This is certainly an excellent study, mainly because of the elegant and economic implementation with almost asymmetric material and the richness of understandable tactical motives. I am not even annoyed by the difficult sideline. However, I find studies with stalemate counterplay always a little bit superficial: they make it easier to produce spectacular moves and counter-sacrifices to lift the stalemate. (I often argue with Martin Minski about this.) This study is not completely exempt from this criticism. Still great! (3,5)
Stalemate is a little like cheating, and not particularly interesting to me as a study theme (always exceptions ofcourse). Luckily here it plays the role of supporting character only.
Wonderful study, marred only be the difficult sideline 6…Qe7 7. Kd5 etc.
This is certainly an excellent study, mainly because of the elegant and economic implementation with almost asymmetric material and the richness of understandable tactical motives. I am not even annoyed by the difficult sideline. However, I find studies with stalemate counterplay always a little bit superficial: they make it easier to produce spectacular moves and counter-sacrifices to lift the stalemate. (I often argue with Martin Minski about this.) This study is not completely exempt from this criticism. Still great! (3,5)
Stalemate is a little like cheating, and not particularly interesting to me as a study theme (always exceptions ofcourse). Luckily here it plays the role of supporting character only.
Шедевр! (4 балла)
Замечательный этюд.