Can you solve this Mate in 2?

Here is a puzzle I recently composed. Hope you like it! White to move and Mate in 2.

How are you creating so fast puzzles?

I have time

Very pretty!  A modern twomover indeed.

Thanks!

Nice puzzle

how does this make sense

why is there a pawn at A2

@fridgeman41 Thanks

@hitmanbang what doesn't make sense

That's there to so there is only one way to checkmate after Qxc1? Bf6?. I suppose it is unnecessary 

As RewanDemontay said you are moving in the direction of professional twomovers! The standards are high though. After 1. Qe7! f6 white has 2 checkmate moves. Both are nice and thematic but having them together is overkill. So you've got to chose and adapt the problem accordingly!

Btw, same after 1. Qe7 f5; two different checkmates.

How did I miss that! I'll try to fix it.

I think I've got a solution. While after Qxc1 f6 doesn't counter it anymore, black has a different refutation Kf6!

Good Grimshaw on f6 (mutual interference between a1-B and f7-P) after the key 1.Qe7! 1...f6 2.Qxg7 and 1...Bf6 2.Qe4. The R on a7 is there for the try 1.Qxc1? 1...f6 2.Raxg7 and 1...Bf6 2.Qb1/Qc2, showing changed mates compared with the post-key play. However, if you want 1.Qxc1? to be a thematic try, you have to (1) add the BP back on a2 to stop the dual and (2) make the try-move a non-capture (a piece-capture is too aggressive as the key or a try in compositions).

A more advanced idea for improving the construction is to do without the uneconomical a7-R, which is useless after the key. Aim to use the h7-R for the mate on g7 after the try. It happens that after 1.Qc1? the Q would be guarding h6 if not for the g5-P, and that's perfect for releasing the h7-R to mate on g7.

Nice puzzle!

I have figured out the correct answer: no.

Thanks for the comments! @Rocky64, I put the g5 pawn there so to prevent Qf4. I think I would have to place a white or black piece on d6 to prevent Qf4 if the g-pawn was not there. Also, I agree with you comment on the a7 rook. So far, I've gotten this:

While this makes Qc1 a good try only defeated by f6! and the rook on a7 is gone, Qd8 is now a capture.

What was I even trying to say with that post? Your version obviously works, and might be even better [Edit: Your version is definitely better. Thanks ]

Well done! Now we have proper try play, 1.Qc1? 1...f6 2.Rxg7 and 1...Bf6 2.Qb1, while the key 1.Qe7! gives 1...f6 2.Qxg7 and 1...Bf6 2.Qe4 – a changed Grimshaw. 

Since you managed to make that work so quickly, here's a much tougher challenge. In the initial position, the BK has a flight-move to f6. The key-move deprives the K of this flight, and that's considered unsubtle and a significant flaw. The try-move doesn't guard f6, though, so it would function better as the key instead. In fact, 1.Qc1 withdrawing from the BK would be a nicer and less obvious key anyway, in contrast to 1.Qe7 approaching the BK. So the challenge is to make 1.Qc1! the solution and 1.Qe7? defeated by one move only. This could be impossible to do, however!

Not sure you know about this blog by Rocky64: https://www.chess.com/blog/Rocky64/an-introduction-to-composed-chess-problems with lots of examples of twomovers.

There are still many ways to build on your current composition if you'd wish to. To mention but one, the black king has a flight square on f6 in the diagram which is taken away by your key move. It is considered a composition "flaw" when a key move takes away more flight squares from the king than it gives to him. If you'd succeed in implementing Rocky's suggestion to turn Qc1! into the key move, that issue would be automatically resolved! Btw I once scored a prize with a 3-mover that took a flight square on the key, so it's not an absolute law!