Fairy twomovers with multiple threats 4

1.Kb3! th. 2.Ga2#, Sa2#
1...Gb1+ 2.Ra2#
1...Gxc2 2.Sxc2#
1...Gc3 2.Gxc3#

The key opens battery line on a-file and threats two antibattery mates on a2. Each black grasshopper can defend against both threats, check defence blocks for (unnecessary) double-check, the other two allow direct mates.

1.a8=Q! th. 2.Qe8#, Qb8#, Qa1#, Qa5#
1...gxf6 2.Qb8#
1...gxh6 2.Qa5#
1...g5 2.Qa1#
1...g6 2.Qe8#

Four threats are separated by four possible moves of bP - Pickaninny Fleck. The means of threat separation are quite easy, always one guard is removed (in variations f4, f5, f6, e4 respectively).

1...Gd7 a 2.Rd4# A
1...Gg4 b 2.Be4# B
1...Gg3 c 2.Sf6# C

1.Bh2! th. 2.Rd4#, Sf6#, Be4#
1...Gd7 a 2.Be4# B
1...Gg4 b 2.Sf6# C
1...Gg3 c 2.Rd4# A

The set mates prove (together with some other defences not shown) the mutate character of this twomover. The key threats all three mates from set play, but three main defences become hal-defences, allowing only one of threats shifted cyclically. As a result we get convincing combination of Lacny cycle and Fleck theme. For other work combining these themes see this orthodox s#2, of course, it would not be thematical for 30th TT CCM

1.Rxb4? th. 2.Se4# A, Sd7#B
1...Gf5!

1.Rd4? th. 2.Se4# A
1...Gc4! a

1.Bc6? th. 2.Sd7# B
1...Gxb5! b

1.Sc1! th. 2.Sd3#
1...Gc4 a 2.Se4# A
1...Gxb5 b 2.Sd7# B

Knight mates on e4 and d7 fail because of white line closing (to potential flights c4 and b5 respectively). In the first try white rook guards both those squares, this means double threat. 1...Gf5 refutes thanks to anticipatory unguard of d5 by Gg5 line closing. Two further anticritical tries (with respect to e4 and d7) guard in addition d5, making Gf5 powerless. However, black grasshoppers can defend well thanks to existence of new hurdles for grasshoppers. Finally the solution brings the new threat that is defended by repelling (2.Sd3+?? would be a self-check), but blocking of c4 and b5 leads to B2 Somov mates.

The only reservation to Dombrovskis is that variations of solution are prepared already in the set play.

1.Rae3? th. 2.Rg5#, Bb3#, Bf3#
1...Rxe8 a 2.Bf3# A
1...Rxc8 b 2.Rg5# B
1...Gxd6 c 2.Bb3# C
1...Gf2!

1.Rac3! th. 2.Rg5#, Bb3#, Bf3#
1...Rxe8 a 2.Rg5# B
1...Rxc8 b 2.Bb3# C
1...Gxd6 c 2.Bf3# A

Another example of Lacny cycle synthesized with Fleck (although there are some black non-defences available as well). Both try and key take flight d4 and threat the same three mates. They are separated by three captures (bR on e8 and c8, bG on d6), affecting potential flights on c-file and e-file. This leads to cyclic shift depending on which flights are covered by which mating move. The refutation of the try gives back the flight d4.

1...Gg5 a 2.Gd8# A
1...Ge5 b 2.Re6# B
1...Gf5 c 2.g5# C

1.Qc5? th. 2.g5# C, Gd8# A
1...Gg5+ a 2.Qxg5#
1...Ge5+ b 2.Qxe5#
1...Gf5+ c 2.Qd6#
1...Sf7!

1.Sc5! th. 2.Re6# B
1...Gg5+ a 2.Se4#
1...Ge5+ b 2.Sxd7#
1...Gf5+ c 2.Se6#

More complicated matter, again some letter theme and even in three phases... but not a cyclic one.

The triplet of set mates eploits one provision of flight (on e5) and two blocks (of f5 and g5).

The queen try guards both f5 and g5 and thus threats both mates exploiting blocks from the set play. Grasshopper moves on 5th rank now check over wQ, but at the same time allow new mates by the queen (in all cases by unguard). The refutation guards both threats.

The solution then provides another hurdle nearby wK (and threats the third set mate by providing the guard of e6) and grasshopper checks are again in action. And again there are some unguards (note how Gg2 guards both e4, g5, Gg7 guards e5, and d7, while Gf8 just d6 - but that is enough).

As a result we get change Z-33-39 with set mates as threats in two phases (D-paradoxes) and quite unified play.

But what about white economy? Well, let's just say that Ge1, Ga2 and Qg1 are not necessary for the solution (but they are needed for the whole content).

1.Qg4? th. 2.0-0-0#, Qd1#
1...Ge2,Gc2 2.Q(x)e2#
1...Ge4!

1.Qd5? zz
1...Kc2!

1.Rc1? th. 2.Qxg3#
1...Ge2!

1.Qe6? th. 2.0-0-0#
1...Ge4 2.Bxe4#
1...Kc2 2.Qe2#
1...c2!

1.Rh2! zz
1...Ge4 2.Bf1#
1...Kc2 2.Be4#
1...Ge2 2.0-0-0#
1...c2 2.Qxg3#
1...gxh2 2.Se3#
1...Gc2 2.Rd1#

In order to solve this #2 it is important to cope with c2 flight.

The try with two threats (both guarding c2) provides flight with Qe2#. 1.Qd5? fails to provide anything.

1.Rc2 takes flight and thus threats 2.Qxg3#, but exposes another weak spot c4, implying the queen should not threat anything.

The more hopeful try 1.Qe6? again provides again 2.Qe2#, but fails to a new defence 1...c2!

Finally ambush move by so far inactive Rh1 makes everything work, with 6 precise variations.

One could say that two threats in the try are just coincidental, but in fact they contribute to the struggle of two sides in this popular piece.

1...Gf6 a 2.e3# A
1...Gf7 b 2.e4# B

1.Gf7? th. 2.e4# B, e3# A
1...Gf6! a

1.Gf8? th. 2.e4# B, e3# A
1...Gf7! b

1.Gb2! th. 2.Qc1#
1...Ge1 2.e3#
1...Kf1 2.e4#

The white pawn e2 cannot fire direct & indirect battery at once because of the potential flight c3. That is why the set mates work (once black opens line for indirect antibattery, the appropriate step by pawn puts everything into order).

Two tries are totally analogous. White grasshopper guards f3 (and threats both set mates), but abandons the original antibattery line, allowing defence by the right black G. This way we get D-paradoxes.

The solution is then an appendix to these actions. Another battery mate is threatened (this time wQ opening wG line) and two defences are properly met by two set mates.