Prokeš maneuver
The Prokeš maneuver is a special intermediate move that takes away a potential field from a pawn. Usually the conversion of the farmer is prevented by clearing the field . The maneuver was named (probably for the first time by Tim Krabbé ) after the Prague chess master Ladislav Prokeš , whose following study illustrates everything:
Schackvärlden, 1939
Honorable Mention
| a | b | c | d | e | f | G | H | ||
| 8th |  |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
8th |
| 7th | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7th |
| 6th | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6th |
| 5 | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
5 |
| 4th | |
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
4th |
| 3 | |
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
3 |
| 2 | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2 |
| 1 | |
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
1 |
| a | b | c | d | e | f | G | H |
After 1. Kh5 – g4! there are two main variations:
1.… d3 – d2
2. Kg4 – f3 Kc4 – d3
3. Rf1 – a1 e3 – e2
4. Ta1 – a3 + Kd3 – c2
5. Ta3 – a2 + Kc2 – c1
6. Ta2 – a1 + Kc1– b2
7. Kf3xe2 remisiert easy.
Things look different after 1.… e3 – e2!
2. Rf1 – c1 + Kc4 – d4
3. Kg4 – f3 d3 – d2 (see following diagram).
| a | b | c | d | e | f | G | H | ||
| 8th | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
8th |
| 7th | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7th |
| 6th | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6th |
| 5 | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5 |
| 4th | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4th |
| 3 | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3 |
| 2 | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2 |
| 1 | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1 |
| a | b | c | d | e | f | G | H |
White seems lost, after about 4. Kxe2 dxc1D.
In this situation, however, White can sacrifice his rook with an intermediate check and thus eliminate the move dxc1D.
4. Rc1 – c4 +! Kd4 – d3
5. Rc4 – d4 +! Kd3xd4
6. Kf3xe2 Kd4-c3
7. Ke2-d1 Zugzwang Kc3-d3 stalemate
A Räumungszug a figure with the aim of a farmer to escape a potential breakdown field is prokeš maneuver called.
Such situations have occurred in tournament practice and have often been overlooked. The best-known example is probably the following game.
| a | b | c | d | e | f | G | H | ||
| 8th | |
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
8th |
| 7th | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7th |
| 6th | |
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
6th |
| 5 | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5 |
| 4th | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4th |
| 3 | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3 |
| 2 | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2 |
| 1 | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1 |
| a | b | c | d | e | f | G | H |
Timman had been putting pressure on Black the whole game, but now his concentration waned. He had given Ivkov a passed pawn unnecessarily a few moves ago and was still able to win relatively easily with 48. c4 a3 49. c5 +. However, Timman found a seemingly profitable, beautiful combination.
48. e6 – e7 Rd8 – a8
There was still a good chance of winning with 49. Rg6 +! Kxe7 50.Ra6 !, but Timman sticks to his plan.
49. f5 – f6? a4 – a3
Now only 50. f7 Kxe7 51. Rg8 Rf8 52. Rg3 Ra8 53. Rg8 would have held a draw with repetition. (If Black deviates, White wins the a-pawn or, in turn, converts a pawn.)
50. Rg7 – g8? Ra8xg8
51. f6-f7
| a | b | c | d | e | f | G | H | ||
| 8th | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
8th |
| 7th | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7th |
| 6th | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6th |
| 5 | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5 |
| 4th | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4th |
| 3 | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3 |
| 2 | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2 |
| 1 | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1 |
| a | b | c | d | e | f | G | H |
Ivkov played 51.… a3 – a2 ?? and gave up after
52. f7xg8D a2 – a1D +
53. Kg1 – h2 Kd6xe7
54. Qg8 – g5 + .
The Prokeš maneuver would have won 51.… Rg8xg2 +!
52. Kg1xg2 Kd6xe7 , after which the a-pawn could not have been stopped ( square rule ).
Saratov, 1982
| a | b | c | d | e | f | G | H | ||
| 8th | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
8th |
| 7th | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7th |
| 6th | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6th |
| 5 | |
|
 |
|
|
|
|
 |
5 |
| 4th | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4th |
| 3 | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3 |
| 2 | |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
2 |
| 1 | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1 |
| a | b | c | d | e | f | G | H |
It is not known if the last move was just a mistake or a trap. After 1. Bb2 – a3 Black's queen was lost, but Black hoped to get both rooks after 1.… f4xe3 . Black exd2 3. Ta1 d1d could 4. txd1 Lxd1 5. Lxa7 despite the material disadvantage, due to the after 2nd Lxc5 opposite colored bishop still have hopes draw.
With 2. Rd2 – d8 + !! However, White took the field on d2 and with it the potential field of conversion d1, and Black gave up because the endgame would be hopeless after 2.… Kxd8 3. Bxc5 e2 4. Ra1.
Another example on the subject is the four-trainer by Hans-Peter Rehm , Probleemblad, 1959 .
literature
- Jan Timman: The double Prokes maneuver , in: ChessBase Magazin 39, 1994 issue 1, pp. 35–41.
Web links
http://www.xs4all.nl/~timkr/chess/prok.htm History of the Prokeš maneuver on Tim Krabbé's website