate by rear piece of battery – mating moves, even if some are obvious
C/capture of threat piece – c/direct mate by capture-flights. What is so good is that some of
rear piece of battery – C/capture of threat these obviously avoided mates 2.Sxd4, 2.Sxc3
piece – c/battery interference mate – A. In and 2.Sxd6 recur in other variations, and the
spite of my implied adverse criticism (I WSh5 serves also to hold f6. No complicated
generally don’t like problems that need to be explanation – just a fine, full-blooded
explained in such detail), times have moved on ‘traditional’ problem with interesting triple
as the two-mover takes another difficult but avoidance
welcome step forward, as shown by this
splendid problem and, perhaps, the 1st Prize. 1st HM
Its theme will challenge the very best! Identify
Ladislav Salai jr. & Emil Klemanič
and enjoy a very different aA/aB/bB/ bC/cC/cA Milan Velimirović 64 MT, 2016
domino cycle in:
£¤£¤£¤£¤
||||||||
P.Einat & U. Avner 3rd Place, 7.WCCT 2001-2004
£J£¤£p£¤
|||||||| ||||||||
¤£¼£¤£¤£
||||||||
¤£¤£¤£¤£ ||||||||
£¤£n£¼£¬
||||||||
o¤£nmª£¤
||||||||
¤£¤£¤£¤£ ||||||||
¤»¤©¤W¤£
||||||||
£º£3£¤£¤
||||||||
Z£ª£¤G¤£ 1.Sg4! (2.Qe3)
||||||||
£¤©3£¼£¤
||||||||
£¤£¤£¤£¤ ||||||||
¤£X£¤¹¤£
||||||||
¤£¬£¤£¤0
||||||||
£¤£¤0¤£¤
#2
||||||||
p£¤£¤£¤£
3rd Prize
Sergei I. Tkachenko #2 (7+7)
Milan Velimirović 64 MT, 2016 1.Sce3! (2.Rd3/2.Rxf4/2.Sc2/2.Bc5#)
1. ... Sxf5 2.Rd3# (2.Sc2? Kd5! 2.Bc5? Ke5!)
£¤W¤£¤£¤
|||||||| 1. ... Bxc3 2.Rxf4# (2.Sc2? Kxc4! 2.Bc5? Kxc5!)
||||||||
1£¤»p«¤£ 1. ... cxd6 2.Sc2# (2.Rxf4? Ke5! 2.Rd3? Kc5!)
1. ... fxe3 2.Bc5# (2.Rd3+? Kc4! 2.Rf4? Kxd5!)
||||||||
m¤o¼£¤£¤
||||||||
¤©¤2¬£¤©
Again, this sharp lightweight is what we might
||||||||
W¤£¼»¤£¤ call an Essential Fleck. The four threats are
||||||||
º»¼»Z£¤£ separated only by four defensive moves:
||||||||
£¤£¤£¤£¤ deliberately all other black moves result in the
||||||||
¤£¤£¤£¤£ four threats. If the black piece economy
worries you, try BPb4 instead of BBa1 – and 1.
#2 (7+13)
... b3 stops 2.Sc2? leaving the other three
1.Ra5! (2.Sc7#) threats to be made. Similarly, switch BSh6 for,
1. ... Kc4 2.Sxd6# (2.Sc7? Bb5!, 2.Sxc3? Kxc3!,
2.Sxd4? Kxd4!); 1. ... Kc5 2.Sxc3# (2.Sc7? Bb5!
say, BPg6 – and 1. ... g5 stops 2.Rxf4? The
2.Sxd6? Kxd6! 2.Sxd4? Kxd4!); problem might be perceived as mechanical, but
1. ... Ke6 2.Sxd4#, 1. ... Bc~ 2.Sf4# the avoidance effects of the essential captures

XII
 Milan Velimirović 64 Memorial Tourney

are subtle. There’s no meaningful pattern I can composer’s skill in his push for the record is
discern in the BK moves after attempted white recognised. Bravo!
mates, but BK flights are unique refutations,
3rd HM
and are one of those happy synchronicities
Dragan Stojnić
that bring luck and relief to a composer! Milan Velimirović 64 MT, 2016
The theme of WCCT7 that asked for at least £¤£n0¤£¤
||||||||
three pairs of related mates I found difficult. It ||||||||
¤£¼£¤£¤£
was easy to compose, but much less so to
present as a unified whole. Too often, in my
||||||||
£º£¤£X£¤
experience, two perfectly good pairs of mates ||||||||
3¹X£¬£¤£
were spoiled by an ill-matching additional pair ||||||||
£¤Y¤£¤£¤
that destroyed overall harmony. ||||||||
¤£º£ª£H£
||||||||
£¤£¤£¤£¤
2nd HM
Dragan Stojnić
||||||||
ª£¤m¤£¤£
Milan Velimirović 64 MT, 2016 #2 (11+4)
£¤£¤W¤£¤
|||||||| 1.Qe1! (-)
||||||||
p£Z»¤£n£ 1. ... Rxc5 2.c4#, 1. ... Rd4 2.cxd4#,
1. ... Rxc3 2.Qxc3#, 1. ... Rb4 2.cxb4#,
||||||||
£¤£¼¹º£¤ 1. ... Ra4 2.Sb3#, 1. ... Sc6(S~) 2.S(x)c4#,
||||||||
X£¤«3£Zo 1. ... cxb6 2.Bxb6#, 1. ... c6 2.b7#
||||||||
£¤£¤£¤£¤
||||||||
ª£º£¤£º£ 1st Commend.
Valery Shanshin
||||||||
£¤mº£¤I¤ Milan Velimirović 64 MT, 2016
||||||||
1G¤£¤£¤£ £¤£¤I¤m¤
||||||||
#2 (12+9) ||||||||
¤£H«¤£¤£
1.Bg6! (2.exd7/2.f7#)
||||||||
£¼£ª£¼£¤
1. ... Rxg6 2.exd7#, 1. ... Bxg6 2.f7#, ||||||||
X£p£¤£¤»
1. ... Qxg3 2.Qe4#, 1. ... Rxg3 2.Qf5#,
1. ... Rc5 2.d4#, 1. ... Bc5 2.Sc4#
||||||||
Y¤©3¹¤£¤
||||||||
¤£¤»¤£X£
However, this problem is a harmonious and ||||||||
£¼»¤«º£1
near-seamless combination of three popular ||||||||
¤£¤on£¤£
and readily definable themes, Nowotny, Bristol
(type) clearance, and Grimshaw. Only one #2 (10+13)
mate by the WSa3 is a small price paid in this 1.Sd2! (2.Sf3/2.Sb5#)
attractive problem. 1. ... Kc3 2.Sb3# – 2.Sf3? d2!
1. ... Ke5 2.Sf5# – 2.Sb5? Bd6!
8 ‘pure’ mates (each square in the BK’s field is 1. ... Se5 2.Sb3# – 2.Sf3? Sxf3! 2.Sb5? Qxb5!
guarded once) is a new record! The late Sir 1. ... Sc3 2.Sf5# – 2.Sb5? Sxb5! 2.Sf3? Bxf3!
Jeremy Morse was able to verify this on 8
February 2015. In truth, records like this Here is a pair of very elegant BK Schiffmann
seldom make good problems, but the variations 1. ... Kc3 2.Sb3 and 1. ... Ke5 2.Sf5.

XIII
 Milan Velimirović 64 Memorial Tourney

Additionally, there is a quite different triple 2.Sc7 and 2.Se7 is memorable. This is the
avoidance system that gives the same mating problem to quote from now on.
moves 2.Sb3 and 2.Sf5. Brian Harley in Mate in
Two Moves saw a difference in such mates W.B.Rice, Chemnitzer Tageblatt,1926.
when a) the BK has moved (Schiffmann
defences) and when b) the BK has not moved £¤£¤£no¤
||||||||
||||||||
¤£¼W¤£¤£
(after defences 1. ... Se5 and 1. ... Sc3). Yet this ||||||||
Y¤¹ª£¤£¤
problem puzzles me. I have no doubt that the ||||||||
¼£¤2ª£X«
1.Qe2! ||||||||
¹¤£¤£¼£¤
composer saw that 6 men could be saved to
leave the double BK Schiffmann pure and
||||||||
¤£¼£¤£¤£
||||||||
0¤£¤£H£¤
simple: ||||||||
¤£¤£¤£¤£
#2
£¤£¬£¤m¤
||||||||
||||||||
¤£H£¤£¤£
||||||||
£¼£ª£¼£¤ 1.Sd2!
||||||||
X£p£¤£¤£ 3rd Commend.
||||||||
£¤©3¹¤£¤ Is the beautifully integrated Karol Mlynka
||||||||
¤£¤»¤£X£ triple avoidance system no
Milan Velimirović 64 MT, 2016
||||||||
£¬£¤£º£¤ more than sophisticated
||||||||
¤0¤£n£¤£ camouflage? £¤£¤£ª0¤
||||||||
#2 ||||||||
¤£¤£¤£nm
||||||||
£¤£ºW¼£p
2nd Commend. ||||||||
¤£¤£¤£¤G
Marjan Kovačević
Milan Velimirović 64 MT, 2016
||||||||
£¤£3£¼«X
£¤Y¤£¤£p
|||||||| ||||||||
¤o¤£ª¹¤£
||||||||
¤£¤W¤£¤Y ||||||||
£ºYº£¤£¤
||||||||
£º£¤£¤m¤ ||||||||
¬£¤£¤£Z£
||||||||
¤£¤©¤£¤£ #2 (10+9)

||||||||
£¤¹3©¤W¤ 1.Qb5! (2.Sf5#)
1. ... Sxe3 2.dxe3# (2.Bxf6?)
||||||||
¤£¤£¤£¤£ 1. ... fxe3 2.Bxf6# (2.dxe3?);
||||||||
G1£¤£¤»¤ 1. ... Rc4 2.Qd5#, 1. ... Bc4 2.Qb6#
1. ... Rc5 2.Qd3#, 1. ... Bxe6+ 2.Sxe6#
||||||||
¤£n£¤£¤£
#2 (10+5)
The sweeping key-move, the cleverly
1.Qa5! (2.Qc3#) 1. ... Kxc4+ 2.Sef6# differentiated pair of half-pin pair of mates, the
1. ... Kd3+ 2.Sec3#, 1. ... Ke5 2.Sc7# Grimshaw at c4, and the BR self-block at c5
1. ... Rxc4 2.Se7#, 1. ... Rh3 2.Se3# almost makes a pleasing whole, but
constructional difficulties began with the need
to guard e5. That required a (pinned) WR to
W.R.Rice’s problem largely anticipates this. provide a mate for 1. ... Be6, and how the
Both problems are confusing for the solver – composer must have disliked WPd6 merely to
which WS battery to play, and where? – but block one of the two unexploited unpins of
this entry is Commended for an important fifth WRe6 after 1. ... Rc4 when 2.Re4? Kd3! is so
WS battery mate it adds. The ‘shut-off’ pair neatly avoided!

XIV
 Milan Velimirović 64 Memorial Tourney

4th Commend. first sight, the quantity is impressive, and

Viktor Chepizhny meets WCCT7 requirements, but is it
Milan Velimirović 64 MT, 2016 sufficient? Strip away what might seem to be
£¬Y¤£¤m¤
|||||||| fringe pairs of mates, and one might reach
something like:
||||||||
¤£Z£¤£¤£
||||||||
£º£¤»¤£¤ B.P.Barnes , Comm. The Problemist Twin Ty. 1966

||||||||
¤0¼W¼£¼£ £¤£¤£¤£¤
||||||||
||||||||
¤£ª£¤£¤m
||||||||
©¤£¤2ºG¤ (a) 1.cxd4? Qf8! ||||||||
£¤£¤»¤£¤
||||||||
¼W¼£¼£¤£
||||||||
¤»ºW¤»¤£ 1.exd4! ||||||||
£¼2¼G¤£¤
(b) 1.exd4? bxc3!
||||||||
£¤£¤£º£p 1.cxd4!
||||||||
¤Wº£º£¤£
||||||||
¹¤£¤oJ£¤
||||||||
¤£Jo¤£¤© ||||||||
p0¤©¤£¤£
#2 (11+13) #2 (b)Rb3->f4

1.Kc4! (2.Rxe5#)
1. ... exd5+ 2.Bxd5#, 1. ... Qxc3+ 2.Sxc3# – which is a part anticipation.
1. ... Sc6 2.Sxc5#, 1. ... Sd7 2.Bh7#
1. ... Qxf4 2.Re3#, 1. ... Bxf4 2.Sg3#,
My thanks to Wieland Bruch for his excellent
1. ... exf4 2.Qxe6#, 1. ... gxf4 2.Qg6#
and speedy work in checking the short-listed
Four pairs of related mates – checks, problems for anticipations, and to Marjan
interferences, self-pins, and square-blocks. At Kovаčеvić, the very model of a Controller!

Mini-lecture in Bat Yam, September 1983

Photo: Bernd Ellinghoven

XV
 Milan Velimirović 64 Memorial Tourney

“VELIMIROVIĆ ATTACK” (Chasing One’s Own Tail)

by Milan Velimirović
(Published in Mat Plus Review, Summer 2008)

Almost from my first steps in chess would probably ruin the whole conception.
composition my mind “went cyclic”. To make Thus, it’s not a surprise that with this kind of
the same things happen differently after other theme the idea is often better than the final
same things (like the shift of mates in the Lačný product.
theme), or to make them happen for
Perhaps the combination I am about to show
themselves (like circling the effects in various
will not be as interesting for you as it is for me.
single phase themes) is a fascinating peculiarity
This is one of many ideas I had written down in
which makes the position on a chess board
my notebook in my late teens and early post-
look like an incredible machine working like a
teens, but had never worked on it since. Yes, I
clockwork.
published two problems in the 70s, but never
Composing a cyclic problem is another dedicated myself seriously to it, although
“Adventure”, but quite different from those during three decades I did some research from
described in the famous book by Comins time to time. I stumbled upon some promising
Mansfield. Here you have only limited mechanisms, but always with a frustrating
possibilities to alter the path determined result. However, so far I haven’t noticed that
before the very beginning. Once you take it, it’s anybody else was thinking in that direction and
usually a road with no detour if you want to therefore I will take the opportunity, by right of
end up with the pattern you’re looking for. This priority, to associate the combination with my
is a journey through unforgiving and unfriendly name. So from now on I will call it “Velimirović
territory, uncertain that you’ll finish it with Attack”, a term already known in OTB chess
your head on your shoulders. And if you do, where one aggressive variation in the Sicilian
there’s no guarantee either that you’ll like defence is named after my namesake, and a
what you find there, or that others will good friend of mine, GM Draško Velimirović.
appreciate it.
The logic of the combination is fascinating in its
Such complex and highly constrained themes simplicity: in tries White self-invalidates two
by definition consume a lot of resources. So, out of three thematic elements, which are
when (and if) the composition is finished there almost inevitably white lines. Each try provides
is not much room for the composer to turn compensation for one invalidation so that
himself from the scientist into the artist and black can utilize only the remaining one to
polish his work in a way which would comfort reject the try. In this way all thematic tries
the commonly accepted artistic conventions; contain two degrees of attack, i.e. each one is
or to turn himself into the narrator and at the same time a correction and an error to
remodel the story in a more digestible way. be corrected.
Unlike in compositions where the artistry can
be expressed (and sometimes faked) by As a picture speaks for a thousand words, it
replacing one ingredient by another, or (not a would be the best to illustrate how the
rare case!) even by taking something out of the combination looks on the board. In example
content, in a cycle the elements are usually so No.1 the three thematic lines are (1) d7- d3(-
tightly linked to each other that any change f3), (2) the bent line c7-c3-f3 and (3) the bent

XVI
 Milan Velimirović 64 Memorial Tourney

line a4-a8-f3. White has to move his Sb4 for composed No.2 – just to be denied once again.
the threat 2.Qe4#, but where to? 1.Sd3? closes Here the Black has a strong defense 1... Sd3! to
lines 1 and 2, but provides the compensation parry the threat 2.Rb5# after a random
removal of the Se2. Therefore, White must
1. Milan Velimirović either put another guard on b5 (a pretty
3-4.HM Buletin Problemistic 1974
primitive way to correct), or provide the mate
£¤£¤£¤£J
|||||||| by a capture on d3. Three such corrections
||||||||
¤£XW¼£¼£ collide by turns with a pair of three white
thematic lines: e5-c3(-b4), h4-b4 and g5-d2(-
||||||||
£¤£p£¤£¤ b4). As in the first example, each compensates
||||||||
¤«¤£¤m¤£ for one weakness: 1.Sc3!? e2 2.threat# (also
||||||||
Gª£¤£¼£¤ primitive!) but 1... Qxb6! (2.Bc3?); 1.Sd4!?
||||||||
¤£¼£¤2¤£ Qxc6 2.Sxc6# but 1... Rxd5! (2.ed5?); 1.Sf4!?
Rxd5 2.Sxd5# but 1... e2! (2.Qd2?). The key is
||||||||
£¤¹¤»¤»¤ 1.Sc1! and after 1... Sd3 2.Sxd3#.
||||||||
1£¤£n©¤£
#2 (9+10) 2. Milan Velimirović
3.HM The Problemist 1975
1. Sc6!? Sd4 2. Sxd4# 1. … Qa8!
1. Sd5!? Qa8 2. Sh2# 1. … Bb4! £p£Z£¤£¤
||||||||
1. Sd3? Bd4 2. Se5# 1. … Sd4!
1.Sa2! ~/Sd4/Bb4/Qa8
||||||||
¤£¤£¤£¤£
2. Qe4/Rxc3/Rd3/Qxa8# ||||||||
£¤¹¤£J£¤
||||||||
¤£X¹n¹H£
for the first injury: 1... Bb4 2.Se5# (instead of
2.Rd3??). However, 1... Sd4! defeats
||||||||
©3£¤¹¤£X
(2.Rxc3??). Further, 1.Sc6? again closes the line ||||||||
¤¹¤£¼£¤£
2, this time with compensation for 1... Sd4 ||||||||
0¤£¤©¤£¤
2.Sxd4# (instead of 2.Rxc3??), but also closes ||||||||
¤£¤£¬m¤£
the line 3 and 1... Qa8! defeats (2.Qxa8? not a
#2 (13+6)
mate). Finally, 1.Sd5? closes the line 3 now
with provision for 1... Qa8 2.Sh2# (2.Qa8?), but 1. Se~? ~ 2. Rb5#, Sd3!
closes the line 1 as well and 1... Bb4! defeats 1. Sc3!? Qc6! (1. ... e2 2. threat)
1. Sd4!? Rxd5! (1. ... Qc6 2. Sxc6#)
(2.Rd3??). The key is a safe and expressionless
1. Sf4!? e2! (1. ... Rxd5 2. Sxd5#)
1.Sa2! with no self-injuries. In short, Sc6!? 1. Sc1! ~/Sd3/Qxc6/Rxd5/e2
corrects Sd3?, Sd5!? corrects Sc6?, Sd3!? 2. Rb5/Sxd3/Bc3/exd5/Qd2#
corrects Sd5? and now we can start all over:
Sc6!? corrects Sd3? and so on, like a silly dog Compared to No.1, the thematic play in No.2
chasing his own tail. takes corrections and the white compensations
are tertiary corrections. That should
This is a clear thematic example but, frankly,
undoubtedly be a better form, but not in such
hardly anything more than that. However, it
an opportunistic realisation, with the threat
made the FIDE Album, so maybe it’s not so bad
standing in for the missing mates (i.e. twice
after all. Either way, I felt that my expectations
after 1... Sd3 and once after 1... e2).
had been denied, that something more was
needed for a great problem. What could it In the mid-90s I returned to chess problems
have been? Maybe the play raised one degree after a decade-long break, and one of the first
up would give a more attractive problem? So I things I tried to do was to find a decent

XVII
 Milan Velimirović 64 Memorial Tourney

rendering of the theme I am talking about. 1.Bd4+ was signaled. Never mind, I thought, I
Soon I came to a seemingly perfect have the black queen, bishop and two knights
mechanism, but sadly ended in another to spare. Alas, I found no use for them! The
frustration, which hasn’t faded away ever only benign unit would be a black rook (on a6,
since. It became like an obsession and until diagram No.3b), but I had already used two,
now all my thoughts about the theme have in and both were definitely irreplaceable. What a
fact been thoughts about this very mechanism. frustration!
A stubborn belief that some “deus ex machina” My first reaction was an attempt to convince
would suddenly pop up and resolve everything myself that the third rook in this position is not
made me, during all these years, into the a big deal: if we adopted the convention that a
above-mentioned silly dog. As the miracle promoted piece (e.g. obtrusive bishop) is
didn’t happen, I decided to put an end to my acceptable if it replaces a captured unit of the
attempts and show you how close to, and yet same kind, a rook replacing a stronger
how desperately far from, my goal I have captured unit – the queen – should be an even
reached, and by doing it at least to illustrate smaller fault. But when the state of shock
what a beautiful elusive problem I am still passed I had to admit that this was not
dreaming of. acceptable.
Except for the absence of the primary
3. Milan Velimirović
weakness, No.3a shows perfect White
Mat Plus 2008
Correction. A random removal 1.S5~? (2.Rxc5#)
is defeated by 1… Bd5!, so white has to £¤£H£¤£1
||||||||
prepare a mate by knight on b5 or d5. Three ||||||||
¤Y¤£¤£¤»
corrections coincide with white thematic lines ||||||||
£¼£¤»¤£¤
e8-e3(-c3), g1-d4(-c3) and e8-e5(-c3). In
addition to the provision for 1… Bd5, each of ||||||||
º»¤£ªW¼£
the three prepares a mate which compensates ||||||||
»¤£¼£¤£J
for one closed line, but fails due to the lack of ||||||||
¼2¤£ª£º£
mate for another: 1.Se7? e5 2.Qg8# (2.Qe5??), ||||||||
o¤W¤£¤£¤
1… exf3! (2.Qe3??); 1.Se3? exf3 2.Rd3#
(2.Qe3??), 1… c4! (2.Bd4??); 1.Sd4? c4 2.Se2#
||||||||
Z£¤£nm¤£
(2.Bd4??), 1… f5! (2.Qe5??). The key is 1.Sd6! #2 (10+13)
Bd5/exf3/c4/f5 2.Sxb5/Qe3/Bd4/Qe5#. 1.S5~? bxa5!
1.Sd7!?
3a. M. Velimirović 3b. M. Velimirović
original* original*
1. ... bxa5/e5 2.Sc5/Qg8#
£¤£¤G¤£¤
|||||||| £¤£¤G¤£¤
|||||||| 1. ... d3/dxe3!
||||||||
Z£¤£¤£¤£ ||||||||
Z£¤£¤£¤£ 1.S5c4!?
||||||||
Y¤o¤£¼£¤ ||||||||
Y¤o¤£¼£¤ 1. ... bxa5/b4 2. Sxa5/Sd2#
||||||||
¤»¼£¤©¤W ||||||||
¤»¼£¤©¤W 1. ... e5/exf5!
||||||||
»¤£¤»1£¤ ||||||||
»¤£¤»1£¤ 1.Sd3!?
||||||||
º£3£¤©¤£ ||||||||
º£3£¤©¤£ 1. ... bxa5/dxe3 2.Sc5/Rc3#
||||||||
£¼¹X£¤£¤ ||||||||
£¼¹X£¤£¤ 1. ... b4!
||||||||
¤Y¤£¤mn£ ||||||||
¤Y¤£¤mn£ 1.Sc6! ~ 2. Rxb5#
#2 10+10 #2 3R 10+11 1. ... bxa5/dxe3/exf5/b4
(cook 1.Bd4+)
2.Sxa5/Qd3/Qd5/Bc4#
* Published in Mat Plus Review, Summer 2008

You may imagine what excitement I felt having Diagram No.3 is my attempt to save what can
reached this position. I set by my computer to be saved, but the built-in constraints of the
test it and only an innocent looking cook mechanism were again the bar I could not

XVIII
 Milan Velimirović 64 Memorial Tourney

jump over without scratching it. The intersections of three lines: 1… Sc2! 2.Sb6! (2…
replacement of the Bc6 by a black pawn allows Bxe4??) but not 2.Sc3? Sxd4!; 1… Sc4! 2.Sc3!
the black rook to be moved from a7 to c7. The (2… Bd3?) but not 2.Sc5? e6~!; and finally 1…
cook is stopped, but an unfavorable chain of Sd5 2.Sc5! (2… Ba2?) but not 2.Sb6? Sxb6!. It’s
events starts to unfold. Now e4 is a weak hard to believe that, with changed roles of
square which requires the black queen on the White and Black, an enormously difficult idea
4th rank. Consequently, the e-pawn is not can be made so simple that it required only
forced to defend by capture on e3 any more: a three light units (black knight and bishop and
random move opening the BQ line is sufficient, white knight) and a few supporters for the
thus leading to a double refutation of one try. side-show.
Furthermore, to prevent the BQ from
interfering on the 5th rank the position must
4. Milan Velimirović
1.Pr= Matthews-75 JT 2002
be shifted to to the left and the white rook
moved away as far as possible, right under the £ª£p£¤£¤
||||||||
attack of the black pawn (now on e6). Another ||||||||
1£3¹¼£n£
double refutation! Again frustration, but the
position can at least partially bear the possible ||||||||
¹¤£¼»¤£¤
criticism. Therefore, I believe, it can serve well, ||||||||
¤£¤£¤£¤£
as an impure but still orthodox prototype of ||||||||
©¤£º¹¼£H
the “Velimirović Attack” wrapped in White
Tertiary Correction.
||||||||
¼£¤£¬£¤£
Finally, I’d like to show that the combination
||||||||
£º£º£¤£¤
can also be performed by Black. In No.4 it is ||||||||
¤o¤£¤£¤«
presented in a purely logical fashion. This form #3 (11+10)
is less demanding for at least two reasons. 1.Sb6? Bxe4! 1.Sc3? Bd3! 1.Sc5? Ba2!
Firstly, after three thematic moves the job is
done, while in a two-mover a fourth good 1.Qe1! [2. dxe3 ~ 3. Qc3,Qa5#]
move, the key, is necessary. And secondly, the 1. ... Se~(=f1,g2,g4,f5) 2. Qc1+
1. ... Sd1 2. d3 Sc3 3. Qxc3#
geometry can be stretched since the thematic
1. ... Sc2! 2. Sb6 ~ 3. Sa8# (2. Sc3? Sxd4!)
lines can target different squares, while in a 1. ... Sc4! 2. Sc3 ~ 3. Sb5# (2. Sc5? d6~!)
twomover all three must have a common 1. ... Sd5! 2. Sc5 ~ 3. Sxe6# (2. Sb6? Sxb6!)
terminus: the black king’s square.
This last advantage has the consequence that The black attack lacks the edge and the
all three lines can have a common origin, thus intensity of the white one. Being not nearly as
allowing mechanisms involving only one black demanding, it is a wide open field for
line-mover, in this case bBb1. Thematic tries composing original (preferably logical)
will help us detect these lines: 1.Sb6? (2.Sa8#)
threemovers with neat and quiet play. At the
but 1… Bxe4! because the bent line b1-e4-a8 is
time I published No.4 I foresaw a series of
clear; 1.Sc3? (2.Sb5#) Bd3! using the b1-d3-b5
threemovers I would compose in months to
line; and 1.Sc5? (2.Sxe6#) is defeated by 1…
come. However, I never did, although I had
Ba2! along the [b1-]a2-e6 line. The key 1.Qe1!
threats 2.dxe3 with 3.Qc3/Qa5# thus forcing some half a dozen good matrices. Somehow,
the black knight to escape from e3. A random the fruit within the grasp doesn’t look so sweet
removal 1… S~ would allow two answers, but and so tempting as those on an almost
no duals happen since after 1… Sf1(g2,g4,f5) unreachable branch. You can feel free to
only 2.Qc1+, and after 1… Sd1 only 2.d3 works. harvest it instead of me with one condition:
Now comes a “déjà vu”. What remained are don’t forget to label it with the term promoted
knight corrections to c2, c4 and d5, right to the here.

XIX
 Milan Velimirović 64 Memorial Tourney

Section B - AWARD
MATE IN 2 (VELIMIROVIĆ ATTACK)
by Touw Hian Bwee

his work and activities. The chess problem

community owes him a lot for everything he
did. He also left us a legacy that enables all
chess problem lovers wherever they are to
communicate with each other through the
MatPlus web forum, established by him in
2006.
Report Section B
Milan spent years studying and working on this
idea that he termed the “Velimirović Attack”
and which without doubt is complex and
challenging. The basic mechanism consists of
(at least) 3 black variations with corresponding
white mates in (at least) 3 phases. In each
phase, white’s first move affects 2 of the 3
variations in the following way: In one variation
there is a simultaneous weakening and
strengthening effect so that the initial mate is
Touw Hian Bwee no longer possible but offers a different mate
Photo: Ian Santini in return. In the other variation it creates a
Milan and I have been in contact with each weakening effect only so that black can defeat
other since the mid-nineties but it was not white’s threat. The remaining variation stays
until early 2007 that our communication unaffected as it is. All phases together form a
became more intense. A few years earlier, I cyclical pattern.
had sent him, at his request, a collection of my During all those years, Milan produced just
chess problems. He told me that he would be four #2s and one #3 showing this theme, a
very happy to publish it as a book. Due to his testimony to the fact of just how complicated it
busy activities, we could only start preparation was to overcome construction difficulties
for the book in mid 2008. A special web forum while working with a specific scheme.
was set up in his MatPlus website for the
It is therefore not too surprising that the
purpose of discussion and exchange of
number of entries received were well below
comments among and accessible only to four average. Fortunately though, we may say that
of us (the other 2 were Michael McDowell and the quality of all 3 entries with their individual
Darko Šaljić). During this period, Milan and I specific characteristics is as high as we may
exchanged quite a lot of messages and expect. One shows very clearly the original
opinions on problem chess. I am very “soul” of Milan’s idea while the other two
impressed that besides being an expert on attempt to show something different than
computing and information technology, Milan usual. I have decided to have these three share
always strove for perfection and originality in the honour equally.

XX
 Milan Velimirović 64 Memorial Tourney

1st - 3rd Prize e.a. 1st - 3rd Prize e.a.

Dragan Stojnić Michel Caillaud & Jean-Marc Loustau
Milan Velimirović 64 MT, 2016 Milan Velimirović 64 MT, 2016
£¤0pm¤G¤
|||||||| £¤£¤£¤£¤
||||||||
||||||||
n£º£¼Y¤£ ||||||||
¤£1£¼Y¤£
||||||||
£ª£¼£¤£¤ ||||||||
£¤£¤m¤£J
||||||||
¼»¤£º£¤Y ||||||||
¤£¼©¼£n£
||||||||
¹¤£¤£¤W¼ ||||||||
£¤£3»¤£X
||||||||
¬£¤2¤¹¤£ ||||||||
¼G¤o¼£¤W
||||||||
W¤£º»¼£¤ ||||||||
©¬£¤¹¤£¤
||||||||
¤©¤£J£¤£ ||||||||
¤«¤£¤£¤£
#2 (13+13) #2 (9+12)

1.Sc4? (2.Rd4#) Phase underlining thematical setplay with

1. ... Sc2 2.Sb2# (2.Bb5?) prepared mates :
1. ... dxe5 2.cxd8Q#, 1.Sb6? (2.Qd5#)
1. ... Rf4! (2.Qb3?) 1. … Qxe6 2.Bxe3#
1.Sd5? (2.Rd4#) 1. … Sc4 2.Qxd3#
1. ... Sc2 2.Bxb5# 1. … Bc4 2.Qxe3#, 1. … c4! (2.Qb6?)
1. ... Rf4 2.Sxf4# (2.Qb3?), Thematical phases :
1. ... dxe5! (2.cd8Q?)
1.Sf4? (2.Qd5#)
1.Sd7? (2.Rd4#) 1. … Qxe6 2.Sxe6# (2.Bxe3??)
1. ... dxe5 2.Sc5# (2.cd8Q?) 1. … Sc4! (2.Qxd3+? exd3!)
1. ... Rf4 2.Qb3#, 1. … Bc4 2.Qxe3#, 1. … c4 2.Qb6#
1. ... Qxd2 2.Rxd2#
1.Sxe3? (2.Qd5#)
1. ... Sc2! (2.Bb5?)
1. … Qxe6! (2.Bxe3??)
1.Sa8! (2.Rd4#) 1. … Sc4 2.Qxd3#
1. ... Sc2 2.Bxb5# 1. … Bc4 2.Sc2# (2.Qxe3??), 1. … c4 2.Qb6#
1. ... dxe5 2.cxd8Q#, 1. ... Rf4 2.Qb3#
1.Sdc3! (2.Qd5#)
(1. ... Qxd2 2.Rxd2#)
1. … Qxe6 2.Bxe3#
1. … Sc4 2.Sb5# (2.Qxd3??)
1. … Bc4 2.Rxe4# (2.Bxe3??), 1. … c4 2.Qb6#
A clear cut presentation of the “Velimirović (1. … Sc3 2.Qxc3# in every phase)
attack” in classical form. This particular scheme
makes it easier for us to digest how the In the “classical” style, 1.Sb6 here would have
mechanism really works. 1.Sc4? indirectly functioned as the key. Instead, the composer
interferes with Be8 so that 2.Bxb5# is no longer has gone one step further to introduce
possible after 1…Sc2, but at the same time something out of the ordinary. Following the
provides for a new mate 2.Sb2#. On the other cyclical pattern we would expect accordingly
hand it also indirectly interferes Qg8, hence 1.Sdc3 to be a thematic try with 1…Bc4 being
2.Qb3# is no longer possible after 1…Rf4, so black’s refutation. Here the composer has
this refutes the try. The other 2 phases work in transformed that particular white move into a
similar fashion, all together in cyclical pattern. key by introducing an additional strengthening
The key avoids all the negative effects. effect, so 2.Rxe4# now follows 1…Bc4.

XXI
 Milan Velimirović 64 Memorial Tourney

1st - 3rd Prize e.a. 1.Re2? (2.Se3#)

Marjan Kovačević 1. ... Qe6/Qxc5 2.Q(x)e6#
Milan Velimirović 64 MT, 2016 1. ... f4 2.Qe4#
opI¤£¤£¤
|||||||| 1. ... Sc4 2.Bg2#
1. ... Kc4+!
||||||||
¤£¤£H¹n£
||||||||
£X£¼£¤£¤ 1.Re6? (2.Se3#)
1. ... f4 2.Qg5#
||||||||
¬«ª2¤»¤» 1. ... Sc4 2.Bg2#
||||||||
£º£¤£¤£¤ 1. ... Qxe6 2.Qxe6#
1. ... Qxc5!
||||||||
Z£¼£X£º£
||||||||
£¤©¤£¤£¤ 1.Re4? (2.Se3#)
||||||||
¤£¤£¤m¤0 1. ... Sc4 2.Bxc4#
1. ... Qxc5 2.Qe6#
#2 (11+11) 1. ... f4!

The white knight is undoubtedly one’s favorite 1.Rf3? (2.Se3#)

choice for use as the thematic white piece.) 1. ... Qxc5 2.Rxf5#
Other pieces may be unsuitable or offer much 1. ... f4 2.Qe4#
less flexibility and fewer possibilities. Selecting 1. ... Qe6 2.Qxe6#
1. ... Sc4!
a white rook as the thematic piece should
therefore be highly appreciated. 1.Re2! would 1.Re1! (2.Se3#)
be the ideal key here if not for the presence of 1. ... Qe6/Qxc5 2.Q(x)e6#
a potential cook 1.Rd3+ which leaves the 1. ... f4 2.Qe4#
composer with no other choice but to place a 1. ... Sc4 2.Bg2#
black B at a8 and the white K at h1.

On the way to Jesi, August 2011

Photo: B. Gadjanski

XXII
 Milan Velimirović 64 Memorial Tourney

Section C - AWARD
MATE IN 3
by Hans-Peter Rehm

Milan Velimirović
1st Pr. Schach-Echo 1974
o¤«¤£¤G¤
||||||||
||||||||
¤£X£¤£¤£
||||||||
Y¤£¤¹¼»¤
||||||||
¼£º©3©¤Y
||||||||
£¤»¤»¤£º
||||||||
1£¤£º£¼£
||||||||
£X£¤£¼I¤
||||||||
n£¤m¤£¤£
#3 (12+13)
1. Qxg6? Bxd5/Rxe6/Rxf5
2.Rb6+/Rd2+/Rxf2+, 1. ... Rh6!
1. Qd8? Bxd5/Rxe6/Rxf5
2.Rd2+/Rxf2+/Rb6+, 1. ... Se7!
1. Qf7! Bxd5/Rxe6/Rxf5
2. Rxf2+/Rb6+/Rd2+ (1. ... ~ 2.Rd2+/Qxf6+)

Milan Velimirović
Hans-Peter Rehm 1st Pr. Die Schwalbe 1986
Photo: Siegfried Hornecker
£¤£ª£¤«n
||||||||
I met Milan Velimirović infrequently. But I ||||||||
¤»¤£¤¹ZI
counted him among my friends, and always ||||||||
£¤»X£Z£p
enjoyed his company and the discussions with
him. In spite of the fact that Milan made about ||||||||
¤£º£3»¼W
ten times as many twomovers than ||||||||
£¤¹¼£¤£¤
threemovers he liked very much threemovers ||||||||
¤£¤¹¤£¤m
and composing them.
||||||||
«¤£H¹ª0¤
His favourite theme was 'changed continua- ||||||||
¤£¤£¤£¤£
tions', and some legendary three-movers are
#3 (13+12)
down to him. He composed the first complete
Lačný (Lačný 3x3) in the field of orthodox 1. Kg3? [2. Qe3+ dxe3 3. d4#], 1. … Sc3!
1. ... f4+ a 2. Qxf4+ A Rxf4 3. Re6# B
threemovers (Nr.384, p.77, FIDE ALBUM 1974-
1. ... g4 b 2. Re6+ B Rxe6 3. Sxg4# C
76), and the first Lačný with move cycles ( 1. ... Rxd6 c 2. Sg4+ C fxg4 3. Qf4# A
B126, p.147, FIDE ALBUM 1986-88), to cite only
1. Kf3! [2. Qe3+ dxe3 3. d4#]
two. In my opinion, historical problems of this 1. ... f4 a 2. Re6+ B Rxe6 3. Qxf4# A
calibre are worth 50 FIDE-ALBUM points or 1. ... g4+ b 2. Sxg4+ C Rxg4 3. Re6# B
more. 1. ... Rxd6 c 2. Qf4+ A fxg4 3. Sxg4# C
(2. ... Kf6 3.Qxd6#)

XXIII
 Milan Velimirović 64 Memorial Tourney

Maybe the reader is pleased to see here a very changes is much wider if one also includes
elegant problem by Milan: unmotivated set-play, and a lot of fine
problems of this kind exist.
Milan Velimirović Milan did not have these scruples. On the
2nd HM, Suomen Tehtäväniekat 1998-99 contrary, he argued that the changes with set
£¤£¤G¤m¤
|||||||| play only are more pure and difficult for the
||||||||
¤£¤£¤£¤£ composer: he cannot use effects of the try-key
to produce the changes.
||||||||
£¤£¤£¤£¤
But in many cases we had the same opinion.
||||||||
¤£¤»¤»¤£ For example: that there should be two classes
||||||||
£¤£¤»¤£¤ of changes: firstly those after exactly identical
||||||||
¤£¤£¤£¼£ moves (same starting and arrival square) and
secondly (easier for the composer) partially
||||||||
£¤£¤2¤»¤ identical moves (only same arrival square).
||||||||
¤£1©¤£X£ It is time to start with my report about
#3 (5+6) awarded problems. Congratulations to their
1.Be6! zz authors. I received 16 threemovers without
1. ... f4 2.B×d5 [3.Q×e4‡] e3 a/Kd3 b/Kf3 c authors' names. This number of entries was
3.Qb5 A/Q×e4 B/Qh5# C somewhat disappointing. But the reader will
1. ... d4 2.B×f5 [3.Q×e4# ] e3 a/Kd3 b/Kf3 c see that the quality of the best entries is up to
3.Qh5 C/Qb5 A/Q×e4# B
the occasion.
1. ... Kd3 2.Qb5+ Kd4 3.Q×d5#,
1. ... Kf3 2.Qh5+ Kf4 3.Q×f5#, The solutions are the author's with little
(1. ... e3 2.B×f5 or B×d5) editing.
1st Prize
This is one of the two most economical Lačný Aleksandr Kuzovkov
presentations after the key (set or tries not Milan Velimirović 64 MT, 2016
needed) in any chess problem. The other is £p£¤£1£¤
||||||||
B11, p.85, Album FIDE 1995-97. Both are by
Milan.
||||||||
J£¤W¤»ª£
Milan was equally fond of composing (the
||||||||
£¤£Z£¼£¤
easier) reciprocal changes, where he was able ||||||||
¤£¤Y¤£¼©
to find very original und strategically pleasing ||||||||
£¤¹¤2ºm¤
mechanisms, resulting in fine problems. ||||||||
¤¹º£¤£X£
Milan and I had some discussions about
problems with changes. In themes with
||||||||
£º»¤£¤¹¤
changed play, I normally prefer tries to set- ||||||||
¤£n£¤£¤£
play. Why should the solver look at bad set #3 (13+9)
moves, even if other bad moves in the set 1.Rh3! [2.Sg3+ A Kd3 3.Be2#]
position followed by a mate are never looked
1. ... g5xf4 2.Bf3+ B Kd3/Ke5 3.Sxf4/Bxf4#
at? Often the only reason is the theme, and the
1. ... Re6 a 2.Bf5+ C Rxf5 3.Sg3# A
important set moves can be only recognized 1. ... Re5 b 2.Sxf6+ D Rxf6 3.Bf3# B
after one has found the solution. In fact we 1. ... Qf2 2.Re7+ Re6 a/Re5 b 3.Sxf6 D/Bf5 C
have a twin mixing part of a multi solution h#1
and a #2. But I admit that there are very After a good key we concentrate on the
interesting mechanisms which cannot be thematic pieces Bg4 and Sh5 and their moves
supplied with a motivating try. The field of Bf3/Sg3, and Bf5/Sxf6. In the threat and a

XXIV
 Milan Velimirović 64 Memorial Tourney

variation the moves Bf3 and Sg3 are 2nd 1.R5g4! [2.Rf3+ Qxf3/Bxf3 3.Sc4/Sf1#]
moves, the black king uses the flight given, and 1. ... Qe4 2.Sf1+ Kxd4/Bxf1 3.Sc6/Rxe4#
the other thematic piece mates. In the 1. ... Be4 2.Sc4+ Kxd4/Qxc4 3.Sf3/Rxe4#
1. ... Sxd4 2.Re4+ Qxe4/Bxe4 3.Sf1/Sc4#
variation after Re5 and Re6 the moves are
theme B mates after the other thematical I believe Milan would have enjoyed the next
piece has decoyed away the other rook. Thus problem showing his favourite reciprocal
the line of Rd7 is open and the flight is changes after set play.
guarded. Even this detail may be an
The content is concentrated on the flight d4.
innovation: to open a line by two decoys away
My criticism of unmotivated set moves does
of 2 black pieces for theme B.
not apply here: The moves Qe4/Be4 are strong
The icing on the cake is the additional variation moves giving the flight. They stand out because
after 1. ... Qf2 where the second moves Bf5/Sf6 the solver might well consider what he can do
reappear in pin-mates. This is a fine and after them in the diagram. Here also the
harmonious content. The strategy is centered reappearance of the moves Sc4/Sc1 is highly
on the line of Rh3 and decoys of the black strategic. They mate in the threat; in the set
rooks but nevertheless this use is very varied. play and in two main variations they are
Such a concentration accompanied by variety is (reciprocally changed) second moves forcing
only in the best threemovers. The problem got the black king out, followed by pin mates
the prize also for its perfect clarity: not a single which are also changed. A good and natural
by-variation. addition is their reappearance as mating moves
after the selfblock on d4. Again pleasing
Remark: For me it completely superfluous to
absence of by-play. Of course good by-play
write down the customary letters after the
same moves. In the helpmate field reappearing can be a virtue but in strong thematic
moves are normally considered as a defect. My problems I like its absence.
taste says the same for direct mates if there is
1st HM
not strategy (above all in changes) which
Fedor Davidenko
justifies this reappearance. (It is rather a dull
Milan Velimirović 64 MT, 2016
fact that good moves are successful in different
situations). The pattern in itself has no value £¤£Z£¤£¬
||||||||
for me if it does not adorn interesting strategy. ||||||||
¤»¤2¤»¤£
2nd Prize ||||||||
»¤£ª£¤»¤
Viktor Chepizhny & Valentin Rudenko (†) ||||||||
¤£¤£¤»¤£
Milan Velimirović 64 MT, 2016 ||||||||
£n©¤»H£¤
£¤£¤£¤£¤
|||||||| ||||||||
¤£¤£¤£¼£
||||||||
H£¤£¤£p£ ||||||||
£¤£¤£¤£¤
||||||||
£¤£¼£¤£¬ ||||||||
¤£X0X£¤£
||||||||
ª«ºI¤£X£ #3 (7+10)
||||||||
»¤£º£X£¼ * 1. ... Ke6 2.Qe5+ Kd7 3.Sb6#
||||||||
Z£¼£3£º£ 1. ... Kc6 2.Sb6+ Kxb6 3.Qe3#
1.Sxe4! [2.Qd6+ Kc8/Ke8 3.Sc~/Se~#]
||||||||
m¤£¤¹¤oª 1. ... Kc6+ 2.Scd6+ Kd5,Kd7 3.Sf6#
||||||||
¤£¤£1£¤£ 2. … Kb6 3.Qe3#
1. ... Ke6+ 2.Sed6+ Kd5,Kd7 3.Sb6#
#3 (11+11)
2. … Kf6 3.Bc3#
* 1. ... Qe4 2.Sc4+ Kxd4 3.Qxg7# 1. ... Kc8+ 2.Scd2+ Kd7 3.Sf6#
1. ... Be4 2.Sf1+ Kxd4 3.Rxd5# 1. ... Ke8+ 2.Sed2+ Kd7 3.Sb6#

XXV
 Milan Velimirović 64 Memorial Tourney

The high place of this problem is due to tournament. Here I see some nonstandard
traditional values; an aesthetic position features justifying a high place: the flight giving
without white pawns, all pieces used key (the flight is guarded by all three mating
efficiently, perfect clarity, and the best key I moves); the second moves of the thematic
saw in a threemover for years: it gives 2 knights are possible only after the (thematic)
additional flights and provokes 4 checks. threat has been parried and result in pin
mates.
The trend is contrary to those values, many
judges concentrating only on thematic featu-
res. One sees highly awarded problems, even
3rd HM
in the FIDE ALBUMS, which show pieces out of Vladimir Sytchev & Viktor Volchek
Milan Velimirović 64 MT, 2016
play, an ugly position, and a bad obvious key.
The theme here is the starflight with Brede
£¤£X£¬£¤
||||||||
cross checks. Very nice that both the knights ||||||||
¤»¤oª£¤»
use the square d6 and, surprisingly, d2. The ||||||||
£º»n»¤»1
changes after the set flights are here not so
important for me, but it is good that these
||||||||
¤£¤£¤£º£
flights are provided. I do not criticize the ||||||||
£¤¹3¹¼£¤
multiple battery openings in the threat, but ||||||||
¤»¤£¤£¤£
with less symmetrical play even a prize would ||||||||
£º£¤Gº£¤
have been possible.
||||||||
¤£¤£¤£¤£
2nd HM #3 (11+10)
Chris Handloser 1.Bb4? A - zz , 1. ...f3! , 1. ... c5 2.Bc3#
Milan Velimirović 64 MT, 2016 1. ... e5 2.f3 C c5/Se6 3.Bc3/Rxd7# E
£n£¤£¤£¤
|||||||| 1. ... Ke5 2.Qd3 [Bc3# and 3.Bd6#]
||||||||
¤G¤£¤«¤£ 1.Bxf4? B - zz , 1. ... Kc5!
1. ... c5 2.f3 C e5 3.Be3# D
||||||||
»¤£¼»º£¼ 1. ... e5 2.Be3+ D Kxe4 3.f3# C
||||||||
¤£¤©3£¤£ 1.f3! ~ 2.e5 ~ 3 Qe4#
||||||||
Y¤«¼£¼¹¤ 1. ... c5 2.Bxf4 B zz e5 3.Be3# D
||||||||
¼£¤¹¤£¤£ 1. ... e5 2.Bb4 A zz c5 3.Bc3# E
2...Se6 3.Rxd7#
||||||||
£¤£¤m¤£X
||||||||
¤£1£X£¤£
#3 (10+11) Good Zagoruyko 3x2 with function changes.
The strategy is less impressive than in higher
1.Qc7! ~ placed problems. A minus is also that one of
2.Q:d6+ A Scxd6/Sfxd6 3.Bf3# B/Rh5# C the selfblocks in one of the thematic tries is
1. ... Sg5 2.Bf3+ B Se4/Se3 Rh5# C/Qxd6# A followed by a short mate. Remark: After 1.f3
1. ... Se3 2.Rh5+ C Sg5/Sf5 3.Qxd6# A/Bf3# B the threat, as written by the author, could
(1. ...Kxd5 2.Bf3#) never happen in a game (play starting from the
diagram).
There have been many problems showing the
Jacobs theme: cyclic overload. (This implies a Solvers (in contrast to computer programs) are
strategic and unified reason for move cycles). satisfied to find mates after the only possible
Hence the standard mechanism of the theme moves c5/e5, and it is waste of time to search
can no longer be rewarded in a good for a threat. I find threats of this type artificial.

XXVI
 Milan Velimirović 64 Memorial Tourney

1st Commend. 1.Kc8! [2.Rxc7+ Rc6,Bxc7 3.Sd7#]

Mirko Marković 1. ... Rc6,c6 2.Sxd6+ S2c3,S4c3 3.Sxb7#
1. ... Be8 2.Se5+ S2c3,S4c3 3.Sd3#
Milan Velimirović 64 MT, 2016
1. ... Rh8 2.Sb6+ S2c3,S4c3 3.Sa4#
£¤£¤£¤mp
||||||||
||||||||
H£¤£¤£¤£ Pleasant problem in traditional style with good
||||||||
W¤»¤£¤£º key. It would be slightly better if all three
thematic future lines would be closed by the
||||||||
¤£¤£3£¼£ foreplans.
||||||||
»¤£ªo¤»¤
||||||||
n£¤£¤»¤£ 3rd Commend.
||||||||
£¤£¤£X«º Vladimir Kozhakin
Milan Velimirović 64 MT, 2016
||||||||
¤£ª£¤«1£ £¤£¤£¤£¤
||||||||
#3 (10+10)
||||||||
¤£¤m¤£¼£
1.Qb8+? Kf6/Kd4 2.Qd6/Qb2#, 1. ...Kxd4!
1.Qe7+? Kxd4 2.Qc5#, 1. ... Kf4!
||||||||
£¤£¤£ª0¤
1.Bb2! [2.Qb8+ or Qc7+ Kf6 3.Qd6#]
||||||||
¤£¤£¤£¤£
1. ... Be~/Bd3 2.Qe7+ Kf4 3.Sce2/Sxd3# ||||||||
£¤£¤£3£¤
1. ... Bd5! 2.Se6+ Kd6/Ke4/Kf5
3.Qc7/Bh7/Qh7#
||||||||
¤G¤£¤»¤£
1. ... Bf5! 2.Sxf3+ Kf4/Ke4/Kd6 ||||||||
£¤£¤£¤£¤
3.Sd2/Sxg5/Ba3#
(by-play:) 1. ... Kf6 2.Qf7+ Ke5 3.Sb5#
||||||||
¤£¤£¤£¤£
1. ... Sf4 2.Sxc6+ Kf5 3.Se7# #3 (4+3)
1. ... Kf4 2.Sde2+ or Se6+ Kf5 3.Qh7# 1.Sg4? , but 1. ...Kg3!
1. ... Ke4/f2 2.Qc4/Qe3#
I liked the corrections by Be4 with selfblocks
and some changes. The key gives a flight, but 1.Bc6! zz
the flight on f4 is not provided before the key. 1. ... f2 2.Sh5+ Kg4/Ke5 3.Qg3/Qd5#
There are also some slight imprecisions (little 1. ... Kg3 2.Qxf3+ Kh2/Kh4 3.Qg2/Qg4#
duals in the threat and by-play). The tries add 1. ... Ke5 2.Qd5+ Kf4 3.Qg5#
1. ... gxf6 2.Qxf3+ Ke5 3.Qxf6#
little to the thematic content.

2nd Commend. Nice miniature. The two-mover try is unusual.

Evgeni Bourd & Arieh Grinblat
Milan Velimirović 64 MT, 2016
£¤£1£ª£¤
||||||||
||||||||
¼»¼W¼£¤£
||||||||
Y¤£pm¼o¤
||||||||
º¹3£¤£¤£
||||||||
£¤©¤«¤£Z
||||||||
¤W¤£º£¤£
||||||||
£ºG¤«¤I¤
||||||||
¤£¤£¤£¤£
#3 (11+13)

XXVII
 Milan Velimirović 64 Memorial Tourney

CIP - Каталогизација у публикацији

Библиотека Матице српске, Нови Сад

794:929 Velimirović M.(082)

MILAN Velimirović 64 Memorial Tourney. - Zrenjanin : The Serbian Chess Problem Society,
2016 (Zrenjanin : Diginet prostudio). - 28 str. : ilustr. ; 21 cm

Tiraž 300.

ISBN 978-86-80050-03-4

a) Велимировић, Милан (1952-2013) - Зборници

COBISS.SR-ID 306962183

XXVIII