MatPlus.Net

 Website founded by
Milan Velimirović
in 2006

9:02 CET
 
  Forum*
 
 
 
 

Username:

Password:

Remember me

 
Forgot your
password?
Click here!
SIGN IN
to create your account if you don't already have one.
Rating List
1st October
2018

B P C F





 
 
MatPlus.Net Forum Competitions KoBulChess Helpmates in 2 moves 2017 Award
 
You can only view this page!
Page: [Previous] [Next] 1 2
(21) Posted by Abdelaziz Onkoud [Thursday, May 3, 2018 19:43]; edited by Abdelaziz Onkoud [18-05-03]

@ Miodrag ( désolé mais ma réponse sera en Français)

J'ai composé cette idée le 27 Aout.
Deux jours après , j'ai proposé ce problème à Michel Caillaud pour résolution le 29 aout au café Commerce à Paris ( Réunion des compositeurs de la région Parisienne).
J'ai dit à Michel que c'est l'un de mes meilleurs problèmes tellement j'étais content de la matrice.

Pour l'écriture. Elle a une véritable histoire.
Je montre souvent des problèmes à ma fille aînée Houda.
Je procède ainsi... au lieu de lui montrer la solution ou de lui demander de trouver la solution.
Je lui propose des questions à qui elle doit trouver des réponses.
Les réponses vont l'amener logiquement à la solution.
Et surtout à comprendre et apprécier l'idée tout en ayant une part même s'il elle est minime dans la recherche de l'idée.
Je l'invite à trouver seulement un coup.
C'est une écriture qui est destinée aux néophytes telle ma fille et non pour les experts.

L'écriture a glissé lors de l'envoi des problèmes en septembre..et je l'ai gardé....

1…C×f5 2.Dé3 C5d4 3.Txg6! - Réponse : 1.Th3 !!
1…C×é5 2.Td3 Céf3 3.Dxe5! - Réponse : 1.Db6 !!
1.T×f3 C×f5? 2.Té3 C5d4? 3.Rxd4! - Réponse : 1...Td6 !!
1.D×d4 C×é5? 2.Dd3 Céf3? 3.Rxf3! - Réponse : 1...Fh5 !!

1.Th3!! C×f5 2.Dé3 C5d4‡
1.Db6!! C×é5 2.Td3 Céf3‡
1.T×f3 Td6!! 2.Té3 F×f5‡
1.D×d4 Fh5!! 2.Dd3 T×é5‡
 
 
(Read Only)pid=16576
(22) Posted by Miodrag Mladenović [Thursday, May 3, 2018 20:21]

seetharaman wrote:
 QUOTE 
Yes this rule (regarding priority date) is sometimes unfair to composers to who composed earlier than the closing date of formal tourneys, but publication in magazines was delayed. Is there a better alternative. I cant think of any.


I do believe that there is a better alternative. There should be some service created for registration of new problems. So then composers should register their problems using this online service as soon as they compose some problem. Then later on priority date should be a date when problem is registered. This would require some programs to be developed but that would be the best solution. With a current rules you are either favoring formal or informal tournaments. At the moment it looks like formal tournaments are favored.
 
   
(Read Only)pid=16577
(23) Posted by Miodrag Mladenović [Thursday, May 3, 2018 20:24]

@Abdelaziz

Sorry but I do no not speak French. But it looks to me that you wrote incorrectly try again. As Nikola stated the try should be 1.Dxd4 Sxe5 2.Dd3 (not 2.Td3) Sf3 3.Rxf3.
 
   
(Read Only)pid=16578
(24) Posted by Dmitri Turevski [Thursday, May 3, 2018 21:45]

@Miodrag

 QUOTE 
This would require some programs to be developed but that would be the best solution.


Actually no special software is needed. The technology is called DKIM (and I believe I have already explained it some time before at matplus forum).
It is enough simply to send an email with the problem to yourself via a trusted email server (e.g. gmail.com).
Gmail will add a digital signature to the message using the google's *private* encryption keys. If later there is an issue with the priority, the full received email may be published and anyone may check the signature online by using google's *public* keys (eg here: www.appmaildev.com/en/dkimfile).
If the signature is correct that would mean that either:
- Publisher has hacked the google private key repository
- Or the email contents (notably sender, date and body) were never tampered with.
 
   
(Read Only)pid=16579
(25) Posted by Abdelaziz Onkoud [Thursday, May 3, 2018 21:58]

Thanks Miodrag. Now corrected.
1…C×f5 2.Dé3 C5d4 3.Txg6!
1…C×é5 2.Td3 Céf3 3.Dxe5!
1.T×f3 C×f5? 2.Té3 C5d4? 3.Rxd4!
1.D×d4 C×é5? 2.Dd3 Céf3? 3.Rxf3!
 
   
(Read Only)pid=16580
(26) Posted by Miodrag Mladenović [Friday, May 4, 2018 09:34]

@Dmitri,

DKIM looks like excellent solution for this. I think that you should submit proposal for this in Ohrid. It looks like very easy solution to resolve the issue of priority. I know that there are still composers who do not use emails (some older problemists) but they can always ask someone for favor to register problem for them.
 
   
(Read Only)pid=16581
(27) Posted by Hauke Reddmann [Friday, May 4, 2018 11:25]

Further advantage: The problems could easily be collected
for inclusion in databases.
Also, it often happens that a problem is composed and then
first hangs off a bit (the composer still isn't satisfied
with the form, the editor rejected it, etc.), and effectively
this way you get priority nearly as soon as the position
pops up on your construction board. (Very relevant for
formal tourneys, where often alike positions are found.)

Personally, I couldn't care less if someone anticipated me -
no hard feelings, I'm a scientist by heart :-)
 
   
(Read Only)pid=16582
(28) Posted by Rajendiran Raju [Friday, May 4, 2018 14:05]

After final award, if anticipation found , then ?
 
   
(Read Only)pid=16583
(29) Posted by Francesco Simoni [Friday, May 4, 2018 16:41]; edited by Francesco Simoni [18-05-04]

Se6 and Bf6 can be replaced by pawns, as the authors themselves recognized in the problem comments.
The same drawback also in the problem by Abdelaziz.
 
   
(Read Only)pid=16584
(30) Posted by Abdelaziz Onkoud [Friday, May 4, 2018 17:11]; edited by Abdelaziz Onkoud [18-05-04]

@ Francesco

Ça serait une grave erreur de remplacer le couple Ff5/Ce5 par deux pions...on n'aura pas de mats par clouage. Du coup à chaque fois l'un du couple Te6/Fg6 est inutile.

Je suis aussi triste pour la presence du Ca8...soit disant pour économiser deux pions (encore deux pions )..il noircit le décor.
 
   
(Read Only)pid=16585
(31) Posted by Francesco Simoni [Friday, May 4, 2018 17:23]; edited by Francesco Simoni [18-05-04]

Yes, of course. I agree that the problem is more beautiful with B and S.
 
   
(Read Only)pid=16586
(32) Posted by Nikola Predrag [Friday, May 4, 2018 18:06]

Hm...
It makes a lot of sense to put bPs on e5&f5 because bS&bB are doing absolutely nothing for the play, except trying to hide the truth that wR/wB are actually useless in one phase each. Thus, the economy suffers double expenses, for both black and white officers that only pretend to justify each other's existence.
It'a a kind of 'racket'.
 
   
(Read Only)pid=16587
(33) Posted by Vlaicu Crisan [Friday, May 4, 2018 19:03]

This is another case of the so-called fictitious strategy.
As composer, I feel a lot of empathy for those two line closing weasels (cf. Chris Feather).
 
 
(Read Only)pid=16588
(34) Posted by Francesco Simoni [Saturday, May 5, 2018 08:38]

I agree. Nevertheless, I believe that in this case the presence of B and S can be tolerated, although static pins does not have much value.
 
   
(Read Only)pid=16589
(35) Posted by Abdelaziz Onkoud [Saturday, May 5, 2018 13:32]; edited by Abdelaziz Onkoud [18-05-06]

@ Nikola , Vlaicu & Francesco .
Commentaires 32,33 & 34.
Je ne comprends pas pourquoi on insiste sur la fonction du couple Ff5/Ce5 alors que la stratégie noire est fondée entièrement sur le couple Dc5/Tg3 qui jouent l'intégralité des coups noirs (100%) (Th3,Td3,Tf3,Te3/De3,Db6,Dd4,Dd3). C'est cela l'idée du problème ( occultée et mise de coté) .
On met une pleine lumière sur la fonction du couple Ff5/Ce5 qui ne joue aucun coup...000% et pourtant , faute de mieux , je leur ai trouvé une fonction qui est évidement passive. Ce n'était pas leur jour.
Au départ , les rôles ont été distribués … La fonction du couple Ff5/Ce5 devrait être passive et surtout, elle devrait justifier une partie de la stratégie blanche. Heureusement.
Sinon tout tombe à l'eau. Et ce n'est pas une 'Racket'....c'est mon idée qui est un sujet de 'Racket' ou pas .
La présence du couple Ff5/Ce5 est une aubaine pour l'idée et non une faiblesse.
Le couple Dc5/Tg3 ,qui était destiné à vampiriser intégralement le jeu noir, n'a laissé aucune place au couple Ff5/Ce5.
D'une autre part , le quadruplé Te6/Ff5/Cd4/Cf3 se partage équitablement le jeu blanc (25% chacun).
 
 
(Read Only)pid=16590
(36) Posted by Vitaly Medintsev [Monday, Sep 17, 2018 11:01]

@ Seetharaman (post 19)

I still se no changes in the award on the web page http://kobulchess.com/en/tournaments/awards/1195-kobulchess-helpmates-2-award-2017.html
 
   
(Read Only)pid=16839
(37) Posted by seetharaman kalyan [Monday, Sep 17, 2018 17:44]

A revised award is awaiting publication. I am in touch with Diyan. It seems he had not received it.
 
   
(Read Only)pid=16841
(38) Posted by Vitaly Medintsev [Monday, Sep 17, 2018 20:09]

Ok.
I hope new award will be published before the deadline in FA 2016-18 submission :-)
 
   
(Read Only)pid=16842
(39) Posted by Diyan Kostadinov [Tuesday, Oct 23, 2018 15:46]

The award is updated and final now. Thanks to all!
http://kobulchess.com/en/tournaments/awards/1195-kobulchess-helpmates-2-award-2017.html
 
 
(Read Only)pid=16862

No more posts
Page: [Previous] [Next] 1 2

MatPlus.Net Forum Competitions KoBulChess Helpmates in 2 moves 2017 Award