Black threatens 27... Qa3.

The passive 27.Qe3 seems to end up in an inferior ending after 27... Qa3 28.Qc1 Qxc1+ 29.Kxc1 Rxc4 30.Bxd6 Rd7.

I was looking at 25.Qc1 <25...Bg5> 26.f4 Rb8+ 27.Bb3 Rxb3+ 28.cxb3 Qb6

White to play (27.?) "Insane"

I think this one really earns the label "insane". Even though White is up a piece for two pawns and attacks the Rh4, Black threatens ...Qa3 and ...Qb2#. So 27. Bxh4?? Qa3 leaves White without an adequate reply, as does 27. Bxd6 Qa3 (there is nothing after 28. Qxe7+ Rxe7 29. Rxe7+ Kd8, and even after 28. Bb5+ Kf8! 29. Bxe7+ Kg8 White runs out of gas). After extensive study (longer than I would have in a game with my clock ticking), I found a move which seems to work.

27. Bxa6!

This move is very counter-intuitive, as it opens up the a-file for Black's a7 rook. If White's Ba6 is now cleared away somehow, Black will have ...Qa1#. But the bishop is immune, since the Ra7 must guard against Qxe7# and if 27...Qxa6 28. Qxa6 Rxa6 29. Bxh4 wins. Also, if 27...Qa3 28. Qb5+ Rd7 (or 28...Kd8 29. Qb8+ Kd7 30. Bb5#, or 28...Kf8 29. Qb8+ mates) 29. Qb8+ Rd8 30. Bb5+ Kf8 31. Qxd8+ Bxd8 32. Re8#. In addition, White threatens 28. Qb5+ trading queens, so moving the Rh4 can be ruled out for Black. Black's only hope is to keep the threat of ...Qa3 and ...Qb2# alive.

27...Kd8

If 27...Kf8 28. Qb5! Qxb5 (or 28...Qa3 28. Qb8+ Bd8 29. Qxd8#) 29. Bxb5 Rh5 (not 29...Rd4? 30. Bf2! with a skewer) 30. Bxd6! (seeing 30...Bxd6 31. Re8#) with a straightforward win for White.

28. Bxd6! Qa3

Might as well go for broke, since 28...Bxd6 29. Qe8+ Kc7 30. Qc6+ mates, and if 28...Qxa6 29. Qxa6 Rxa6 30. Bxe7+ leaves White with a simple win.

29. Bxe7+ Kc7 30. d6+ Kb8 (or 30...Kd7 31. Qb5#) 31. Qb5+ Ka8 32. Qe8#.

As <morfishine> observed, many solvers (probably most) found the first of the dual solutions, (1) 27. Bxa6! rather than (2) 27. Bf4!; a few even found both. But there are also a few of us who found only the latter.

I don't know if this is true of anyone else, but I never even glanced at (1). I saw the urgency of combining two functions in one move — to prevent Black's mate threat on b2, and to get through first with an attack on Black's uncastled king. From this flowed the deflection/enticement of solution (2), and once that idea appeared, I stopped looking for others.

What the source of this difference in approaches may be, I can only conjecture. Perhaps it's a matter of pragmatism for solvers more accustomed to practical play than to artistic problems. Perhaps it's simple laziness. Perhaps, on the other hand, it's a legacy of traditional problems in which the key move was *never* a check or a capture. Or perhaps it's something that hasn't occurred to me yet. ;-)

The crowning irony is, once I saw references to (1) and actually looked at it, I saw quickly that it worked as well as the solution I did find. I even saw the queen sac on d8, followed by Re8#. It is in some ways the more aesthetically pleasing solution. But whatever its merits, I was blinded to them as well as to the mere existence of a solution containing them as soon as I saw the scintillating 27. Bf4!

posterity does not mention whether Nunn saw both moves or whether Bxa6 was an afterthought in post mortem.

<What the source of this difference in approaches may be matter of pragmatism for solvers more accustomed to practical play than to artistic problems. >

I believe if one capable to find the first solution, he also CAPABLE to find the another one. Just how big your willing to spend the time for the solutions. Its like if you are good driving a truck, you also good driving a limo or something else. Doesnt mean you need to feel how to drive the both vehicles to make sure you are capable.

And if you want to be a good solver, the topmost thing is the STUDY. Not the PLAYING. If you want to be a good player who beat almost your opponents so the answer is STUDY and PLAYING.

Apparently you know not only chess, but everything about me, far better than I; else you couldn't offer such useful advice about STUDY and PLAYING and their relative worth, and how I might benefit from driving both a truck *and* a limousine — apparently simultaneously.

Let me explain something to you seriously: That I *did* not find the second solution does not imply that I *can* not. As in a real game, one need find only one solution to a puzzle. If one wishes to continue looking after doing so, one certainly may, but it is not required.

I'm not sure what your rating is (or was when you were active, as the case may be), but mine was just over 2200: not strong compared to a GM, but certainly not weak. I got there through both study and play, but especially the latter; a lot of games against masters and IMs will add up, over time, to a clearer sight of the board.

Sorry to say this im more than you at least 300 points.

You, sir, are not the only one. The constant overweening patronisation by this poster proves your point beyond doubt in my mind.

<....Your kibitzes are not those of a 2500 player, so if you ever were one, you must be as rusty as a barge resting at the bottom of a canal for a century.>

Seems to me there is a quote to the effect that only a strong player knows how weak he truly is. This particular kibitzer appears obsessed with proclaiming his superior understanding in broad terms while simultaneously issuing remarks denigrating others' insights.

There are a fair number of kibitzers on CG in your classification as a player, and I would venture to say that all of them would be more than capable of discerning who, as between you and the <Conquering Hero>, has understanding and who lacks same.

Most certainly there is no question which of the two of you treats others with respect and which does not.

BTW: Funny comment about the rusting barge

To remain objective, he raises a good point, the differences between solving and playing. For me, its been a painful process over the past 2-years to improve my solving ability since I've primarily been a player. I've found by trying to improve at both, the effort will compliment each area. So, by working on one's solving skills, one becomes a better player and vice versa.

As for this problem, I need to address an inaccuracy in my post, namely my assertion: <27...Rh8 Forced>...'Practically Forced' would've been more accurate (after all, Black played <27...b3>)

Also inaccurate was my statement <Black has no other way to counter an invasion at <h8> starting with 28.Rh1> since if after 27...Rh8 28.Rh1 Black can play 28...Rxh1 29.Rxh1 <29...Kd7> and here, Black is lost, though he can struggle for awhile:

click for larger view

Which brings me to my last inaccurate statement
<28...Rf8 A sad concession> since per the above, Black can play 28...Rxh1

That's why I prefer to know my opponent's rating after the game, not before.

Same with myself. I don't reveal until the game ends.