DRAWN PROOF GAMES
This page contains some proof games with a difference. Proof games are explained here, more or less, but in most of the problems on this page, there is an additional piece of information: namely that the game has just ended in a draw.
Could the draw have been by agreement? A rarely-used convention is that in a chess composition, the players may not agree a draw, in the same way that no player may resign in a chess composition. For an example, see ???. [1] So the draw must have been by some other mechanism, not hard to find.
{A}-{I} are just appetizers, with {I} the shortest and best. {J}-{L} extend the idea of {H} & {I} to slightly more complicated positions. Then follow some related earlier problems by other composers, {M}-{O}. {P} offers the same kind of stipulation, but with a full proof game.
| {A} Original |
{B} Original |
{C} Original |
||
 |
 |
 |
||
| (16+16) Drawn. Proof game in 8.5 moves. (No Codex.) | (16+16) Drawn. Proof game in 8.0 moves. | (16+16) Drawn. Proof game in 8.0 moves. | ||
| {D} Original |
{E} Original |
{F} Original |
||
 |
 |
 |
||
| (16+16) Drawn. Proof game in 8.5 moves. | (16+16) Drawn. Proof game in 7.5 moves. (No Codex.) | (16+15) Drawn. Proof game in 7.5 moves. | ||
| {G} Original |
{H} Original |
{I} Probleemblad, May 2002 |
||
 |
 |
 |
||
| (16+14) Drawn. Proof game in 10.5 moves. | (16+15) Drawn. Proof game in 7.5 moves. | (15+16) Drawn. Proof game in 7.0 moves. | ||
| {J} Probleemblad, May 2002 |
{K} Original |
{L} Probleemblad, Jan 2002 |
||
 |
 |
 |
||
| (15+13) Drawn. Proof game in 14.0 moves. (No Codex.) | (15+15) Drawn. Proof game in 8.0 moves. | (14+14) Drawn. Proof game in 11.5 moves. |
Peter van den Heuvel & Joost de Heer pointed out to me two earlier problems from 1997. The first appearance seems to be in 1996, but is known to be cooked, and is beyond my wit to repair. {P} is my offering along the same lines.
| {M} P.I.Olin The Problemist, Mar 1996 |
{N} P.I.Olin Die Schwalbe, Feb 1997 |
{O} A.Frolkin & S.Tkachenko Die Schwalbe, Oct 1997 |
||
 |
 |
 |
||
| (12+13) COOKED. Position after Black's 12th move. White can claim a draw by repetition with his next move. Game to White's 9th move? | (15+14) Position after White's 15th move. Black can claim a draw by repetition with his next move. Game to Black's 11th move? | (13+13) Position after Black's 23rd move. Black played 19. ... b4. Result? |
{Q} addresses a theoretical issue discussed on the solutions page.
| {P} Original |
{Q} Original |
|||
 |
 |
 |
||
| (13+15) White can claim a draw with his next move. Proof game in 9.0 moves. | (14+14) Drawn. Proof game in 11.5. |
[1] If resignation were permitted, then all self-mates, direct stalemates, self-stalemates and arguably all direct mates would be cooked. There are only a few compositions which would be cooked by players agreeing a draw, but I follow the convention adopted by Michel Caillaud. Another example is the joke problem ???. Neither convention appears in the Codex.