A curious problem, which can be solved as both a directmate and a selfmate. What effect does the change of stipulation produce?
The solution will appear here on Friday 29th August 2025.
(a) 1.Qd3 threats 2.Qe3, Qd4, Qd5
1....Rxc7 2.Qe3 A
1....Bxg2 2.Qd4 B
1....g any 2.Qd5 C
(b) 1.Qd3
1....Rxc7 2.Qd4+ B Rxd4
1....Bxg2 2.Qd5+ C Bxd5
1....g any 2.Qe3+ A Sxe3
Satanick Mukhuty: The key move remains the same in both parts, while White’s second move undergoes a cyclic shift with the change of stipulation. A truly fascinating construction! Additionally, the first part also exhibits threat separation, which constitutes the Fleck theme.
Richard Stein: Going from directmate to selfmate turns the crank of the cycle.
Jacob Hoover: Part a) shows a primary Fleck. Since the white responses to the defences are cyclically shifted in b) we have a 3x2 Lačný across the two parts. I found it interesting and a little humorous that the two parts are solved by the same key.