Website founded by
Milan Velimirović
in 2006
17:56 UTC
| |
MatPlus.Net  Forum Competitions WCCT-11, section E |
| |
|
|
|
|
You can only view this page!
| | Page: [Previous] [Next] 1 2 3 | | (1) Posted by Marcos Roland [Tuesday, Sep 27, 2022 02:48] | WCCT-11, section E
For the first time in my life, I examined carefully, the best I could, all the problems of a given competition, before the official award was issued. I did this with the problems of the section E of the WCCT-11. And I did that simply because I liked the theme and I started to like very much many entries. In fact it was a very enjoyable experience for me, and at a certain point, I decided to take the task seriously, as if it were a job. I looked at all problems, at least twice each, for roughly an entire week.Sometimes, while sleeping, I figured I was watching some officers talking at low voice about the solver's next possible tries...
After seeing the results on the site of the WFCC, my first, general and main conclusion is: the judges have done their hard work very seriously, coherently and honestly. Although I have some questions to put, nothing makes me think that they haven't done their best.
However, some "casualties" were unavoidable, given the "cold (hot) war" unfortunately brought inside the WFCC. Six compositions were excluded from the award, and I presume the cause of the exclusion was that they were works of Russian or Bielorussian composers. Anyway, one masterpiece, in my view, was excluded from the award: entry E16. And at least another very good work, a probable member of the "top 20", was equally dismissed: entry E23. I don't reproduce the diagram of entry 16 here, because I don't know what the composer intends to do with his problem, but I think I can share here the comment I gave to myself about this fine piece of art:
"Entry E16 is the most successful of several problems using a powerful idea for intensifying the theme: two white unities are sacrificed on adjacent squares, with the BK capturing both unities and being mated on the second square he occupies. The first sacrifice removes a black unity from a square by which the BK must pass. The capture is delayed, in this case, because Black first must open a gate allowing White to make his next move (this gate opening is also a necessary self-blocking move). Then comes the second White’s sacrifice, which is the great difference of this problem from the others using the same idea: it’s a sacrificial hideaway of a bishop located on a corner of the board, without option to leave the diagonal containing the square where the BK will be mated. So, the bishop sacrifices itself on the (empty!) mating square. The delay of the second capture is a consequence of the first delay. The author achieved the very impressive task of producing two solutions, using two adjacent corners of the board for the bishops, and performing a perfectly harmonic chameleon play, culminating with a gorgeous mate by a humble pawn (c3/c4)! This problem features the most intense and beautiful interplay of all the entries. To be noted that even the twinning, in Forsberg style, is a nice touch, and probably is the only way to have the two solutions. Hats off!"
| | | (2) Posted by Joost de Heer [Tuesday, Sep 27, 2022 08:02] |
No need to hide the diagram, it's available from the WFCC website: https://www.wfcc.ch/wp-content/uploads/11-WCCT-Section-E-entries.pdf
| | | (3) Posted by Harry Fougiaxis [Tuesday, Sep 27, 2022 08:27] |
The composers have meanwhile published it in SuperProblem: E1216 Valery Gurov, Georgy Evseev, Vitaly Medintsev, Anatoly Skripnik, SuperProblem 08-VI-2022.
| | | (4) Posted by Marcos Roland [Tuesday, Sep 27, 2022 08:59] |
Thank you, Harry. Joost, yes, but I was not sure the authors would like. Well, it's already published somewhere else, so here is the diagram and the solution:
 (= 6+12 )
h#3.5 b) Sc4
a) 1...Rxe4 2.Sd3 Bd4 3.Kxe4 Bxc6+ 4.Kxd4 c3#
b) 1...Sxe5 2.Rd6 Bd5 3.Kxe5 Bxb2+ 4.Kxd5 c4#
And two model mates, I forgot to mention. It's always nice, although not essential in most of helpmates.
| | | (5) Posted by Vitaly Medintsev [Tuesday, Sep 27, 2022 12:19] |
E23 has been published on SuperProblem.ru today - http://superproblem.ru/htm/tourneys/annual-it/2022/helpmates_2022.html#64-66
| | | (6) Posted by Marcos Roland [Tuesday, Sep 27, 2022 13:48] |
Thank you, Vitaly, and congratulations for the magnificent E16!
Well, let's also reproduce E23 here:
Mikhail Khramtsevich (the man who saved the WCCI 2019-2021!?)
 (= 5+13 )
h#4 2 sol.
1.Sd8 exd5 2.Ke4 Sxc6 3.Kxd5 Sc7+ 4.Kxc6 d5#
1.Bd8 dxc5 2.Kd4 Sxd6 3.Kxc5 Sd3+ 4.Kxd6 e5#
We see, everything is fine here. Two thematic sacrifices in each solution, dual avoidance because of unblocking, unpins with B1 moves to the same square, Kniest, Zilahi, Chumakov, follow-my-leader...All finishing with two model mates.
We could compare this problem with this one, which got 7.4 points, 16th/17th place:
E48
 (= 5+9 )
h#3.5 2 sol.
1...fxe5 2.Kf4 Sxd6 3.Kxe5 Sf3+ 4.Kxd6 e5#
1...exf5 2.Ke4 Sxe6 3.Kxf5 Sh6+ 4.Kxe6 f5#
We see the problems are very similar. E48 is also very good and beautiful. The most significant difference betwwen them is the half move more of E23, but what a half move! Unpins with B1 moves to the same square, dual avoidance by unblocking...There's also another little difference in favor of E23: a little more economy in the mate position, with the WS controlling two squares instead of one, as in E48.
In short, if E48 is very good, E23 is excellent!
| | | (7) Posted by Marcos Roland [Wednesday, Sep 28, 2022 04:01] |
From the enunciation of the theme of section E: "Helpmates in 3,5-n moves. During the solution White moves a piece or a pawn to a square where it is going to be captured by Black, but not immediately. Set play, multi-solutions and twins are allowed, but not duplex, Polish-type twins (all pieces change colour) or zero-positions.",
it seemed logical that the most used lengthy would have to be 3.5, simply because it was the minimum allowed. It’s evident that the longest is the problem, the most difficult is to justify a sacrifice of a white unity, especially a piece. This logical expectation was confirmed by the statistics: of the 92 entries presented, 61 (66.30%) were h#3.5, and 14 (15.22%) were h#4.
The main imbalance I saw in the marks given by the judges of this section has to do precisely with lenghty. Just as the composers quite understandably preferred the shorter lenghties (h#3.5, h#4), the judges apparently went along with them, giving preference to the shorter helpmates. Everything happened as if the judges had separated the entries into two shelves: the "superior" shelf, for the "short" helpmates; and the "inferior" shelf, for the "long" helpmates (in 4.5 moves or more). In my view, this attitude was the cause of some injustice.
I give one example to clarify my point of view. This great problem was classified in the 21st/24th places:
E81
 (= 4+13 )
h#4.5 2 sol.
1...Sc2 2.Re6 (Se6?) fxg6 3.Kxc2 g7 4.Kd2 g8=Q 5.Ke3 Qg5#
1...Sb3 2.Se6 (Te6?) f6 3.Kxb3 f7 4.Kxb4 f8=Q+ 5.Ka5 Qa3#
This entry, like entry E55, features a master skilful, sophisticated, use of a White’s tempo move to perform the theme. White must wait for a diagonal to be closed so that his pinned pawn can walk to the promotion. Only White can do is to move his knight poorly parked on a1 (there is no other legal moves). However, each of the two knight moves prevents the BK to reach one of the two mating squares. So, Black must choose the other path, involving the capture of the WS. But Black, before capturing, must close the diagonal c8-h3, unpinning White’s “f” pawn, allowing it to move and promote, choosing one of two possible paths. The promoted Queen will deliver two complementary, beautiful model mates, the first moving like a rook and checking like a bishop, the second moving like a bishop and checking like a rook. This splendid, elegant pair of mates amply justifies, in my view, the separation of black blockers in two groups.
But the problem features another charming, complex idea, which we may call "thematic dual avoidance". The mentioned black's first choice of paths for his King is complemented by dual avoidance in his first move, when Black must choose between two moves (by two different pieces) for the interference on e6. The peculiar feature of this dual avoidance has to do with the theme itself, the delayed capture. We can figure that, according to the solver's logical thinking, first Black(forced by first White's move) chooses the path his King must follow, and the square where he'll be mated, and second, consequently, he chooses the piece to interfere on e6. However, because of the delayed capture, he must first interfere on e6! In other words, the order of the real play is the inverse of the order of the logical thinking. So, the dual avoidance, that in general always has an anticipatory character, seems to have this characteristic intensified. Another tentative name: "over anticipatory" dual avoidance. It's difficult to express the idea with words. But I definitely see something different here.
We can compare this problem to the wonderfiul E55:
E55
 (= 4+6 )
h#3.5 2 sol.
1...Sb5 2.Sg7+ fxg7 3.Rh8+ gxh8=Q 4.Rxb5 Qc3#
1...Sc4 2.Re7+ fxe7 3.Sd8 exd8=Q 4.Rxc4 Qb6#
We see that the two problems share some values, and at the same time are very different. E55 features perfect economy; E81 is more vivid and elegant. I confess I would prefer E55, if I had to choose one, but the impact they had on me was close. For me, the two problems belong to the same, first shelf of the field. And the only reason ("à faute de mieux") I see for the judges having given so different marks to them (8.8 points to E55, 6.8 to E81) is that the first is a h#3.5, the second a h#4.5. Maybe they think, as Chris Feather has said about some long helpmates, there is no justification for such lenght... I really don't know, and I would like to know.
| | | (8) Posted by Marcos Roland [Wednesday, Sep 28, 2022 17:39] |
Not only among problems classifiable in the "top 20" I saw some possible unfairness. I think that every composer would like to see his problem fairly appreciated, no matter its placement should not be in the higher shelves anyway. And I think that the problems which suffered more badly from the biased view of the respectable judges were those which acumulated two "sins": i) they are long (n higher or equal to 4.5) helpmates; ii) they are single liners (just one solution). In short, single liner long helpmates, in general, were not happy in this competition.
However, I start with the only exception. The interesting E62 was, in my view, correctly evaluated (6.6 points). I think that its good acceptation has to do with the quantitative aspect: four white pawns are sacrificed in a row. Anyway, the problem, despite of its clumsy apparence, is really original and witty, and gives a very intense presentation of the theme. And I think its stronger feature is the tempo move 3.Kxd6!, which incidentally is the first thematic capture. Ironically, this move makes possible a future further tempo move (...d6), which notwithstanding will not be necessary any more...
E62
 (= 10+3 )
h#6
1.Kb7 d6 2.Kc6 d5+ 3.Kxd6! (tempo, zugzwang avoidance) d4 4.Kxd5 d3 5.Kxd4 Be3+ 6.Kxd3 Bb1#
(We could think that "f2" would be a better square for the WK, because the mate would be a model. However, with the K on f2, there's a cook: 3.Kxd5 d4 4.Ke4 d3+ 5.Kxd4! Be3+ 6.Kxd3 Bb1#.)
| | | (9) Posted by Marcos Roland [Wednesday, Sep 28, 2022 22:04] |
Now I would like to point out the "miserables", the long single-liners which were sadly "despised" by the judges of section E... I start with my heart bleeding, because it is my own composition:
E64 (I was particularly optimistic because of the number 64...)
 (= 3+4 )
h#5
1.Sf5 Bh8! (Bf6?; Bf8?; Bh6?) 2.Sd6 exd6 3.Qxh8 d7 4.Kh3 d8=R 5.Kh4 Rxh8#
In order to fully appreciate this problem, you have to have in mind two important tempo tries (not accidental, not just Helpmate Analyser tries). First, if the WQ prepares to sacrifice herself on d6, at the same time vacating a square for the BK: 1.Qa3 (Qd3) ~ 2.Qd6 exd6 3.Sf3 d7 4.Kh3 d8=R 5.Kh4 Rh8#. However, White must "pass" and unfortunately he doesn't have a tempo move with his bishop, which is trapped in a negative star, with all its moves failing for different reasons:
1...Bf6? doesn't work because it prevents the BK from coming to h4; 1...Bf8? is not good because closes the line d8-h8; 1...Bh8 fails because plugs the mating square h8; 1...Bh6? is bad because closes the line h8-h4.
So, Black chooses to sacrifice his knight on d6: 1.Sf5!. Now comes a second tempo try: 1...Bf6? 2.Sd6 exd6 3.Dg2 d7 4.Kh3 d8=Q(R) 5.?? Qh8# (Rh8#). This try is important because it explains why the piece on h3 must be a Queen, not a rook. If it were a rook, no tempo issue would take place: 3.Rg3 d7 4.Rg2 d8=Q(R) 5.Kh3 Q(R)h8#.
That's why White must choose a sacrificial tempo move: 1...Bh8! 2.Sd6 exd6 3.Qxh8! d7 4.Kh3 d8=R! 5.Kh4 Rxh8#. We see that White's Rxh8# completes also the pseudo-theme by Black. So, my miniature, in my view, does the maximum it may be done in order to show a negative star. The performing of the pseudo-theme by Black adds artistic unity to the composition, even if it doesn't intensify the theme strictu sensu.
It must be noted that my comments on my problem were "edited" by the Director or someone acting for him, so that the mentions to the tempo tries were supressed. I wonder if this had some impact on the judges' appreciation of my problem, which got "miserable" 4.2 points.
| | | (10) Posted by Marcos Roland [Wednesday, Sep 28, 2022 23:35] |
E53
 (= 3+4 )
h#5
1.Rb3 g4 2.Ka4 g5 3.Ba3 Kd5 4.Rxg5+ Kc4 5.Ra5 axb3#
In my view, this lovely miniature has the charm of perfection, which is a relative concept. It is perfect because, given the features it intends to show, nothing could be added or removed. All the seven unities play. Ideal mate. Pseudo-theme by Black, with the maximum possible delay of the capture. The thematic white unity (the Pg2) plays twice! (only this entry showed this form of intensification of the theme). Roentgen theme. The mating position is entirely built in the solution, nothing just wait.
However, it got just 3.6 points! The chess muses are crying...
| | | (11) Posted by Marcos Roland [Wednesday, Sep 28, 2022 23:57] |
To end my whining, here's another interesting long single-liner:
E80
 (= 3+11 )
h#6
1.Rc5 Kg1 2.Kc4 g3 3.Qb4 Kf2 4.fxg3+ Ke3 5.Sd3 Ke4 6.Bc3 cxd3#
Three self-blocks. This problem also features pseudo-theme by Black, but its most outstanding feature is something I never had seen before: "The black moves are made by six different pieces, and none of them may be replaced by another of a different kind (the rook must be a rook, the queen must be a queen, and so on)." A little detail to be noted is the motivation of the white sacrifice (to provoke the unguarding of a square the WK must pass by), which is not shown in other entries.
This problem got just 3.4 points. Again, I think it deserved more.
| | | (12) Posted by Juraj Lörinc [Thursday, Sep 29, 2022 08:31] |
Did you notice this was a theme tourney?
Have you considered the fact that judges in such tourneys reward multiplication of the prescribed theme as a rule and additional themes only as a bonus?
Three last mono-liners E64, E53 and E80 show the theme only once and as such are doomed to very low points in extremely competitive tourney like WCCT.
Obvious.
| | | (13) Posted by Torsten Linß [Thursday, Sep 29, 2022 12:24] |
re post 4)
Capturing an immobile black pawn on a square where the black king has to pass through (or go to be check mated) is not particularly subtle. It is one of the poorest motivations for a white sacrifice.
| | | (14) Posted by Marcos Roland [Thursday, Sep 29, 2022 12:56] |
@ Juraj
I did notice this was a thematic tourney. But the quantitative aspect to which you referred cannot be an absolute separator of shelves. It is a sound criterium to be followed, everybody agrees, but not absolute. The judges themselves showed flexibility when comparing, for instance, entry E55, already cited in this thread, and entry E92. E55 presents one sacrificed piece in each solution and E92 presents two(!). However, entry E55 got 8.8 points (4th place) and E92 7.0 points (19th/20th places). Let's reproduce here the gorgeous entry E92:
 (= 6+11 )
h#3.5
1...Sc5 2.Kd4 Bc6 3.Kxc5 a8=R 4.Kxc6 Rxc8#
1...Sxd6 2.d4 Bf3 3.Bxd6 a8=Q 4.Rxf3 Qxf3#
The fact is: this thematic tournament allowed helpmates in 3.5-n moves. Not just 3.5/4 moves. Therefore, judges should be prepared to meet helpmates of very different lenghties and to do the hard (artistic) work of comparing them, forgetting criteria good just to compare problems of the same lenght (even for these, not as absolute criteria!). Some ideas in longer helpmates cannot be duplicated, of course. One cannot demand from a h#5 to present two solutions involving negative stars. But if the composer manages to show also the pseudo-theme by black, this is enough compensation, I think. Therefore, I think the judges could and should give more visibility to E64, which better enrichs this tournament than other compositions ranked above it in the award. I am sure that, in the future, E64 will keep provoking happy smiles, and I cannot say the same of others.
| | | (15) Posted by Frank Richter [Thursday, Sep 29, 2022 13:18] |
Marcos, many thanks for your very interesting and objective comments.
You wrote:
"It must be noted that my comments on my problem were "edited" by the Director or someone acting for him"
Yes, unfortunately this happened in other sections too (namely F). Incomprehensible and not fair to the authors.
| | | (16) Posted by Marcos Roland [Thursday, Sep 29, 2022 14:37] |
Thank you, Frank. Yes, I am aware of the fact you mentioned. In my case, I wanted to make a complaint to the Director, but we, in Brazil, told to each other we would have a meeting to discuss the terms of the complaint! Unfortunately, this meeting didn't take place. Anyway, our omission is not an excuse for the wrong Director's action. And I say once more: I am not meaning any accusation of dishonesty or undue favoritism. I am talking about things that could be improved in the future. Best wishes to everyone.
| | | (17) Posted by Marcos Roland [Thursday, Sep 29, 2022 15:42] |
@ Torsten Linss
I am astonished by your comment! Did I understand well? Do you really mean this criticism to problem E16?? "Capturing an immobile black pawn on a square where the black king has to pass through (or go to be check mated) is not particularly subtle. It is one of the poorest motivations for a white sacrifice."
If you really mean that, what do you think of the first place in this tournament?
E56
 (= 12+11 )
h#3.5 2 sol.
1...Bxd3 2.Qxd6 Bxd4 3.Kxd3 Rf6 4.Kxd4 Rxd6#
1...Sxe3 2.Qxg5 Rxf4 3.Kxe3 Bf6 4.Kxf4 Bxg5#
The "poorest motivation" you mentioned is used four times, it's the only motivation used in this excellent work.
For God's sake, let's be reasonable!
| | | (18) Posted by Neal Turner [Thursday, Sep 29, 2022 17:06] |
Well it's obvious why E92 didn't get such a high placing - the two solutions are quite unequal.
The 1..Sxd6 solution is much the stronger and was probably the author's original idea, while the 1..Sc5 line looks like it's been contrived just for the sake of getting two solutions.
The play after 1..Sd6 is what I would consider in the spirit of the theme: the pieces are put immediately en-pris which produces the question: Why aren't they being captured immediately?
In the other line the pieces are not en-pris to the capturing piece on arrival and so there is no question to ask - a whole level of logic missing.
I was actually quite surprised that this type of play was accepted as being thematic.
| | | (19) Posted by Juraj Lörinc [Thursday, Sep 29, 2022 17:12] |
Answering to 14.
Of course, the mere multiplication of prescribed theme does not make a good problem. However, and this was in my view confirmed in all WCCTs since 5 judging countries system is applied, in this system the multiplication of prescribed theme is strongly preferred in the collective judging. There are instances with thematically less intensive compositions were preferred to thematically more intensive ones by some judging countries, but the view on such entries is usually volatile and not enough to push the compositions in question too high in the overall ordering - or points received. The composition might be memorable in the highest degree, but simply unsuitable for theme tourney. Then the highest places are usually reserved to 1. thematically intensive, 2. good in general, 3. ideally highly original compositions.
| | | (20) Posted by Torsten Linß [Thursday, Sep 29, 2022 20:30] |
In E56, can the wBe2 be replaced by a wPe2? With bBh2 removed for legality...
And yes, I think the white sacrifices are not particularly subtle, as are the captures by the bQ, although they echo the set theme with inverted colours.
| |
Read more... | Page: [Previous] [Next] 1 2 3
MatPlus.Net Forum Competitions WCCT-11, section E |
|
|
|
ISC 2024
