|Page: [Previous] [Next] 1 2 |
|(1) Posted by Diyan Kostadinov [Sunday, Apr 29, 2018 04:46]; edited by Diyan Kostadinov [18-04-29]|
KoBulChess Helpmates in 2 moves 2017 Award
Hi. Here is the award of KoBulChess Helpmates in 2 moves 2017
|(2) Posted by Abdelaziz Onkoud [Tuesday, May 1, 2018 02:04]; edited by Abdelaziz Onkoud [18-05-03]|
For The 1° Prize (17/12/2017)
See Abdelaziz ONKOUD
Composed 28 August 2017
Fédération Royale Marocaine des Echecs (3° FRME) 2017
2° Mention d'Honneur
(= 9+9 )
h‡2 (9+9) C+
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!
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‡
Judge : Vasil Kryzhanivski (03/10/2017 )
|(3) Posted by seetharaman kalyan [Wednesday, May 2, 2018 19:25]|
Ahead by a few months! Welldone Mr.Onkoud !
|(4) Posted by Harry Fougiaxis [Thursday, May 3, 2018 13:26]|
@ Seetharaman: Will there by an amendment of the award, as the problem is clearly anticipated?
Off-topic, I'm trying hard to understand the judge's comments about the Klasinc theme and shut-off switchbacks...
|(5) Posted by Miodrag Mladenović [Thursday, May 3, 2018 14:07]|
Well, Klasinc theme means that white on the first move opens black line piece and then plays switchback after black line piece passes through the opened square on the second move. The "shut-off" looks like sufficient attribute although it's not wrong. The "shut-off" has multiple meanings and one of the meaning is to close something. So white Knights are closing in the initial position bR and bQ. After opening them that do play switchback move. That's my understanding of this comment in the award.
|(6) Posted by Harry Fougiaxis [Thursday, May 3, 2018 14:28]; edited by Harry Fougiaxis [18-05-03]|
Well, I know quite well what Klasinc and shut-off means. The intention of my remark was that using these terms here is conceptually wrong. In the first pair of solutions, the departure effect of W1 moves is gate-opening. This is only half of what the Klasinc theme requires. The switchbacks in the W2 moves are not shut-offs (the 'closure' is only visual and that's why we need the plugs on c7 and h5), so there's no Klasinc.
|(7) Posted by Viktoras Paliulionis [Thursday, May 3, 2018 15:40]|
Klasinc theme definition:
A piece opens a gate for another line-piece of either colour and then returns to its initial square.
There is no "shut-off" on the last move, but line closing is not a requirement for this theme.
|(8) Posted by Miodrag Mladenović [Thursday, May 3, 2018 15:48]|
Where is the award of "Fédération Royale Marocaine des Echecs (3° FRME) 2017" published? Is there a link where we can see the full award? By the way the date when you composed the problem is irrelevant here. It's only important what is the date when this award is published. If the date when this award is published is after 17.12.2017 then I think the KoBulChess award should not be changed. So the only relevant dates are dates when problems become public to everyone (not to the director or tournament organizer). If award of "Fédération Royale Marocaine des Echecs (3° FRME) 2017" is published on 3.10.2017 then the KoBulChess award should be updated. But it's very strange that award of "Fédération Royale Marocaine des Echecs (3° FRME) 2017" is made so quickly. Based on your post you composed problem in August and award is completed in October. So it's less then two months and award is already published? Or am I missing something?
|(9) Posted by Miodrag Mladenović [Thursday, May 3, 2018 16:06]; edited by Miodrag Mladenović [18-05-03]|
You listed as two tries:
1.T×f3 C×f5? 2.Té3 C5d4? 3.Rxd4!
1.D×d4 C×é5? 2.Td3 Céf3? 3.Rxf3!
In my opinion if we accept them as tries than any combination of moves that does not lead to solution is try. This is wrong. How can 1.Dxd4? to be a try? It does not abandon guarding of line e6-e4 at all? This is very weak try. Honestly this problem is an excellent problem but tries are not worthy of mentioning at all. They do not add any value to this problem. The better try is 1.Dd6 Sxe5? 2.Td3 Sef3? 3.Dxe6, De5! . By the way in your second try black defends checkmate even with 3.De5!
|(10) Posted by Miodrag Mladenović [Thursday, May 3, 2018 16:17]; edited by Miodrag Mladenović [18-05-03]|
I just found out that deadline for 3rd Tourney FRME 2017 was 30.9.2017. Per Onkoud's post (2) the award is made on 3.10.2017. How it's possible that tournament director made award for 3 days? Or is that a date when he got the problems? If that's the 3rd FRME 2017 award should be updated and not the KoBulChess award. Unless the award of 3rd FRME 2017 is published before 17.12.2017. Very interesting situation.
And this raise a question? Should we introduce something like registration of problems composed for thematic tournaments so that the problems do not become anticipated by some problems published later on but before award is made?
|(11) Posted by Vitaly Medintsev [Thursday, May 3, 2018 16:43]|
It is obvious that 03/10/2017 is the date of receiving entries by the judge I'v understood this after reading Russian version of the award.
I'v found the award in my mailbox.
A message from Jamal Elbaz dated 14/11/2017 with attached file "awardh2Frme3.pdf". A mailing list includes around 40 recipients.
Should we consider the date 14/11/2017 as publication date?
|(12) Posted by Rajendiran Raju [Thursday, May 3, 2018 16:57]; edited by Rajendiran Raju [18-05-03]|
Following is the FRME 3 - 2017 announcement pdf link , mentioned last date for entry is 30-09-2017
Below one is More Mover award.
#3 award also existed in super problem but it seems link is not working.
Our master CGSN zabunov theme #3 got 4th Place !
Searching for h# award ..but onkoud website also not working.
( Thanks Onkoud for the link : frme.cf )
|(13) Posted by Abdelaziz Onkoud [Thursday, May 3, 2018 17:21]|
|(14) Posted by Nikola Predrag [Thursday, May 3, 2018 17:26]|
Misha, the purpose of these tries is to clearly illustrate the thematic features of the position, showing the need for precise adjustment of the general strategy. Of course, the last try has a mistake which makes the idea unclear (1.D×d4 C×é5? 2.Dd3!? etc).
Set-play just shows the need for hiding bQ/bR and the tries show that double function, hide and (changed) self-blocks on e3/d3 by the same piece, would fail because 1.Rxf3/Qxd4 remove a relevant white flight-guard. However, another plan may compensate for these captures.
So, both flights will be blocked by both bQ&bR and the hiding will be pure.
Klasinc theme is not convincing, seeing merely the solutions, since W1 accidentally open the gates while mainly motivated for battery-creation.
But it's exactly the virtual play that completes the idea. (bQ must arrive to e3 INSTEAD of bR in order to save wSf3, and that requires the gate-opening. It's reciprocal about d3)
However, there's a great lie about the pinning functions of wR/wB, as bPs e5&f5 would prove it.
|(15) Posted by Dmitri Turevski [Thursday, May 3, 2018 18:27]|
It's only important what is the date when this award is published.
This is not true for formal tourneys. See Codex VI.22.2.b
The priority date of a chess composition is
(a) the actual date of its first publication , or
(b) if it is first published in the award of a formal tournament, the closing date of that tournament.
|(16) Posted by Miodrag Mladenović [Thursday, May 3, 2018 18:48]; edited by Miodrag Mladenović [18-05-03]|
OK, than I am wrong. However this rule is in my opinion very bad and leads to several issues. I remember several formal tournaments where there was one deadline but then later on the deadline is extended because there were no enough good entries. What is the valid date in this scenario. Let' assume that original closing date was 1.6.2017 but then the tournament director decided to extend this date for a month of two. So what is now the priority day for problem?
Also this gives advantage to the problems of formal tournaments. I sent my original problem for "The Problemist" in March and due to waiting line my problem will be published in the September issue (6 months later). Now if there is a closing date of some formal tournament on 1.8.2018 and now if someone compose the same problem in July and send it to this formal tournament his problem will have a higher priority than mine? It does not make any sense to me. But it's good to know this rule.
|(17) Posted by Rajendiran Raju [Thursday, May 3, 2018 18:55]|
Already our relevant composers take it as sportive and skipped to next subject.
Message by :
It is unfortunate that our problem is totally anticipated by A Onkoud. Please see the dates , His was published in October & ours in December.
Dr. Manikumar, it is a great disappointment especially for you. Sorry. But I am sure, you will win many top awards in future.
It is an unfortunate coincidence.
|(18) Posted by Rajendiran Raju [Thursday, May 3, 2018 18:59]|
We wonder how it escaped from all eyes before the award ?!
|(19) Posted by seetharaman kalyan [Thursday, May 3, 2018 19:04]|
@Harry. Yes the first prize is clearly anticipated. The award will be revised.
@Misha. 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.
@Raju. It is not always possible for the judge, the tournament director or the editor to find out the anticipations, especially when the dates are close like in this case. That is why the awards are published as preliminary and finalised after a reasonable time.
|(20) Posted by Rajendiran Raju [Thursday, May 3, 2018 19:08]|
Well Said KSR Sir !
|Page: [Previous] [Next] 1 2 |
MatPlus.Net Forum Competitions KoBulChess Helpmates in 2 moves 2017 Award