Par Mohamed Jamal Elbaz
Federation Royale Marocaine des Echecs - FRME
3° rd Composing Tourney of FRME, 2017
[ (#3 – Treemovers) ]
Organizers: The Royal Moroccan Chess Federation (FRME).
Tournament director: Vidadi Zamanov (Goychay, Azerbaijan).
Judge: Aleksandr Sygurov (Samara area, Russia).
71 problems from 41 authors 16 countries: Azerbaijan (Salman Javadzade, Elmar Abdullayev, Vidadi Zamanov), Argentina (Daniel Perone), Belarus (Viktor Volchek), Canada ( Charles Ouellet), Czech Republic (Josef Burda, Miroslav Svitek, Alexander Fica), Finland (Ismo Tompuri), Greece (Emmanuel Manolas), Germany (Dieter Müller, Peter Sickinger, Sven Trommler), India (C.G.S.Narayanan), Israel (Leonid Lubashevsky, Leonid Makaronez), Italy (Carlo de Grandi, Daniele Gatti, Alberto Armeni, Bruno Colaneri), Moldova (Croitor Mihail), Russia (Valery Shavyrin, Juri Gorbatenko, Aleksey Popov, Vladimir Kozhakin, Gennady Ignatenko, Alexander Melnichuk, Igor Agapov, Eugene Fomichev, Diana Utarova, Alana Utarova, Anna Shakleina, Arina Chayka, Sergey Khacaturov), Serbia (Srecko Radovic), Slovakia (Zoltan Labai), Spain (Miguel Uris), Ukraine (Alexander Spitsin, Vladimir Melnikov, Vitaly Shevchenko).
(Traduit par google.com)
The choice among the presented problems was great (more than 70 tasks !!), but a significant part of the compositions wasfrankly of poor quality. Thus, a number of compositions (judging by the same type of commentary) were fromone or two undemanding authors, and for these tasks, some recommendations should be made. In-First, the "task on the mat in the 3 turns" and "the position on the mat in the 3 turns" are two big differences: the problem has an idea,implemented as a
rule in several thematic versions, there is no "position" in this, a maximum of one-two interesting moves. Secondly, the same second move of White in several (sometimes even in three or fouroptions!) is a disadvantage. Thirdly, the short threat to genre # 3 is unnatural and to it resort to very rare cases: more often in logical tasks and tasks, less often when constructive the features of the position leave no choice; none of the above I did not see in the competition. Similarly,
The dual threat is a disadvantage, except in cases when it forms an idea or not at all refers to the main content of the task (just a threat that has nothing to do with the thematic game).
Some tasks could be noted, but they have serious shortcomings:
№2 - absence at the beginning of the answer to a course 1 ... Rg7 +. Well, in the decision zugzvang, so you can not fail to mention duals in the variants 1 ... Rb3 and 1 ... Rg8. In other respects a good game composition. I hope the author can fix at least the duals.
№ 6 - something interesting in this position promised a threat, but the further development of the game is not visible,
№ 27 - with the pure performance of the topic of Fleka, the task could claim a difference, although the very form of such tasks (Flecke, Karlstrom-Fleck and analogs), I do not favor.
№ 35 - it is advisable to present the idea in the form # 4, and three-way (with short threats) alternation moves no more than fiction,
No. 51 - there is not enough pairwise version to 1 ... Bd6; I wish the author perseverance in finishing the composition,
No. 60 - well, it feels complete, and the twin b), in the opinion of the judge is more interesting than the twin a), who overloaded with frankly weak computer false tracks.
Of the contenders for the high distinction, it's a pity № 31 (the judge liked this song!): On 1 ... e5 passes the duality 2.R: f5 / S: e7.vIn some compositions, figures were skipped (as in No. 39 - there is no Bishop d2) and most likely there are others mistakes in the set (the contest is anonymous!), so if the authors found an obvious absurdity in the judges comments, I ask you to notify the organizers in a timely manner.
No 3 (Special commendation for miniature) predecessor Karl Bettin (1888) http://www.yacpdb.org/#105046
The following distribution of differences is proposed:
1 st Prize №16. Valery Shavyrin (Russia) .
Sol:1.Bd7! - 2.Se2!- 3.Qf4#!, 2…Se6 3.Qf5#, 1…Sf~ 2.Sc4+ Ke4 3.Qe3#!, 1…Sxd6! 2.Sc6+ Ke4 (2…Kd6?)
3.Qf3#!, 1…Se3! 2.Sf3+ Kf4 3.Qg3#! (3…Ke3?), (1…Se6 2.Se6!)
Synthesis of black correction with blocking of fields with thematic threats and the "albino" of the white queen on the matting course (author). A fresh idea with a well-organized game, although it causes some regrettable quality entry.
2 nd Prize №29. Igor Agapov (Russia) .
Sol:1.Qf3! - 2.dxe3 - 3.Qg3#, 1...Rd3 2.exd3+! Kxd2 3.dxc4#!, 1...Rxf3+ 2.exf3+! Kd1 3.f4#! (2...Kf2 3.Rg4#)
1...Re4 2.e3! Rf4+ 3.exf4#!, 1...Re5 2.e4! Rf5+ 3.exf5#!, 1...Rxe6 2.Qg3+! Kd1 3.e3/e4#, 1...Rc3 2.e3 Rd3
3.Qe2#, 1...Rd1 2.Qxg2! -3.Qf1#, 2… Rd3 3.exd3#.
Continued albino (task): white pawn continues to move and on the matting course. Battery game. Earlier only two composers succeeded To implement this task (# 3): M. Mladenovic (http://www.yacpdb.org/#104266, http://www.yacpdb.org/#104268), V.Kapusta (http://www.yacpdb.org/#324286) - author. A truly completed work! Clearly and concisely.
3 rd Prize. №71. Sergey Khacaturov (Russia) .
Sol: 1.с5! - 2. Sh4 + Rf5 3. Sg6#, 2… Bf5 3. Sf3#,1… Rxf5 2. Qg6 - 3.Qе6# (a), 2… Rе7 3. Qf6#, 1… Bxf5
2. Qh2 - 3. Qxf4# (b), 2… Sd3 3. Qе2#, 1… gxf5 2. Rxf5 + Rxf5 3. Qe6#(a), 2… Bxf5 3. Qxf4#(b), 2… Kxf5
3. Qg5#, 1… Bh5, R6- 2. Sd6 + Sа5, Bf5 3. Sxf7#.
Alternating threats and mats, Finnish Novotny, self-binding of black figures, mats using a bundle (author). The concept of such tasks for a long time and is well known, but in No. 71 the game is constructed quite interestingly and draws attention to a successful turn the plot in version 1 ... gxf5.
4 th Prize №48. C.G.S.Narayanan (India)
Sol: 1.Qa1! - 2.Rb4+ d4 3.Qxd4#, 1… Qd6 2.Rb5+ d4 3.cxd6#, 1… Kd4 2.Rb3+ Ke3 3.d4#, 1… Qxf5 2.Re2+
d4/Ke6 3.b8Q#/exd5#, 1… dxe4 2.Rf2+ Kxf5 3.fxe4#, 1… d4 2.Bxe6 - 3.b8Q#.
The next 4-variant task with the so-called Zabunov theme. Made on the same principle as the previous tasks (for example, I. Agapov, 2015 - http://kobulchess.com/en/tournaments/awards/954-kobulchess-threemovers2015-award.html), but all the newly formed batteries are pawn. The idea itself, of course, is complex for implementation, but in a tactical sense the task is rather dry.
Special Prize №40. Eugene Fomichev (Russia) .
Sol:1.Qxc4+? Ke5 2.Bd6+ Kf5!, 1.Bd6? Rh4!, 1.Qf5+? Kd4 2.Bc5+ Kc3!, 1.Bc5? Kxc5!, Sol: 1.g4! – 2.Qxc4+ (A)
Ke5 3.Bd6# (B), 1…Rc3 2.Qf5+ (C) Kd4 3.Bc5# (D), 1…f5 2.Bd6! (B) b5 3.Qe5#, 2…Bh2 3.Qxc4# (A),
1…b5 2.Bc5! (D) g6 3.Qd4#, 2…e2 3.Qf5# (C) (2…Kxc5 3.Qd6#).
Synthesis of M.Adabashev 3x2 in 4 versions in logical form: 1) 1 ... f6, b5 - a new position mechanism - the white bishop and queen play on the cross around the black king: d6, e5, c5, d4; 2) 1 ... Rc3, b5 - variants with long blocks; 3) 1 ... -, Rc3 - moves Bd6, Bc5 changed functions and became mats. Plus alternating 2-3 turns of white. Another 1 ... .Ra4 2.Sxa4 - 3.Sc3 #. (author) Very few white forces the author presented deployed and not devoid of intricacies game. Of course, there is no new mechanism of position: the options with the game of the elephant and queen are known even for double-armed. A special difference is for the laconic representation of a famous idea.
1 st Honourable Mention №25. Gennady Ignatenko (Russia)
Sol:1.Sa6? Ba3! Sol: 1.Bh6! -2.Rg7-3.Rg4#, 1...Scxe3 2.Sc6 (2.Rg7? 2...Re2!) -3.Rxd4#, 2...bc 3.Bxc6#, 1...Bxe3
2. Sa6 (2.Rg7? 2...Sxe1!)- 3.Sc5#, 2...ba 3.Bc6#, 1...Sfxe3 2.g4(2.Rg7? 2...Sxe1!) - 3.Sg3#.
Binding Black figures in the hope of their own unleashing. Scale, but straightforward, especially emphasizes the position of white horses.
2 nd Honourable Mention №41. Josef Burda & Miroslav Svitek ( Czech Republic) .
Sol: 1. d6! -2. Qa8+ Be4+ 3. Bg5#, 1... Bxg4+ 2. Be5+ Rf5, Bf5, Ke4 3. Qa8#, 1... Be6+ 2. Bg5+ Bf5 3. Qa8#,
2... Bxf7 3. Qf6#, 1... Bf~ + 2. Bg5+ Bf5 3. Qa8#, 1... Qxd4 2. Bxd4 ~ 3. Qa8#.
Motivation of the division of the second White's moves are simple enough, so it's surprising the large number of pieces on the board. TO Unfortunately, this time the judge did not have enough time to move the checkers and show the author other ways to implement the idea.
3 rd Honourable Mention №49. Viktor Volchek (Belarus) .
Sol : 1.Qh5? (A) - 2.Qf7# (C) 1...Rxf5! (a); 1.Sa6? (B) - 2.Sb4 # (D) 1...Bd6! (b) Sol: 1.Qh4! - 2.Rxc3! Rxf5 (b) 3.R3c5 #,
2...Bd6 (a) 3.Qe4#, 1...Bf4 2.Qxh5! (A) - 3.Qf7# (С), 1...Rf4 2.Sa6! (B) Rxf5 (b) 3.Sb4#(D), 1...Bd6 (a) 2.Qxd4 +
Kxd4 3.Rxd6# , 1...Rxf5 (b) 2.Sb6+ Ke5 3.Sd7#, (1...Bxh4 2.Sa6 - 3.Sb4#).
The author slyly pointed out pseudo-protection in option 1 ... Bf4 2.Qxh5! Bd6 (a), but except 3.Qf7 # (C) does not threaten and defend against this threat Black can not. Similarly, in a threat, the 3.R3c5 mat is also cleaned with other black protections. Lame alphabetic substantiation and in version 1 ... Rf4 2.Sa6 !, t. inopportunely imminent second threat 3.Sc7 # eliminate and other protection of the rook. Therefore, in the author's asset we will enter two interrelated pairs of variants, and the rationale for the first of them. In the rest we see, unfortunately, an attempt to give out the desired for valid, for which the author receives a yellow card and "only" an honorary tip.
4 th Honourable Mention №5. Josef Burda (Czech Republic) .
Sol : 1.Rxg6! - Rc8 2. Rh6+ (первая угроза) Rh7 3. Rxh7#,1…Rxg6 2. Qxg6 -3. Qh7#, 2…Rxg8 3. Qh6#,
1…Rbxg8 2. Qe5 (вторая угроза) - 3. Rh6#, 2…R~ 3. Qxg7#, 2...Kh7 3. Qh5#,1… Rgxg8 2. Qe5+ Rg7
Options with the right mats. Statically, there is obviously not enough dynamics. Plus a double threat.
5 th Honourable Mention №57. Vitaly Shevchenko & Vladimir Melnikov (Ukraine) .
Sol :1.Qh8? - 2.Be6 + Ke5 3.Sc6#, 2...Kd4 3.Rf3 #,1...Ke5 2.Sc6 + Kf4 3.Qh6 #, 2…Kd5 3.Qg8 #/3.Be6#,
1...Kd4 2.Rxd6 + Ke3 3.Qh6# 1...e3!; Sol: 1.Qh3! - 2.Be6+ Ke5 3.Qc3#, 2...Kd4 3.Sc6#,1...Ke5 2.Qc3+ Kd5
3.Be6#, 2...Kf4 3.Qg3#, 1...Kd4 2.Sc6+ Kd5 3.Be6#, 2...Kc4 3.Qxb3 #, 1...e3 2.Qxe3 - 3.Be6#/3.Qe4#, 2...Bc2
A simple change of game. Unpleasant is the dual in the thematic version of the false track. I believe, the author sought alternation of second moves of whites, but something did not grow together and it was necessary to stop on this position.
6 th Honourable Mention №55. Juri Gorbatenko (Russia) .
Sol: 1.Be3! – 2.Rf4+ Kxe5 3.Sxd3# 1…Be2 2.Rh6! (Rd6?) ~ 3.Be6#, 1…Bc2 2.Rd6! (Rh6?) ~ 3.Bg6#, 1…Ra3
2.Kd6 ~ 3.Rf4#.
Shuttle races of the boat on 6 horizontal. It is a pity that there are no attempts: with the bishop on f4 attempts would become side-effects.
7 th Honourable Mention №56. Juri Gorbatenko (Russia) .
1.Rc3! g2 2.e4+ Kf4 3.Be5#, 1…bxc3 2.Be5! ~ 3.e4#, 1…Sxc3 2.Sh6+ Kg5 3.f4#. correct mats. A good introduction.
7 th Honourable Mention №59. Vladimir Kozhakin (Russia)
A) diagram 1.Kc8? -2.R7f5+ Kc6 3.Rc4# 1…Kc6!. 1.Sh3? Kc6!. Sol: 1.Se6! -2. Sc7+ Kc6 3. Rc4#, 1… Kc6 2.
Sc7 (3. Rc4#) 2… d5 3. R4f6#, 1… Kxe6 2. R4f5 (3. Sf8#) 2… d5 3. R5f6#.
B) wSd7 →g6 1.Kb7? – 2. R7f5# 1...Kc5. 1.Se6 ? zz, 1...Kxe6 2.R4f5 (3.Sf4 #/Sf8#) 2...d5 3.Rf6# Sol: 1.Rb7! zz, 1...Kc5 2. Kc7 zz, 2... Kd5 3. Rb5#, 2... d5 3. Se6#, 1...Kc6 2. Se7+ Kc5 3. Se6# C) wSg5 →e5 1.Kb7? dxe5!, 1.Sd3? Kc6!. 1.R7f5? (A) zz, 1… dxe5 2. Kc7 (B) Ke6 3. Rxe5# 1… Ke6!. Sol:1.Kc7! (B) dxe5 2. R7f5 Ke6 3. Rxe5#, 1… Ke6 2. Kc6 d5 3. R4f6#.
Set of motley twins, but with a normal chess game.
1 st Commendation №7. Leonid Lubashevsky & Leonid Makaronez (Israel) .
Sol : 1.ab (2. Se3!!), 1… Bg1 2. Sg3+fxg3 3. Bd3#, 1… Qc5 2. Sd2+cxd2 3. f3#, 1…Bd5 2. Sg3+ fxg3 3. Bd3#,
1… Sh6 2. gxh6 (3. Sg5#) gxf5 3. Qc4#, 1… Sf6 2. Se7 Bd5, d5, Sd5, Q~ 3. Qxg6#.
The overall picture is blurred, and separately the options are interesting.
2 nd Commendation №14. Srecko Radovic (Seriba) .
Sol : 1.Qa6! -2. b5 -3. Qc6#, 2... Sd6 3. Qxd6#, 1...Sd7 2. Qc6+Kxc6 3. Be4#, 1…c3 2. Bd3 -3. Qc4#, 2...Sd6
3.Qd6#, 1...d3 2. Qxc4+ Kxc4 3. Ba2#, 1...g5 2. Bf5 Sd6 3. Qxd6#.
Options with a queen sacrifice good are known. The author added a change in the functions of the moves of the queen and with greater homogeneity of the game in the second A couple of options could count on a higher difference.
3 rd Commendation №8. Daniele Gatti (Italy) .
Sol : 1.Qxb6? - 2. Qe3# 1… Sxb6!; 1.Qxb7? - 2. Qg2#, 1…Rxb7!; 1.Sxe5? - 2. Sf7# 1…Sxd6!; Sol: 1.a8=S! - 2. Sc7
ad lib 3. Se6#, 1…Rxa8 2. Qxb7-3. Qg2#, 2…e4 3. Qd5#, 1…Sa7 2. Qxb6 -3. Qe3#, 2… Bc1 3. Rg2#,
1…Sxd6 2. Sxd6 (3. Sf7#, Se4#) 2… Rf8 3. Se4#
Sorry, did not take place and the third Queen's exit at will - 1.Qxb5 ?, 2.Qb5 This and the next composition with the conversion into a horse on the first move, that the judge considers as a disadvantage. In addition, in No. 8, virtually unnecessary wRa2 and bBb2 - these figures can be just take off the board.
4 th Commendation №11. Alexander Fica & Zoltan Labai (Czech Republic/ Slovakia) .
Sol: 1.c8S! - h6 2.Bc2 (A) hxg5 3.Sb6(B)# MM, 1…Ke4 (a) 2.Sxb4 ~ 3.Sd6# MM, 1…Kc4 (b) 2.Sb6+ Kd3
3.Sc5# MM, 1…b3 2.Se7+ Ke4 (a) 3.Sc5# MM, 2...Kc4 (b) 3.Be2#, 1…Sf3 2.Sb6+ (B) Ke4 3.Bc2(A)#.
Correct mats. The choice of entry is not clear: there is a move 1.Sa7-c8.
5 th Commendation №58. Miguel Uris (Spain).
Sol : 1.Sc2? -2. Qe3+Sxe3 3. Bxe3#,1...Rd8 2. Qxe7+ Rd6 3. Qxd6#,1...e6 2. Bf8+ Rxf8 3. Qe7#, 2... Re7 3. Bxe7#/
Qxe7#, 2... Qxf8 3. Qxe5#, 1...Sf4 2. Qg1+ f2 3. Qxf2# 1...Qf6!; Sol: 1.Sf5! - 2. Qe3+ Sxe3 3. Bxe3#,1...e4+
2. Sd4+ e5 3. Sb3#, 2... Qe5 3. Qxe5#, 1...Rd8 2. Qxe7+ Rd6 3. Qxd6#, 1...Qxh6 2. Sd4 [3. Qxe5, Sb3#]
2... Rd8, Qh8/h5/h2/xg5/g7, Sf4/Se3, Be4/Bf5 3. Sb3#,2... e6, Qxg6, Ba2/Bc2/Bxg6 3. Qxe5#, 1...Sf4 2. Qg1+
f2 3. Qxf2#.
The author presented a very extensive commentary and even declared a new topic, open in 2016 (I quote "The theme was presented in October, 2016. Newsletter" Problemas "nº16, pages 414 and 415 https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B5lHTACLJK1fRVo2U01BdEdMN3c/view »), but usually the game in option 1 ... e4 + 2. Sd4 + was called cross shah and nothing more. Yes, there is mutual unleashing shamming figures, but this motif has already met. I remember the Russian proverb "one in the field is not a warrior, "which in translation to chess Esperanto means" one option does not do the theme. "
6 th Commendation №13. Aleksey Popov (Russia) .
Sol: 1.Bg5! zz, 1...g6 2. Qxc6+ Kxe5 3. Bf6#, 1...Sg6 2. Sxg6 -3. Sf4#, 2… Re7 3. Qxe7#, 1...c3 2. Sd3 Sg6 3. Sxc5#, 1… Bf7 2. Sd7 Rc8/ B~ 3. Sxc5#, 1… Sf7 2. Qxc6+ Sd6/ Kxe5 3. Qd5#.
7 th Commendation №22. Charles Ouellet (Canada)
Sol : 1.b6!-2.bxa7+ Kxa8 3.Qb7#, 1… Bxb6 2.Qxb6+ Kxa8 3.Qb7#, 1… Kxa8 2.b7+ Kb8 3.bxc8Q,R#, 1… Rxc7 2.bxc7+ Kxa8/Kc8 3.Qb7/Qe6#. Игра батареи Q+P, но очень прямолинейная и без особых изысков.
8 th Commendation №52. Salman Javadzade & Vidadi Zamanov & Sven Trommler (Azerbaijan / Germany) .
Sol: 1.Qc7! -2. Sf7+ Kd4 (a) 3. Qe5#, 2... Kf6 (b) 3. Qe5#(B), 1...Bc3 2. Sde4+ Kd4 (a) 3. Qxc5#(C), 1...Be4 2. Sb5+ Kf6 (b) 3. Sxe4#(D), (1...Kd4/Kf4 2. Sb5+ Ke3 3. Qg3#, 1...exd6 2. e3 -3. Qg7#). Change mats to moves the king, but in the battery mechanism, this is quite easy.
9 th Commendation №63. Vladimir Kozhakin & Alana Utarova (Russia)
Sol : 1… e4 2.Bd6 (3.Bd7#) 2… e3 3.Bd3#, 1.Qg5+? zz, 1...Ke4 2.Bd3+ Kd4 3.Qg1#, 2...Ke3 3.Qg1# 1...Ke6!,
1.Bd6? - 2.Qg5+ Ke6,Ke4 3.Qxe5# 1… Ke4!, 1.Bc5? d4!. Sol: 1.Bd2! zz, 1...e4 2. Bxf4 (3. Bd7#) 2… e3
3. Bd3#, 1...Ke4 2. Bd3+ Kd4 3. Qb6#, 1...d4 2. Bd7+ Ke4 3. Qc6#, 1...f3 2. Bd7+ Ke4 3. Qe3#, 1...f6 2. Qh7+
Ke6 3. Qd7#.
Engraving with a large set of non-futile options.
Special commendation (as equal) №64. Vladimir Kozhakin & Anna Shakleina (Russia) .
A) diagram 1.Rh8? zz, 1...Kxg5 2.Rg8+ Kh6 3.Rh3 # 1...fxg5!. 1.Kh2? Kxg5! Sol: 1.Be8! zz, 1...Kxg5
2. Rg6+ Kh5 (Kh4) 3. Rh3#, 1...fxg5 2. Bh5+ Kh4 3. Rh3# (1.Rg6? zz, 1… Kh5 2.Bxf5 Kh4 3.Rh3#
B) wBd7→e1 1.Rg6? zz, 1… fxg5 2.Rh3 f4 3.Rh4# 1… Kh5!. 1.Rfh3 f3!. Sol:1.Bd2! zz, 1...fxg5 2. Rfh3 f3 3. gxf3#, 1...Kxg5 2. Rfh3 Kg4 3. Rg6#.
Gravure. If in the second twin in the phase of the actual decisions passed different second courses of white, it was possible to put forward a task and on prizes ...
Special commendation (as equal) №26. Elmar Abdullayev & Alexander Melnichuk (Azerbaijan/Russia) .
The attempt to begin with a sacrifice of a rook alone does not succeed:
1.Bс7+? Kxh4 2.Qd6 (A)! Kxh3 3.Qg3#, 2… Kg5 3.Bd8#! (возврат) 2.Qg6(B)! Кxh3 3.Qg3# 1…Kf2!. Правильно: 1-ый ход на жертвы и ладьи, и слона! : Sol: 1.Rf4!! -2.Qxf3+ Kh2 3.Qg2#, 1… Kxf4 2.Qd6+(A)! Kе4 3.Qd4#, 1… Kxh3 2.Qg6(B)! Kh2 3.Rh4#! (возврат) 1… Kf2 2.Qxf3+ Kе1 3.Bа5#, 2… Kg1 3.Qg2#. Жать, но кроме эффектного вступления другой интересной игры нет.
Special commendation (as equal) №10. Daniele Gatti (Italy) .
Sol: 1.Ra1! zz, 1… f2 2. Rxe2 zz, 2… dxe2 3. d4#, 1… Bxf1 2. Kb1 ad lib 3. Rc1#, 1… Bd1 2. Kxd1 ad lib
An unusual game!
Special commendation (as equal) №12. Daniele Gatti (Italy) .
Sol: 1.Ra3! -2. Bb3 ad lib 3. Rf7#,1...a1B 2. Bxf5 zz,2... Kxf5 3. Rf7#, 1...a1S 2. a7 ad lib 3. Ra6#.
Not difficult, but I like tasks with similar subjects.
Special commendation (as equal) №20. Daniele Gatti (Italy)
1.Bf4? -2. Bxg5 -3. Sf4#, 1… f5 2. Rc2 zz 2… B~ 3. Rxh7#, 2…gxf4 3. Sxf4#, 1… f6!; Sol: 1.Rc2! zz, 1… f6 2. Bxf6 zz, 2… B~ 3. Rxh7#, 1… f5 2. Bf4 zz, 2… B~ 3. Rxh7#, 2… gxf4 3. Sxf4#.
Judge of the contest
Alexander Sygurov (Russia)
Mohamed Jamal Elbaz (firstname.lastname@example.org)