MatPlus.Net

 Website founded by
Milan Velimirović
in 2006

7:35 CET
 
  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
01-Oct-2019

B P C F





 
 
MatPlus.Net Forum Competitions Quick Composing TT-143 (r#3) C. 30-06-2015
 
You can only view this page!
(1) Posted by Aleksey Oganesjan [Friday, May 22, 2015 10:47]

Quick Composing TT-143 (r#3) C. 30-06-2015


Editorial board of international web project "SuperProblem" (http://superproblem.ru/index-en.html) announces a quick composing thematic tourney for reflexmates in three moves.

Awards will be published on the website http://superproblem.ru

View the announcement on the link http://superproblem.ucoz.ru/blog/2015-05-21-92#02
 
(Read Only)pid=13447
(2) Posted by Evgeni Bourd [Friday, May 22, 2015 20:05]

Misha went crazy with the theme :)
 
 
(Read Only)pid=13448
(3) Posted by seetharaman kalyan [Friday, May 22, 2015 22:12]

Rehm's problem is also terrific.
 
   
(Read Only)pid=13449
(4) Posted by Evgeni Bourd [Saturday, May 23, 2015 00:19]

All example problems are crazy good ( probably 10+ album points ), what i meant is that the theme is very very very (x10) hard...
 
   
(Read Only)pid=13450
(5) Posted by seetharaman kalyan [Saturday, May 23, 2015 06:32]

You are right. It is a tough theme... not for everyone.
 
   
(Read Only)pid=13451
(6) Posted by Miodrag Mladenović [Saturday, May 23, 2015 22:13]

Well, theme is little bit harder I agree. However since I know only four problems showing this theme I expect that there is a plenty of space for new ideas. I think that any problem showing this theme will be very good problem and will be nice to publish. I hope some new great problems will be composed.
 
   
(Read Only)pid=13452
(7) Posted by Marcel Tribowski [Sunday, May 24, 2015 14:19]

Excellent problems indeed, but the first two examples [Kc1-Kd5; Kh2-Kc6] confuse me.
In my humble opinion, thematic tries "with a short threat" require non-checking introductions.
 
   
(Read Only)pid=13453
(8) Posted by Nikola Predrag [Sunday, May 24, 2015 16:59]

This "humble opinion" could be understood as that the problems are excellent but too trivial.
So, should we expect to see the same complexity with non-trivial introductions?
:-)
 
   
(Read Only)pid=13454
(9) Posted by Marcel Tribowski [Sunday, May 24, 2015 22:18]

I suppose these two examples have been chosen as thematical for this TT.
Which short threats in at least two thematic tries did I overlook there?
 
   
(Read Only)pid=13455
(10) Posted by Nikola Predrag [Sunday, May 24, 2015 23:09]

Hm, I missed the point. It's indeed dubious to consider 1...K~ 2.Rd8-d1! or 1...K~ 2.Qa8xf3! as the "threats".
Misha will obviously accept such threats (or perhaps not?).
 
 
(Read Only)pid=13456
(11) Posted by Miodrag Mladenović [Sunday, May 24, 2015 23:09]

@Marcel

Well, after the bK random moves there are threats by white. Perhaps it's not perfectly clear threat but for me it is. For example in my problem you could write try as:

1.b8R+? ~ 2.Qxf3 Sxf3# (the effect of this move is same as threat because bK is forced to move because of the check)
1...Kc7! 2.Sb5#

Similar is in other tries (both my and Rehms problems).
 
   
(Read Only)pid=13457
(12) Posted by Miodrag Mladenović [Sunday, May 24, 2015 23:14]

@Nikola

Yes, I will accept such threats. However if I was judging those four problems (let's assume they were composed for this tournament) I would ranked higher two problems without check tries (numbers 3. & 4.).
 
   
(Read Only)pid=13458
(13) Posted by Nikola Predrag [Sunday, May 24, 2015 23:26]

Thanks Misha, that's an important information about the criteria.
(It would be nice to know it for various tourneys with various judges.)
 
   
(Read Only)pid=13459
(14) Posted by Evgeni Bourd [Wednesday, Jul 15, 2015 01:02]

Plan to scare other composers from composing to the tourney worked ( muhahaha ).
Kidding aside...I am really happy the judge enjoyed the problems, I grew to like these reflex ideas/problems/motivations.
After a while you being to understand what is doable/not doable and how to control your pieces around both kings in a way that a problem could actually be finished. I was also hoping to create a problem showing three thematic variations but it turned out to be a difficult task and doing it in a non mechanical way might be just too hard for a short tourney.
I probably had a little luck as I had some experience composing some R#3 lately - I unsuccessfully tried to make a rice cycle for Peter Gvozdjak's tourney - but came close :)

Some comments on the remarks -

1st Prize - My "strange" decision to place the bishop on e8 instead of b7 was the following - I wanted a little more play on the top right side of the board ( only move is Qxf6 in that 'area'), somewhat dumb, I know, and probably not worth the additional pawn.
So I agree with the change.
The refutation to 1.Qe3? is missing from the solution, I guess a task for the solvers :)

2nd Prize -
This problem gave me some headaches, my initial goal was to create pawn double-step as the thematic moves.
That escalated quickly and got to positions like -
3R2n1/1P1N4/2b1p1pp/p1BkP1Pq/r2p2pr/b2Bp1K1/1p1QPP1R/3n4
1.f3?f4?Sf6? 1.b8=R!
The problem is correct but the position is illegal and very very very ( x10 ) messy so after a while I gave up on this 'not so easy' idea of pawn double step and went back to something more manageable.
Regarding the constructional remarks -
a) and b) are somewhat debatable but I tend to agree that this is better.
The most important improvement is c) which I somehow missed as I did not place the knight on c7, without that knight there the defenses 1...Bb4/Rb4 are not only closing the line but also act as self-blocks - 1...B/Rb4 2.Sf6+ Kxc5! ( only only Kxe5!) Se4#
A fact I was very unhappy to find in one of my 'finished' versions without Bc6.
So here again I accept all the constructional improvements.

3rd Prize -
This is also debatable but here as well I tend to accept your motivation. This is a little different as a dual is a dual, you don't want some random move in a two-mover to have a dual even if a mate is ready on piece random movement. But....a small dual is probably a good trade-off to having a close to idle queen

So - all in all I accept all the improvements :)
Good night!
 
   
(Read Only)pid=13543
(15) Posted by seetharaman kalyan [Wednesday, Jul 15, 2015 18:48]; edited by seetharaman kalyan [15-07-15]

Congrats to the runaway winner Evgeni... Very nice problems which must surely be in the FIDE Album. I only wish that the latest proposal to separate the "non-fairies" (R#, R=, =n, series movers etc.) from the Fairies section of the Album is accepted so that nice problems like these will be more prominently displayed.
 
   
(Read Only)pid=13544
(16) Posted by Miodrag Mladenović [Monday, Nov 2, 2015 19:31]; edited by Miodrag Mladenović [15-11-02]

@Evgeni,

Once again congratulation for producing three nice problems. The 1st Prize winner is amazing problem.

By the way you wrote:
 QUOTE 
I was also hoping to create a problem showing three thematic variations but it turned out to be a difficult task and doing it in a non mechanical way might be just too hard for a short tourney


I managed to compose one. It's just published on SuperProblem site (G017 original).
 
   
(Read Only)pid=13955
(17) Posted by Evgeni Bourd [Tuesday, Nov 3, 2015 13:14]

Excellent problem!
Very nice quiet play in a mechanism all over the board, well done.
Does not look mechanical at all, very natural and logical.
People should try to compose this theme in order to understand the difficulty of finding a worthy scheme to work on ( even for 2 variations )
 
 
(Read Only)pid=13960

No more posts


MatPlus.Net Forum Competitions Quick Composing TT-143 (r#3) C. 30-06-2015