MatPlus.Net

 Website founded by
Milan Velimirović
in 2006

18:20 UTC
ISC 2024
 
  Forum*
 
 
 
 

Username:

Password:

Remember me

 
Forgot your
password?
Click here!
SIGN IN
to create your account if you don't already have one.
CHESS
SOLVING

Tournaments
Rating lists
1-Jan-2024

B P C F





 
 
MatPlus.Net Forum Competitions 2nd FIDE World Cup in Composing 2011
 
You can only view this page!
Page: [Previous] [Next] 1 2
(1) Posted by Andrey Selivanov [Saturday, Feb 5, 2011 23:41]

2nd FIDE World Cup in Composing 2011


http://www.sci.fi/~stniekat/pccc/fidewcc_11.htm
 
(Read Only)pid=6696
(2) Posted by Andrey Selivanov [Tuesday, Jun 21, 2011 12:57]

Preliminary result:
studies - http://www.selivanov.ru/download/Awards/2011/2WCUPENDGAMES.pdf;
selfmates- http://www.selivanov.ru/download/Awards/2011/2WCUPSELFMATES.pdf
 
 
(Read Only)pid=7025
(3) Posted by Juraj Lörinc [Tuesday, Jun 21, 2011 20:40]

The position of the 1st Prize in s# section seems wrong as 1.Bd6! is clearly illegal move.
 
   
(Read Only)pid=7026
(4) Posted by Bojan Basic [Tuesday, Jun 21, 2011 21:01]

@Juraj: The first move should be 1.Bb6!
 
   
(Read Only)pid=7027
(5) Posted by Juraj Lörinc [Tuesday, Jun 21, 2011 22:17]

Well, that makes sense - position is ok, only solution is wrong, thank you, Bojan.
 
   
(Read Only)pid=7028
(6) Posted by seetharaman kalyan [Wednesday, Jun 22, 2011 16:01]; edited by seetharaman kalyan [11-06-22]

Congratulations to Mr.Selivanov on winning the Selfmate section. What an astounding problem !!
 
   
(Read Only)pid=7029
(7) Posted by Andrey Selivanov [Wednesday, Jun 22, 2011 22:05]

Thank you Mr.Kalyan for congratulations!
 
   
(Read Only)pid=7030
(8) Posted by Kevin Begley [Thursday, Jun 23, 2011 00:19]

Yeah, I'll second that -- congratulations for a wonderful problem!
 
   
(Read Only)pid=7031
(9) Posted by Sarah Hornecker [Thursday, Jun 23, 2011 07:54]

I also second that. It shows a double AUW! Phantastic!
 
   
(Read Only)pid=7032
(10) Posted by Yochanan Afek [Friday, Jun 24, 2011 01:17]

Indeed a great problem! I wish I could praise the studies section too...
 
   
(Read Only)pid=7033
(11) Posted by Andrey Selivanov [Sunday, Jun 26, 2011 02:08]

Preliminary result:
Fairies - http://www.selivanov.ru/download/Awards/2011/2WCUPFAIRIES.pdf
Retros - http://www.selivanov.ru/download/Awards/2011/2WCUPRETROS.pdf
 
 
(Read Only)pid=7034
(12) Posted by Andrey Selivanov [Thursday, Jun 30, 2011 21:09]

Section threemovers - http://www.selivanov.ru/download/Awards/2011/2WCUP3.pdf
Section moremovers - http://www.selivanov.ru/download/Awards/2011/2WCUPN.pdf
 
 
(Read Only)pid=7037
(13) Posted by Andrey Selivanov [Thursday, Jul 14, 2011 07:45]; edited by Andrey Selivanov [11-07-14]

Section helpmates - http://www.selivanov.ru/download/Awards/2011/2WCUPH.pdf
Section twomovers - http://www.selivanov.ru/download/Awards/2011/2WCUP2.pdf
 
   
(Read Only)pid=7067
(14) Posted by Juraj Lörinc [Thursday, Jul 14, 2011 11:57]

In helpmate award, is it just me (and my eyes) or does anybody see a lack of analogy in the 4th Prize?

I could live with the fact that in the 1st solution R interferes with Q and S with R, in the 2nd solution S interferes with both B and R - let's call it variety.

But the claim of reciprocal changes of functions Q-B and R-R seems to be a bit strong in this setting, when the pieces are moving:
- Rc3 moves to interfere with Q and to be interfered with by S
- Re6 moves to hide away and to be interfered with by S
- Qg3 moves to hide away and to be interfered with by R
- Bg4 moves to shield wK from Re1 and to be by interfered with by S
Especially B function on the 1st rank is clearly unmatched in the other solution.

Or am I too puristic?

Overall, I do not question the placement, rather the commentary.
 
   
(Read Only)pid=7069
(15) Posted by Michael McDowell [Thursday, Jul 14, 2011 18:22]

I agree with your comments Juraj.

I also don't see complete harmony between the solutions of the 1st prizewinner, as Be7 vacates a square for the king while Bd4 crosses over the square the king moves to.
 
   
(Read Only)pid=7070
(16) Posted by Kevin Begley [Thursday, Jul 14, 2011 21:24]; edited by Kevin Begley [11-07-14]

It is clearly apparent that you are correct, Juraj.
But, I just wouldn't be myself if I couldn't take exception with one small matter...

You say the overall ranking is fair, but, to my eyes (here in the "World Cup" of all places!), the published ranking is not entirely real.
Between the 5th Prize, and the 1st Honorable Mention, I find lurking the notorious: "Special Prize" <insert theme from Beethoven's 5th>.
While I may well understand the reasoning behind stamping a non-numeric ordinal value onto this problem -- I humbly submit, it would be better to replace this with an imaginary numeric ordinal (e.g., "√(-1) Prize") -- I lack the comparative operators to clearly identify the winner.

Have these judges failed to squarely fulfill their responsibility?
Perhaps, but their task (to quantify art) is often beyond the challenges of The $100 Theme.
 
 
(Read Only)pid=7071
(17) Posted by Nikola Predrag [Wednesday, Jul 20, 2011 18:21]

Analogy and harmony may get practical meaning after the complete analysis of the essence of things, not earlier, otherwise they might be misleading. The essence of a chess problem is some principle realised through an adequate chess-mechanism.
Intentionally or not, there is a variety of the principle in the mentioned 4th prize. 2 critical squares-c7/c6 in one and a single-e2 in the other phase, cause the malfunction of the thematic mechanism, so the outside 'corrector' is necessary. It is wK at the 1st rank - wKa2 with additional bSc8 clearly show the weakness of thematic mechanism. wKa1 is a constructional technicality for the avoidance of cooks and duals but DOES NOT enable the solution. It is not thematic, it is a MINOR VARIETY in the reciprocity of bQ/bB. bRc7 DOES enable the solution, it belongs to the thematic mechanism and this is a MAJOR VARIETY in the reciprocity of black Rooks. Inadequate mechanism is the crucial flaw and the cause of everything else. It reveals that the variety in the principle was probably not the author's intention but rather a difficult choice of a lame mechanism with a nice-looking solution, instead of a perfect mechanism for a firm governing principle with a tainted solution.

(= 6+16 )
h#3; b)Sd4->g5
a)1.Qb8 Bxc8 2.Rc7 Bxe6 3.Sc6 Rxa3# b)1.Bd1 Rxa3 2.Re2 Rxc3 3.Se4 Bxc8#
 
   
(Read Only)pid=7079
(18) Posted by Andrey Selivanov [Thursday, Aug 4, 2011 06:42]

Final awards in all sections- www.selivanov.ru
 
 
(Read Only)pid=7121
(19) Posted by Vitaly Medintsev [Saturday, Aug 6, 2011 21:52]; edited by Vitaly Medintsev [11-08-06]

My first version was the following:
(= 4+15 )

h # 3 b) Sd4 -> d2 (4+15)
a)1.Qb8 Bc8 2.Rc7 Bxe6 3.Sdc6 Rxa3# b)1.Rb4 Rxa3 2.Bc4 Rxc3 3.Sd5 Bc8#
but I have preferred the other version with multi-solution form...
 
   
(Read Only)pid=7122
(20) Posted by Nikola Predrag [Sunday, Aug 7, 2011 00:47]

Thanks Vitaly, I was pretty sure that you have had some version like this one. I can only guess that personally I would perhaps prefere this twin-version but it always depends on many things in the particular moment of a decision. Anyway, I congratulate.
 
   
(Read Only)pid=7123

Read more...
Page: [Previous] [Next] 1 2

MatPlus.Net Forum Competitions 2nd FIDE World Cup in Composing 2011