The BDS Website

BDS

Version of T R Dawson, British Chess Magazine, 1943

#2
GRASSHOPPER f5
ROOK-HOPPER e4, g6
BISHOP-HOPPER c8

1.Rf4! ()

1...Gd3 2.RHeg4#
1...Gh7 2.RHgg4#
1...Gf3 2.Rfg4#
1...Gd5 2.Seg4#
1...Gf7 2.Sfg4#
1...Gh5 2.Rg4#

In TRD's day, the rook-hopper and bishop-hopper had not been invented, so he had no opportunity or reason to arrive at this version of his problem. By replacing Grasshoppers that were only used on rook or bishop lines with the new pieces I have been able to save three units.

I have always been of the view that one should use the fewest fairy pieces and/or conditions, and, of course, pieces overall, to illustrate one’s idea. No composer, in an orthodox problem, would use a queen where a rook or bishop would do and was available. To do otherwise would make the queen 'camouflage' and unfair to the solver. I believe the same should be true of stronger and weaker fairy pieces of the same kind. So, in recent years I have used rook-hoppers and bishop-hoppers as alternatives to grasshoppers where possible. My view is far from universal, with a lot of composers holding to the view that the fewest possible types of fairy pieces should he used. I consider grasshoppers and rook-hoppers and bishop-hoppers to be of the same family, rather like Chinese Pieces. I know of no composer who would use multiple Leos when Pao and Vaos would do the job.

There is no set of universally-agreed conventions for the construction of fairy chess problems – the above issue being just one of several. How then does one fairly judge a fairy chess composing tourney? How indeed?