CHESMAYNE

Midi: Stranger

Fork :fk

01 A forked hazel twig is used by some people to locate water. 

02 See KT under Major Pieces. 

03 A simultaneous attack on two MPs/mps by one of your MPs/mps. 

French: fork - la fourchette.  

FORK, PIN, SKEWER Symbols

:fk = Fork....................37:01

:pn = Pin.....................37:02

:sk = Skewer................37:03

CROSS PIN :cpn.........37:04

HALF-PIN...................37:05

SKEWER (Symbol :sk)..37:06

UNPINNING.................37:07

X-RAY........................…37:08

Fork link

 

THE FORK TRICK

Perhaps you’ve watched a man called Uri Geller bending forks on television.   I’ve got no idea how he does it.   It is a trick or does he have a special gift?   In chess you can also do tricks with forks.   Anyone can do them: you don’t need special gifts for these FORK TRICKS. 

You know what a FORK is, don’t you?  A move with one of your pieces to THREATEN two enemy pieces at the same time. 

To do the FORK TRICK all we need is a pawn.   This sort of FORK won’t always win you the game but it will give you a good position from the opening. 

Let's start with these moves:

1. e2-e4 e7-e5

2. Ng1-f3 Nb8-c6

3. Nb1-c3 Ng8-f6

4. Bf1-c4 (Diagram)

It’s Black to move.   What would you play?

There’s nothing at all wrong with Bf8-c5 or Bf8-b4, both good DEVELOPING moves, but Black has an interesting alternative which might surprise you if you haven’t seen it before. 

4... Nf6xe4

If White doesn’t take it he’s just lost a Pawn, so...

5. Nc3xe4

Why has Black given up a Knight for a Pawn?   Has he gone mad?   No, he’s just playing a FORK TRICK.   What’s his next move? 

5... d7-d5

That’s it!   A PAWN FORK!   If White moves the Bishop we’ll take the Knight.   And if he moves the Knight we’ll take the Bishop.   Black isn’t winning yet but he’s solved his opening problems.   We’ll return to this position later, but first a few more examples. 

White can play the FORK TRICK just as easily:

1. e2-e4 e7-e5

2. Ng1-f3 Nb8-c6

3. Nb1-c3 Bf8-c5 (Diagram)

What can White play now?   He could develop with Bf1-c4 or Bc1-b5 but we recommend you play...

4. Nf3xe5

in this position.

You can play it in the Ruy Lopez as well:

1. e2-e4 e7-e5

2. Ng1-f3 Nb8-c6

3. Bf1-b5 Ng8-f6

4. 0-0 Bf8-c5 (Diagram)

Again, White has a choice of good moves here.   One of the most popular is...

5. Nf3xe5

In this course we look mostly at openings starting 1. e2-e4 e7-e5.   As you progress in your chess career you’ll learn lots of other openings, some of which will also give you the chance to play a FORK TRICK! 

For instance:

1. e2-e4 d7-d6

2. d2-d4 Ng8-f6

These are the first moves of the PIRC DEFENCE, named after a Yugoslavian Grandmaster, and pronounced PEERTS, not PERK. 

3. Nb1-c3 g7-g6

4. Ng1-f3 Bf8-g7

5. Bf1-c4 0-0

6. 0-0

Again, a possible move for Black is Nf6xe4, and if Nc3xe4, d7-d5 FORKS Knight and Bishop.

In this Junior game, Black tried the FORK TRICK in the Sicilian Defence.

1. e2-e4 c7-c5

2. Nb1-c3 d7-d6

3. Ng1-f3 Ng8-f6

4. Bf1-c4

Here Black played Nf6xe4.   Was that a good idea.   Stop and work it out, using CCT.

No, it wasn’t!   After 4... Nf6xe4? 5.   Nc3xd4 d7-d5 White could get out of the FORK.   Do you see how?   He played 5. Bc4-b5+, which gave him time to move his Knight to safety. 

You really have to be careful before you play the FORK TRICK.   If you get it wrong you end up losing a piece. 

After the moves

1. e2-e4 e7-e5

2. Ng1-f3 Nb8-c6

3. Bf1-c4 Bf8-c5

would you play 4. Nf3xe5?

It often happens, but I hope YOU wouldn’t do it!   After 4. Nf3xe5? Nc6xe5 5. d2-d4 Black can play Ne5xc4 and remain a piece ahead. 

You CAN’T play the FORK TRICK with White if you’ve got a Bishop on c4, or with Black if you’ve got a Bishop on c5. 

Remembering ideas like this is an important part of learning to play good chess.   But something that works in one position might not work in a very similar position.   You always have to stop and work it out before you play it. 

Let’s now go back to our first example and see how play might develop.

Do you remember the moves?

1. e2-e4 e7-e5

2. Ng1-f3 Nb8-c6

3. Nb1-c3 Ng8-f6

4. Bf1-c4 Nf6xe4 (Diagram)

Firstly, you might have noticed a clever move for White instead of taking the Knight:

5. Bc4xf7+ Ke8xf7

6. Nc3xe4

Perhaps White’s feeling happy because he's stopped Black Castling.   Let’s play a few more moves.

6... d7-d5

7. Ne4-g5+ Kf7-g8 (Diagram)

What do you think about this position?   Do you prefer White or Black?

1. Black has much better CENTRE CONTROL: look at those two fantastic Pawns on d5 and e5 - Danny and Eddie’s dream position.  Remember the SPACE INVADERS! 

2. Black has won Bishop for Knight: BISHOPS ARE BETTER THAN KNIGHTS IN OPEN POSITIONS. 

3. White’s Knights are in a tangle.   Black will probably play h7-h6 next move, when the White Knight will have to go back to h3.   Then if White castles, Black might play Bc8xh3 to give White a DOUBLE HARRY. 

I think Black has a large advantage in this position.

So, going back to move 5, White usually plays:

5. Nc3xe4 d7-d5

What do you think White should play here?

I repeat: BISHOPS ARE BETTER THAN KNIGHTS IN OPEN POSITIONS.   So White should move his Bishop.   The best move is 6. Bc4-d3 which leads to a level position after 6... d5xe4 7.   Bd3xe4. White sometimes tries 6. Bc4-b5, which works well for Black after 6... d5xe4 7.   Nf3xe5 Qd8-d5. 

But the move most of your opponents will probably play, if they don't know this lesson, is...

6. Bc4xd5

when play might continue...

6... Qd8-d5

7. Ne4-c3 Qd5-d8

Qd5-a5 is also good.   Yes, Black has wasted two moves with his Queen, but it doesn’t really matter as White has wasted two moves with his Knight.

White has a slight lead in development, it’s true, but Black has a pawn in the centre and the advantage of Bishop for Knight.

7. 0-0 Bc8-g4

Why does Black play this move?

It's PINNING the Knight and aiming for the DOUBLE FREDDIE.

8. d2-d3 Bf8-c5

Now, if White’s not careful he can fall into a trap:

9. Bc1-g5

Black’s Queen is attacked. What should he do about it?

Did you suggest Qd8xg5?   That’s a clever way to exchange pieces, but it doesn’t win anything.   The winning move is Bg4xf3!, when whatever White does Black comes out a piece ahead.   For instance, if 10.   Qd1xf3, Qd8xg5, or if 10.   Bg5xd8, Bf3xd1, or if 10. Qd1-d2, f7-f6. 

Now remember that idea and have a look at this game.

White: Kotkov Black: Akopian

Krasnodar 1966

1. e2-e4 e7-e6

2. d2-d4 d7-d5

The FRENCH DEFENCE.

3. Nb1-d2 d5xe4

4. Nd2xe4 Bc8-d7

5. Ng1-f3 Bd7-c6

6. Bf1-d3 Ng8-f6

7. Ne4xf6+ Qd8xf6

8. Bc1-g5

“My Queen is in trouble, but so what!   I can win a piece” thought Black. 

8... Bc6xf3

After 9. Qd1xf3 Qf6xg5 10. Qf3xb7, Black has Qg5-d5.   The winning move is 9. Qd1-d2.   Black’s Queen is THREATENED and has only one move - Qf5xd4.   What would White play in that position?   CCT!   The two Queens are in line with a Bishop between them.  Black’s Queen is undefended (LOOSE PIECES DROP OFF!).  So White looks at what he can do with his d3 Bishop, and finds Bd3-b5+!   Black must get out of check, and next move White will take the Queen. 

In fact Black can play 9... Bf3xg2 when he gets Bishop and Rook for Queen, but he still has a lost position, so he resigned after Qd1-d2.

This example shows you again that you can’t be too careful.   Positions that look similar may turn out to be completely different. 

HELPFUL HINTS

 

1. Learn and remember the idea of the FORK TRICK.

2. If you see a chance to play it use CCT to check that it works first.

3. If you want to develop your Bishop to c4 in the opening, do so on move 3, not on move 4.   If you then want to play a closed game, play d2-d3 before Nb1-c3.

4. Remember: BISHOPS ARE BETTER THAN KNIGHTS IN OPEN POSITIONS.

5. Remember the tactical idea: he plays a Bishop to g5 to attack your Queen: you play Bishop takes Knight on f3 to attack his Queen and win a piece. 

 

 

 

 

THE QUEEN’S LUNCH BREAK

 

The Queen was feeling hungry.   “It must be lunchtime” she said to herself.  “I wonder what I can find to eat.   A tasty pawn would be nice.   A Knight would be even better.   Mmm, scrumptious!   Or how about a nice fat juicy Bishop?  Yum yum!”   And what does the Queen use to eat her lunch.   Just the same as you or me: a FORK! 

You remember what a FORK is, don’t you.   A move which THREATENS two pieces at once with the same piece.   Queens are really brilliant at FORKING because they are so powerful.   Look out for moves which CHECK and attack an undefended piece, or moves which attack two undefended pieces. 

Our first example has happened several times.

Opening: Ruy Lopez

1. e2-e4 e7-e5

2. Ng1-f3 Nb8-c6

3. Bf1-b5 a7-a6

4. Bb5xc6 d7xc6

5. 0–0 f7-f6

This is an exception to the rule about not moving Freddie in the opening.   Black can play it because White no longer has a White squared Bishop.   But he still has to be careful.

6. d2-d4 e5xd4

7. Nf3xd4 Bf8-c5??

And it’s your move.   What would you recommend for White here?   Remember CCT!

8. Qd1-h5+

The Queen’s FORK has a Bishop on one prong and a King on the other.   The King must escape so the Queen has a nice fat juicy Bishop for lunch. 

Another example, this time from a Grandmaster tournament.   Black was one of the best players in the world, but here he plays like a beginner.

White: Frank Marshall Black: Mikhail Chigorin

Monte Carlo 1903

Opening: Queen’s Gambit Declined

1. d2-d4 d7-d5

2. c2-c4 Nb8-c6

3. Nb1-c3 d5xc4

4. d4-d5 Nc6-a5

5. Bc1-f4 Bc8-d7

6. e2-e4 e7-e6

7. d5xe6 f7xe6??

The next move, please. CCT!

8. Qd1-h5+

This time there’s a King and a Knight on the prongs of the Queen’s FORK.

Rounding up the stray Knight on a5.   Black resigned.

Our next example is the shortest ever loss by a player of master strength.   Don’t blink or you’ll miss it.

White: Ziva Djordjevic Black: Milorad Kovacevic

Bela Crkva (Yugoslavia) 1984

Opening: Trompowsky Opening

1. d2-d4 Ng8-f6

2. Bc1-g5 c7-c6

3. e2-e3??

How can Black win a piece here?

3... Qd8-a5+

This time the FORK came on a5.   If White had played something else instead of e2-e3 he could have defended with Qd1-d2 or even Bg5-d2.

The previous (genuine) record holder went like this.   It’s a game from the 1933 Olympiad.   White was from Scotland, Black from Lithuania. 

White: Robert Combe Black: Wolfgang Hasenfuss

Chess Olympics Folkestone 1933

Opening: Queen's Pawn Game

1. d2-d4 c7-c5

2. c2-c4 c5xd4

3. Ng1-f3 e7-e5

4. Nf3xe5??

You should be able to find this one by now!

4... Qd8-a5+

Another FORK on a5, this time of King and Knight.

Here’s a trap you might be able to try out yourself with White if your opponent plays the Sicilian Defence.

1. e2-e4 c7-c5 (This is the Sicilian Defence, the most popular opening in master chess.) 2. Ng1-f3 d7-d6 3. Bf1-e2 (This will surprise your opponents.   The usual move is d2-d4.) 3... Ng8-f6 4. c2-c3 (Baiting the trap.   If Black takes on e4 you know what happens.   So he develops his Knight to block the check.) 4... Nb8-c6 5. d2-d4 Nf6xe4?

Can you work out how White can win a Knight here?   This time you have to look a bit further ahead.   Don’t forget to think CCT.

6. d4-d5 (ATTACKING the Knight, so Black moves it). 6... Nc6-e5

7. Qd1-a4+ (And now the FORK, and another Knight bites the dust.)

Now for something slightly different.

Opening: Two Knights Defence

1. e2-e4 e7-e5

2. Ng1-f3 Nb8-c6

3. Bf1-c4 Ng8-f6

4. d2-d4 Nf6xe4?

5. d4xe5 Bf8-c5?? (Diagram)

Black’s playing for a KNIGHT FORK on f2, but it’s White’s turn first.   Think CCT, and don’t worry about trying to defend f2. 

6. Qd1-d5

This time it’s not a CHECK, but a mate threat.   The THREATS are to the Knight on e4 and the Pawn on f7.   Black’s welcome to play Bc5xf2+: White just moves his King: Ke1-e2.   Now what happens if Black plays Ne4-c5? Qd5xf7#!   Or if Ne4-g5? Bc1xg5!   Or if Ne4-d6? e5xd6!   Or if 0-0? Qd5xe4.   If Black doesn’t want to get mated White’s Queen will have another succulent Knight for her lunch.   

This idea is seen a lot in junior chess games.   Here’s an example where Black wins. It's another King's Gambit.  

1. e2-e4 e7-e5 2. f2-f4 Bf8-c5 (You should know what happens if White plays f4xe5 here. That’s right: Qd8-h4+!) 3. Ng1-f3 d7-d6 4. Bf1-c4 Ng8-f6 5. d2-d3 0-0 (If White thinks he can now win a pawn he’s in for a nasty shock.) 6. f4xe5 d6xe5 7. Nf3xe5??   It’s your move.   If you remember the last example you’ll get it right.

7... Qd8-d4

Again the Knight is lost.   If White plays Ne5-g4 to stop the mate on f2 Black just takes it off: Bc8xg4. 

Earlier in this lesson we looked at the start of a Ruy Lopez game: 1. e2-e4 e7-e5 2. Ng1-f3 Nb8-c6 3. Bf1-b5 a7-a6 4. Bb5xc6 d7xc6.   Perhaps you wondered why White didn’t play Nf3xe5 here.   Well, can you work it out for yourself? 

The answer is that Black can regain the pawn with the aid of a QUEEN FORK: Qd8-d4, FORKING e4 and e5.   Or, if he prefers, Qd8-g5, FORKING g2 and e5.   Not to mention Qd8-e7 with a SKEWER on the e-file (A SKEWER is a move which attacks two pieces in the SAME direction - with the more valuable piece being in front.   If you like it’s a back to front PIN!   Here, when the Knight moves Black will take the Pawn on e4. 

HELPFUL HINTS

 

1. Queens are brilliant at forking.   Look out for Queen moves attacking undefended pieces.

2. If Freddie has moved, look out for QUEEN FORKS on h5 (h4).

3. Look out for QUEEN FORKS on a4 (a5).

4. If your opponent has a Knight on e4 (e5) and he hasn’t castled look out for QUEEN FORKS on d5 (d4).

5. Try to keep all your pieces defending each other if you can.   If you have an undefended piece make sure it can’t be FORKED.   Remember: LOOSE PIECES DROP OFF (LPDO)! 

6. Think CCT all the time. 

 

 

 

 

THE MOTHER OF ALL FORKS


A Guided Tour of Chess - The Chess Cafe

The most elementary of all tactical devices is probably the fork.  But however elementary, it was hotly discussed recently in the electronic newsletter of an Amsterdam chess club. 

    This started when one contributor, commenting his Qd6 which attacked two Rooks on b8 and f4, innocently called that a fork.  In the next issue, somebody else protested that this wasn’t a fork at all because the teeth of a real fork do not point away from each other.  When the discussion really got going, it turned out there were vastly different views about what a fork really is.   Some thought both teeth of a fork must point forward; that only Knight and Pawn can fork; that the King can do it too, but not the Rook, the Bishop or the Queen; that a fork must be symmetrical; that empty squares can be forked too; that the attacker must be of less value than the attacked, ‘because a fork cannot prod anything smaller than its teeth.’   There was also somebody who thought a fork is only a fork when the forking piece moves to the square where it forks.
    That’s something I want to refute at once.  (See Diagram). 

 

Black to play; NN - Mannheimer, Frankfurt am Main 1921.  With 1...Re4!, Black activated the fork that Ke5 already gave.  White resigned; he loses a piece.

    Just like the readers of that newsletter, chess encyclopedias disagree about the fork.  They all say it is a double attack in different directions by one piece or a pawn, but sometimes that is the whole definition (and in that case empty squares count too, making any move, except h2-h4 and Ba1-h8, a fork) and sometimes again, it is only the Pawn which can fork. 

    In my own definition that I use here, not so much to be pedantic as to limit the subject, I’m adding a clause that I saw nowhere else: the double or multiple attack must not be aimed at the King; in that case it is a ‘Family Check’.
   

The basic fork, agreed, is a pawn prodding two pieces; one of the first tactics a beginner encounters.   Often a gross blunder allows one, and one soon learns the part it plays in standard pseudo sacrifices like 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Nc3 Bc5 4.Nxe5 Nxe5 5.d4

    An elementary but surprising serial fork happened in Grigoriev - Panikovsky, Kurgan 1972: 1.e4 c5 2.Nc3 Nc6 3.g3 g6 4.Bg2 Bg7 5.d3 d6 6.f4 Nh6 7.Nf3 f5 8.O-O O-O 9.h3 Nf7 10.Be3 Nd4 11.Qd2 Rb8 12.Bf2 fxe4 13.Nxd4 A Zwischenzug.  (See Diagram).  But Black had the Zwischen-Zwischenzug 13...e3! and after Q or Bxe3 there would follow something resembling a multiple jump in draughts; cxd4 and dxe3 or dxc3. After 14.Ne6 exf2+, White resigned.

Another sort of serial fork is seen in the next diagram. In Kochiev - Tal, Moscow 1981, Black played 25...d2, forking the Rooks, but also vacating d3 where a second fork of those same Rooks will follow: 26.Qxd2 Nd3 winning the exchange and a little later the game.



A funny case of a fork met by a counterfork: (See Diagram) White to play; Tretyakov - Zhuravlev, Riga 1978.  White saw a fork which wins a pawn: 1.dxe5 dxe5 2.Qc3.  But he didn’t see the counterfork: 2...Bb4 3.Qxe5 Qxe5 4.Nxe5 Bc3 which wins a piece. 



An unusual fork happened in Razuvajev - Mestrovic, Keszthely 1981 (See Diagram).  With 38.Nh7!, White won the exchange (Rxc8 39.Nxf6+) and soon the game. 

There are several standard middlegame traps which are based on forks - here is one which has made many victims over the years.   It was first seen in Norman - Vidmar, Hastings 1925: 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 g6 3.Nc3 Bg7 4.Nf3 O-O 5.e4 d6 6.Bd3 Bg4 7.h3 Bxf3 8.Qxf3 Nc6 9.Be3 Nd7 10.Ne2? (See Diagram).  And now 10...Nce5 won a pawn, and destroyed White’s position. After 11.dxe5 Nxe5 12.Qg3 Nxd3+ 13.Kf1 c5 14.h4 Qd7 15.h5 Qe6 16.Rh4 Qxc4 17.hxg6 fxg6 18.Qh3 Nxf2 19.Bxf2 Bd4, White resigned. 

    The exact position of the diagram has occurred more often - I found 12 games with it, the last one from 1998.   In a slightly different form, in another opening, it has also happened 13 times - at surprisingly high levels.  The premiere of that fork was:


Ljubojevic - Timman, Tilburg 1978: 1.e4 d6 2.d4 Nf6 3.Nc3 g6 4.f4 Bg7 5.Nf3 c5 6.dxc5 Qa5 7.Bd3 Qxc5 8.Qe2 O-O 9.Be3 Qa5 10.O-O Bg4 11.Qf2 Bxf3 12.Qxf3 Nc6 13.Ne2 Nd7 14.c3 (See Diagram) 14...Nde5 15.fxe5 Nxe5 16.Qh3 Nxd3 17.Qd7 Qa6 18.Qxe7 Rae8 19.Qh4 d5 20.Ng3 f5 21.e5 f4 22.Bxf4 Qb6+ 23.Kh1 Nf2+ 24.Rxf2 Qxf2 25.Rf1 Qxb2 26.Qg5 and White resigned. 

    You’d think this would have been a good warning, but with a minor modification (pawn h2 being at h3 because of the intermediate 11.h3 Bxf3 12.Qxf3 etc.) this has also happened in, among others:

Zapata - Chernin, Cienfiegos 1981
Hübner - Korchnoi, Skelleftea 1989
Korneev - Van Wely, Krumbach 1991

    All together, I found 34 games where this Ne5-fork was possible.  It was missed 6 times - never in master games, except for this one:

Gligoric - Pirc, Bad Pyrmont 1951: 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 d6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 a6 6.f4 Qc7 7.Bd3 Bg4 8.Nf3 Nc6 9.h3 Bxf3 10.Qxf3 e6 11.O-O Be7 12.Be3 O-O 13.Ne2 Nd7 14.c3 (See Diagram) 14...Rad8 That 14.c3 looks like a trap, but I don’t see why Ne5 couldn’t have been played: 15.fxe5 Nxe5 16.Qg3 Nxd3 17.Bh6 Qc5+ followed by Qe5, and Black seems to be better.  In reality, White won after: 15.Rad1 d5 16.e5 Bc5 17.Nd4 Bxd4 18.cxd4 f5 19.g4 g6 20.gxf5 gxf5 21.Kh1 Kh8 22.Rg1 Rg8 23.Qh5 Rde8 24.Qh6 Nd8 25.Bf2 Nf8 26.Bh4 Rg6 27.Bf6+ Kg8 28.h4 and Black resigned.

For forks aimed purely at winning material there is nothing like this study: (See Diagram).  White to play and draw; A. Herbstmann & L. Kubbel, 1st Prize, Troitzky-Tourney, 1937.  White cannot stop the pawn by ordinary means; moves are dictated by family checks on f3; knight-stalemates; pinning stalemates by a new Queen on e1; and by the knowledge that the endgame of three Knights against one Knight is won - something first demonstrated by Troitzky. 1.Ng1 Ne3+ (Nf4+ 2.Kh1 e1N 3.Nf3+ Nxf3 stalemate) 2.Kh3 Nf4+ (2...e1N 3.Nf3+ Nxf3 with a beautiful three-Knight stalemate) 3.Kh2 Ng4+ (Not 3...e1N 4.Nf3+ Nxf3+ 5.Kg3 and White forks two Knights; or again 3...Nf1+ 4.Kh1 e1N 5.Nf3+ Nxf3 stalemate) 4.Kh1 Nf2+ (Again both promotions are, or lead to stalemate) 5.Kh2 e1N Finally.  No stalemate seems in sight.  6.Nf3+ Nxf3+ 7.Kg3 (See Diagram).  A fork of three Knights - Black needs them all to win.  So he must play 7...Ke3, but that is stalemate once again. Witty and beautiful, this belongs to my 10 favorite endgame studies.

A unique sort of fork is seen in this amazing study. (See Diagram).  White to play and draw; F. Simkhovich, 1st Prize Turkmenskaya Iskra, 1940.  After 1.cxd4 Rxe4 Black wins, and after random Bishop moves, the Rd4 just moves away, and again Black wins.  1.Bf5! however, restricts Black. 1...Rde4 then fails to 2.Kh3, and 1...Rg5 to 2.g7 Kxf7 3.g8Q+ Kxg8 (the Rg5 must keep attacking the Bf5) 4.Be6+, and White has time for cxd4.  Therefore, Black must choose between 1...Rc4 and Ra4.  But wherever the black Rook goes, there follows a sort of perpetual fork, e.g. 1...Rc4 2.Be6 Kf8 (2...Ra4 3.Bd7 etc.) 3.Kh3 Rge4 4.Bd5 Kg7 5.Kh2 Ra4 6.Bc6 Rec4 7.Bb5 Rg4 8.Bd7 Rae4 9.Bf5 and so on, always keeping both Rooks under attack and never capturing one. For each pair of squares that the Rooks have, there is a corresponding square for the Bishop.  And if Black makes his waiting move again; 9...Kf8, White makes his waiting move: 10.Kh3! and the double attack continues. e.g. 10...Kg7 11.Kh2! Rc4 12.Be6 etcetera.

    That is not all in this ingenious study.  One might wonder why 1.Bf3 does not work.  The same perpetual fork seems possible from the other side; 1...Rc4 2.Be2 Ra4 3.Bd1 Rge4 4.Bc2 Rec4 5.Bb3 etc.  In that case however, Black exploits a hidden weakness in White’s position: after 1.Bf3? he plays 1...Ra4 (he can also shuffle around for a bit first) 2.Bd1 Kf8! and now it turns out that White’s waiting move has a surprise drawback: 3.Kh3 Ra1! 4.Bxg4 Rh1 mate.

An appealing sort of fork, which is indirectly aimed at mate, is hidden (not so well, you’d think) in the following position: (See Diagram).  Black to play, Alden - Nilsson, Sweden 1972. After 1...Qb7? 2.Qf1 White won, but with 1...Qc6!, Black could have turned the tables.

 

This sort of fork, where two line-pieces are forked on one line, is often seen in connection to the back rank mate, but of course it can be motivated differently. (See Diagram).  White to play; Csulits - Bade, GDR 1972.  White is a piece and three pawns up, but the threatening black King makes his position very dangerous.  And in fact, he lost after 37.Qd6? h5! 38.Be5? (38.Rd2 still draws) 38...Kh3! 39.c6 Rxh2+ and White resigned; it is mate next move.  In the diagram, 37.Rc1 is winning, but much more forceful would have been 37.Rd2! - Black would have had to resign immediately; his forked Queen and Rook are overloaded.

    And a clear, be it somewhat schematic example from an endgame study: (See Diagram).  White to play and win; V. Kalandadze, 1965.  Direct attempts at promotion only lead to winning a Rook and losing all the pawns, and therefore to a draw.  With the obvious 1.Re1 White forks the Rooks which are each tied to one white pawn, and that seems to be it: Black takes pawn; White takes Rook and wins.  But Black has a temporary escape: 1...Rb2+ 2.Kxa3 Rff2 Which only leads to the next fork: 3.Re2! And so on: 3...Rb3+ 4.Kxa4 Rff3 5.Re3! Rb4+ 6.Kxa5 Rff4 7.Re4 and only the fourth fork finally does it.

    This could be seen as an elaboration of a much older repetitive fork (See Diagram): White to play and win; F. Sackmann, Deutsche Schachzeitung 1909.  After 1.c7, Black can stop the promotion of that pawn in two ways, but in each case forks force a promotion anyway. 1...Nd6 (Nb6 2.Nd5!) 2.Ne4 and now a serial fork: Nd(f)xe4+ 3.Kf4 Nd(f)6 4.Ke5 and one pawn promotes.

A fork may also be aimed directly at mate, as in this elegant problem by the great American wizard: (See Diagram).  White mates in 3; Sam Loyd, Leipziger Illustrierte Zeitung 1869. 1.Qf1! and now the Queen can always attack h7 while providing a diagonal QxB mate against the defense g6, e.g. Bb2 2.Qb1 or Bf6 2.Qf5.  And after 1...g3, there is another mate with 2.Ng6+

Another well known multiple fork by a great American composer: (See Diagram).  White mates in 3, W.A. Shinkman, Detroit Free Press 1882.  After the waiting move 1.Kh1! the black Rooks are moving targets which White can always hit both at once, e.g. 1...Ra4 2.Qe4 or 1...Rh8 2.Qc3, or 1...h4 2.Qh5.  In eight variations, it is mate on the third move by the Queen taking one of the Rooks or, if she is taken herself, by Ra7 or Rb8.

It is no coincidence that we already encountered Leonid Kubbel here: the fork, in all its simplicity, was one of his favorite themes.   He also used it in problems; in that discipline too, he was one of the greats. (See Diagram).  White mates in 4; L. Kubbel, Shakhmatiy 1937.  Not an elegant position, but these forks come at a price - which is worth it.  The hero is the inconspicious Nb3, which forks its way to three mating squares.  After the key move 1.c4 (most other tries fail to Qxb3), 2.Rd5+ and mate next move is threatened.  Black can meet this threat in different ways, leading to different Knight’s forks and a cyclical permutation of mates:

1...Rxc4 2.e4! Rxe4 3.Nd2 and 4.Nxe4 or Nxc4 mate
                  2...Bb7 3.Na5! and 4.Nxc4 or Nxb7 mate
1...Bb7 2.Qf7 Re4 3.Nxc5 and 4.Nxb7 or Nxe4 mate

Many years later, two joint Russian composers showed a vastly improved rendering of this beautiful idea.  The position was lighter, more elegant, there was more unity (the threat was a mating fork now, too), and they upped the number of variations from three to five, doubling the number of mating squares to six. (See Diagram).  White mates in 4. A. Virtmanis & V. Chekarkov, 2nd Prize, Shakhmatiy v SSSR 1979.  It might be obvious (after a few hours) that White must first block the Pe3, to rob Black of a possible flight square. After 1.Re2! there is already the beautifully thematic threat: 2.Ng4 Rxe6 3.Nxe3 and Nc2 or Nxf5 mate. 

Black now has four defences, which all lead to a new Knight’s fork:

1...Rxe2 2.Nh5! Rxe6 3.Nf4 and Nxe2 or Nxe6 mate
1...Rxf3 2.Nh7! Rxe6 3.Ng5 and Nxf3 or Nxe6 mate
1...Bxb3 2.Nd7! Rxe6 3.Nc5 and Nxb3 or Nxe6 mate
1...Bxb5 2.Ne8! Rxe6 3.Nxc7 and Nxb5 or Nxe6 mate

A simultaneous double fork, both parts satisfying all conditions, is the core of a well known study, worthy to conclude this survey: (See Diagram).  White to play and win. G. Kasparyan, Sjachmatniy 1935. 1.Ne8 Threatening Ng7+ and Bf5 mate 1...Kg6 2.h5+ Rxh5 3.f5+ Rxf5 4.g4 Re5(f4) 5.Bf5+ Rxf5 6.Ng7 and the Rooks on f5 and h5 are doubly doubly attacked; mate next move. This is the Mother of All Forks. The fantastic final position is seen one move earlier after 1...Rxf4 2.Ng7+ Kg6 3.h5+ Rxh5 4.Bf5+ Rxf5 5.g4 (See Diagram). 

© Tim Krabbé, 2000

Top | Main Chess Page |

 

 

Search:

search tips sitemap