Website founded by
Milan Velimirović
in 2006
0:12 UTC
| |
MatPlus.Net  Forum Competitions 11th FIDE World Cup |
| |
|
|
|
|
You can only view this page!
| | Page: [Previous] [Next] 1 2 | | (1) Posted by Juraj Lörinc [Saturday, Aug 5, 2023 12:53] | 11th FIDE World Cup
I just realized that anonymous presentation of 11th FIDE World Cup results gives us rather unique opportunity to comment on chess problems provided by authors as some their good output and evaluated by judges as prizeworthy. Of course, I know some of awarded problems, I will refrain from pointing at these, but I invite anyone to show appreciation (or, in the worst case, criticism) of still anonymous problem(s) from the awards that appear here: https://www.wfcc.ch/competitions/composing/fidewcc_2023/
Let me start.
- in the #3 section (B) the first prize will surely bring some discussion as capture of wQ screams flight d5, thereby motivating the key, also the evacuation sacrifices were quite fashionable in the past, but the open position and majestic play of wQ over all the board has my admiration
- also among #3 (B) the 1st Commendation with single active bR making a cross with correction and some dual avoidance thrown in is very much to my taste
- Prize in the retro section (H), proof game in 22 moves, contains fantastic manoeuvre by White (of course, combined with precisely timed Black play)
- the 3rd Prize in #n section (C) is a rich beast, #4 with threat and six variations, with 4 different quiet 2nd moves. I love initial diagrams where white and black forces are visually separated (as here except Pg3). Note that wQ does not make single move in the whole solution.
| | | (2) Posted by Kenan Velikhanov [Saturday, Aug 5, 2023 18:30] |
See the results of the competition "SOCHI-2014". The judge of the section #3 Valery Shavyrin, evaluated the four-phase problem of M. Marandyuk with the 4th prize. The judge in the comments indicates the smallness of the thematic options in the decision phase. There are only two of them. In the current competition, the 1st prize was given to a problem with two thematic options. And on the additional variation 1... Qd7 2. Qxd7 there are two threats at once, and there is no separating defense or neutral mate. And the game itself is rough, with the capture of a thematic piece.
| | | (3) Posted by Miodrag Mladenović [Sunday, Aug 6, 2023 09:23] |
@Kenan,
I must admit that I did not understand your post at all. What does SOCHI tournament has to do with a FIDE Cup. If you wanted to compare the 4th PR. winner of this tournament with the the (B) group winner then I think you should give the position that you'd like to compare.
About B problem winner:
This is one of the best threemovers I saw recently (and I saw many of them). Even if it's only one phase problem the two thematic variations are amazing. Great construction and in my opinion the perfect problem.
By the way this problem does deserve a diagram here:
B29 - 1st Pr.
 (= 10+10 )
#3
1.N2e3! > 2.Qd5+ Kxf4/Bxd5 3.Qxf6/Nd6#
1...Qh7 2.Qb8!! >/Kd3 3.Nd6/Qb1#
1...Qf7 2.Qd8!! >/Kxf4/Qxc4 3.Nd6/Qh4/Rxc4#
1...Qd7 2.Qxd7 3.Nd6/Qxf5#
| | | (4) Posted by seetharaman kalyan [Sunday, Aug 6, 2023 16:10] |
@Misha
And not to forget the excellent dual avoidance.
Kenan quoted Sochi problem to highlight the judge's comment that just two variations is the reason for lower prize.
| | | (5) Posted by Kenan Velikhanov [Sunday, Aug 6, 2023 16:49] |
КОНКУРС «СОЧИ-2014»
M. Marandyuk
4th prize
1B2K31p1R41p2kbRp2p2n1p3n42Pp2PQb5P11NrB2N
1. Rd6+? (C) Ke5! 1. Re7+? (D) Kd5! 1. Bf3? (A) -2. Re7# 1... Sxf3 2. Sxf3 (B) 3. Rd6# (C) 1... Sc6! (a)
1. Sf3? (B) 2. Rd6# 1... Sxf3 2. Bxf3 (A) 3. Re7# (D) 1... Sb5! (b)
1. Sd2! [2. Se4 ~ 3. Rxf6#]
1... Sc6 (a) 2. Rd6+ (C) 2... Ke5 3. Sf3# (B)
1... Sb5(b) 2. Re7+ (D) 2... Kd5 3. Bf3# (A)
This beautiful problem won the 4th prize. As we can see, the task is decorated with thematic phases with alternating moves. But the judge, referring to the smallness of the options, set the task below.
| | | (6) Posted by Kenan Velikhanov [Sunday, Aug 6, 2023 16:51] |
And the task from the World Cup consists of two options - this is not enough. In the end, this is not a moremove, and not a helpmate genre. 1... Qd7 2. Qxd7 [3. Qxf5, Sd6#]
2... Kxf4 3. Qxf5# In addition, in the additional version there is a dual. Two threats are created - Black has protection from one threat, but not from the second. There is also no neutral mat. The task is great, but the options are few. It's my opinion.
| | | (7) Posted by Miodrag Mladenović [Monday, Aug 7, 2023 08:39] |
@Kenan,
Now I understand your post. However I completely disagree with your opinion. I do appreciate more artistic value of the problem. I do think that it's very bad approach to count variations when you are evaluating problems.
The threemover with many phases and variations can compose anyone. However to find the position as 1st Prize winner in (B) group is very hard to achieve. If you analyze position it's amazing how composer avoided cooks and dual.
The double threat in side variation is irrelevant for me. There are gazillions of Prize winning threemovers with a multiple threats in some variations.
| | | (8) Posted by Viktor Syzonenko [Monday, Aug 7, 2023 09:11] |
Cher Jean-Marc Loustau
Dear Jean-Marc Loustau
You very successfully avoided a collision with my problem.
And they didn't make history.
And that's the story.
I am greatly impressed by the phenomenon of magic.
Variation 2.Qd8! (unguard) Kxf4 3.Qh4 # in the B29 and the variation 1.Qc8? (unguard) Kxe4 2.Qg4 # in my #2, who also avoided a collision with a judge, make a chameleon echo pair.
It can be. Yes, maybe...
But in one competition... with one author... - is a phenomenon of higher powers. Their Possibility Practice has long refuted Probability Theory.
Дорогой Jean-Marc Loustau
Вы очень удачно избежали столкновения с моей задачей.
И не попали в историю.
Вот и вся история.
Меня сильно впечатляет явление магии.
Вариант 2.Qd8! (unguard) Kxf4 3.Qh4# в B29 и вариант 1.Qc8? (unguard) Kxe4 2.Qg4# в моей #2, которая также избежала столкновения с судьей, составляют хамелеонную эхо пару.
Такое может быть. Да, может быть...
Но в одном соревновании... с одним автором... - это явление высших сил. Их Практика возможностей давно опровергла Теорию вероятностей.
| | | (9) Posted by shankar ram [Monday, Aug 7, 2023 12:31] |
The 1st Prize winner in the 3-mover section harks back to the 1970s!
Specifically the 2nd 3-mover theme of the 1st WCCT (1972-75): "Sacrificial Square Vacation".
It reminded me of this problem by Vukcevic, showing the theme with additional flourishes and which has similar surprising quiet 2nd moves by the WQ.
Milan Vukcevic
1st Prize The Problemist 1981
 (= 11+9 )
#3
1.Bb6! [2.Qg6 [3.Se4,e4‡] R×f3 3.R×f3‡]
1…Rf5 2.Qf4 [3.Se4‡] R~5+/R~f+ 3.Be4/e4‡
1…Sf5 2.Qh4 [3.Se4‡] S~+ 3.e4/Rg6‡
1…e5,Df5 2.D(×)f5 [3.Cé4,e4‡]
1…R×f3 2.R×f3+ K×g2 3.Rf5‡
| | | (10) Posted by Viktor Syzonenko [Monday, Aug 7, 2023 16:04] |
Dear Participants, Judge, Director, Organizer
A software robot worked against the participants in section E.
Without any justification, he rejected (threw away, defamed) 13 works.
(There was a suspicion that a number of tasks were not considered by the judge because the robot, not legitimate and not mentioned in the announcement of the Cup, deprived them of the right to consider.)
This is set after checking one link.
It turned out that at each progress of the decision there is no matching content.
Therefore, ALL indications of predecessors, without justification (without showing) what is repeated, must be removed from the judge's report.
Who will do it? Judge? Director? Organizer? It doesn't matter.
The judge is obliged to find the "best" works and give this justification.
Looking for the "worst" jobs is an unnecessary and ungrateful activity that no one needs.
Дорогие Участники, Судья, Директор, Организатор
Против участников секции Е работал программный робот.
Без всякого обоснования он отклонил (выбросил, опорочил) 13 работ.
(Появилось подозрение, что ряд задач судьей не рассматривался потому что не легитимный и не упоминаемый в объявлении Кубка робот лишил их права на рассмотрение.)
Это установлено после проверки одной ссылки.
Оказалось, на каждом ходе решения отсутствует совпадающее содержание.
Поэтому, ВСЕ указания на предшественников, без обоснования (без показа) что повторено, необходимо удалить из отчета судьи.
Кто это сделает? Судья? Директор? Организатор? - не имеет значения.
Судья обязан найти "лучшие" работы и дать этому обоснование.
Искать "худшие" работы - лишняя и неблагодарная деятельность, никому не нужная.
1
Let's see E16, supposedly "1 prize."
But first we look similar, but "1 commendation."
Посмотрим E16, якобы "1 приз“.
Но сначала глянем похожее, но "1 похвальный".
P1380342
SG89 01-03/2020
 (= 10+9 )
H#3 2.1. 10+9
1.Qa3 Rb2 2.Qxc3 Rb3 3.Qg3 f6#
1.Qc8 Be8 2.Qxf5 Bd7 3.Qg4 c4#
And now E16, supposedly "1 prize."
А теперь E16, якобы "1 приз“.
 (= 7+12 )
H#3 2.1. 7+12
1.Bb6 Rxd4 2.Se5 Rd5 3.Rxh4 Rxe5#
1.Qf1 Bxd3 2.Sf3 Be2 3.Bxg6 Bxf3#
And the question here is one: "Where is the difference in class, what is the distance between a commendation in the magazine and the first prize in the World Cup?"
Where? What?
For this, the competition is organized.
И вопрос здесь один: "Где разница в классе, в чём дистанция между похвальным отзывом в журнале и первым призом в Кубке мира?“
Где? В чём?
Для этого и соревнование организовано.
2
There is another interesting pair.
Имеется и другая интересная пара.
P1253417 - 2012 год
E19 – 2nd Prize, 2023 год
Look and compare for yourself.
The desire of white figures at their own cost to help the black king get into the cherished field will certainly remain in the memory. This is the best work among those published in this section.
I assume the author of the E16 is VM, the author of the E19 is ZG.
Well, somehow I thought so.
VM uses "fakes," ZG creates "cycles" that are indestructible: you can watch, you cannot touch - you will lose time.
Heroes are not offended. They go forward.
Посмотрите и сравните сами.
Стремление белых фигур своей ценой помочь черному королю попасть на заветное поле непременно останется в памяти. Это и есть лучшая работа среди опубликованных в этой секции.
Предполагаю, автор Е16 - VM, автор Е19 - ZG.
Ну, почему-то я так подумал.
VM использует "подделки", ZG создает "циклы" которые нерушимы: смотреть можно, трогать нельзя - потеряешь время.
Герои не обижаются. Они идут вперед.
| | | (11) Posted by Olaf Jenkner [Monday, Aug 7, 2023 19:20] |
The translation robot does not know that задача is not a task but a problem.
| | | (12) Posted by Peter Gvozdjak [Monday, Aug 7, 2023 20:00] |
this artificial idiot also translates "orthodox piece" as "православная пьеса" and "fairy piece" as "волшебная сказка".
| | | (13) Posted by Peter Gvozdjak [Monday, Aug 7, 2023 20:03] |
deleted (doubled post)
| | | (14) Posted by Frank Richter [Monday, Aug 7, 2023 21:30] |
I assume, direction of automated translation was RU -> EN ...
I don't understand such posts, if these examples are considered as anticipations, then:
"Claims of defects and anticipations can be sent to the Director during 2 weeks after the publication of the preliminary results."
| | | (15) Posted by Viktor Syzonenko [Monday, Aug 7, 2023 21:31] |
Section E
The report reads:
"Some problems have full or partial anticipations. I either excluded these problems from the competition or took its into account when ranking."
The word "problems" is used twice, but what do the authors get? Their "problems" are immediately declassified. "Problems" is turned into "unterproblems." And - not considered.
Do not consider!
Attention, the decision on the "anticipation" is made before consideration. Without consideration. Therefore, there is no justification.
Repetition:
(There was a suspicion that a number of tasks were not considered by the judge because the robot, not legitimate and not mentioned in the announcement of the Cup, deprived them of the right to consider.)
P.S.
In our working environment, the words "problem," "work," "composition," "job," "task," "diagramm" are synonyms for me. You accept the main thing: thought.
| | | (16) Posted by Olaf Jenkner [Monday, Aug 7, 2023 23:54] |
You built your own language and expect to be understood?
| | | (17) Posted by Viktor Syzonenko [Tuesday, Aug 8, 2023 03:03] |
Yes, I hope so. My language: position, movements, recording movement in notation.
And synthesizing the big picture.
After all, I did not call someone's problem bad or not original.
YOU were asked to show the difference in class between the two problems.
And here - ... . Alas.
| | | (18) Posted by Viktoras Paliulionis [Tuesday, Aug 8, 2023 13:09] |
I understand Russian well, but I don't understand your "personal language" like others.
What does "difference in class" mean? As far as I know, chess problems are not divided into classes. These two problems are very different, showing different sets of motives and effects. There is no point in comparing them here.
| | | (19) Posted by Viktor Syzonenko [Wednesday, Aug 9, 2023 10:23] |
Dear Viktoras,
Вы не видите существующего разделения на "классы" или опровергаете существование этого разделения?
Смотрите.
Приз, Почетный отзыв (иногда, 1-е место в Кубке мира!), Похвальный отзыв.
А также: некорректно, неоригинально, слабо.
Разделяются и авторы: IGM, IM, M FIDE, ...
Существует выражение: Разделяй и властвуй.
Все живые существа классифицированы.
Поэтому, пожалуйста, напрягите интеллект и дайте ответ.
Видите Вы различие в классе двух показаных шахматных задач или не видите?
| | | (20) Posted by Frank Richter [Wednesday, Aug 9, 2023 13:34] |
Certainly, classifications make life easier...
But all the classes mentioned are relative and subjective. Even correctness is by no means always unambiguous with respect to duals.
And titles for composers are only a label, assigned in a more or less subjective process of selection and scoring.
Thus, even classes will not lead to the absolute truth in chess composition, because it does not exist.
| |
Read more... | Page: [Previous] [Next] 1 2
MatPlus.Net Forum Competitions 11th FIDE World Cup |
|
|
|
ISC 2024
