|
| Page: [Previous] [Next] 1 2 3 4 5 |
| (41) Posted by shankar ram [Thursday, Jul 14, 2016 13:28]; edited by shankar ram [16-07-14] |
This thread is quite old..
Thought I'd freshen it with a new problem!
Well, the problem itself dates back to 1947..
My proposition is that it can be seen as a 5th degree..!
(I think most people may not agree..;-))
A.A.Baturin
Soviet Composition Tourney(?), 1947
 (= 9+9 )
#3
1.Rg8!(2.Bxh1 ~ 3.Ra8#)
1...c6 2.Bb7
1...d5! 2.Bc6
1...e4!! 2.Bd5
1...f3!!! 2.Be4
1...g2!!!! 2.Bf3
1...R~ 2.Se2
1...B~ 2.BxB
|
|
| (42) Posted by seetharaman kalyan [Thursday, Jul 14, 2016 14:31] |
Once we agree that equivalent errors can be made by different pieces, this is surely the Pioneer example of fifth degree correction.
|
|
| (43) Posted by Miodrag Mladenović [Friday, Jul 15, 2016 06:53]; edited by Miodrag Mladenović [16-07-15] |
Fantastic problem. And yes, I agree it presents fifth degree black correction. If someone asked me until yesterday is it possible to compose 5th degree black correction threemover with 5 thematic defenses by 5 different black pieces I would say it's impossible. However this is a clear example. Usually problemists think about black correction by same thematic black piece. However it's possible to repeat black errors by different pieces as in this problem.
|
|
| (44) Posted by shankar ram [Friday, Jul 15, 2016 12:46]; edited by shankar ram [16-07-15] |
Well.. one acknowledged correction play expert agrees.. Thanks, Miodrag!
I remember showing this to a few others in the 80s.. I think one agreed and two didn't.. Somehow there is a reluctance to accept that such tasks can be shown by "mechanical" and "schematic" positions..
|
|
| (45) Posted by ichai [Friday, Jul 15, 2016 16:11] |
"....can be seen as a 5th degree..."
What do you mean ?
And what is a 5th degree ?
|
|
| (46) Posted by Miodrag Mladenović [Friday, Jul 15, 2016 16:27] |
ichai wrote:
QUOTE
"....can be seen as a 5th degree..."
What do you mean ?
The black correction theme requires that all black defenses but 1st one are repeating black error effects (weakness created by move that white exploits) from all previous defenses and at the same time hass correction effect that is preventing previous white continuations. The degree is determined by the number of thematic defences. In this latest example it's 5 defenses and that's why it's fifth degree black correction problem. Very difficult theme to achieve. In this latest problems black powns are always repeating the same errors by closing lines: h1-b7, h1-c6, h1-d5, h1-e4, h1-f3 but at the same time there is move by bRh3 that will defend all previous white continuations by wBa8 and forc white to play new 2nd move. I recommend that you read the whole thread and look into examples given. In many of those problems black errors are marked with lower letters and described so it's easier to understand theme.
|
|
| (47) Posted by ichai [Friday, Jul 15, 2016 18:31] |
Thx Miodrag !
If I understood well a correction is also called a 2nd degree.
And in a 3rd degree happens the same as in a 2nd degree, but one degree further ?
Here after 1...c6 you have a closure of the black bishop so that 2.Bb7 is possible.
After 1...d5 you have the same closure of the black bishop but the opening of the 6th row makes 2.Bb7 wrong, so now 2.Bc6 is right.
This is a 2nd degree ok
But I can't see how to go further : 1...e4 does not open the 6th row.
How does it work ?
|
|
| (48) Posted by Miodrag Mladenović [Friday, Jul 15, 2016 18:41]; edited by Miodrag Mladenović [16-07-15] |
@ichai
Opening of 6th row is not black error move. It's black useful effect (opening of bR to prevent previous white continuations). It's not requirement by theme for black to repeat useful effects (only an errors). The useful effect are actually corrections and that's why theme contains correction word in its name. It's only important to repeat errors in all further black defenses.
|
|
| (49) Posted by Georgy Evseev [Saturday, Jul 16, 2016 10:50] |
No, there is no 4th level correction in Baturin's problem.
There are 4 instances of 1st level correction, as there are no secondary (tertiary, etc.) error effects in black defences.
Compare with beautiful C.G.S.Narayanan #3 winner from 9th WCCT, where we have clear tertiary correction.
Of itself, multiple correcting moves do not create a correction of multiple degree.
|
|
| (50) Posted by Sarah Hornecker [Saturday, Jul 16, 2016 10:54] |
I have in the book of Rudi Albrecht a definition of what makes degrees of corrections, but for the sake of the discussion, can someone explain it on a simple example?
From what I understand and what is said here, it is that move X fails to a defense. Move Y defeats that defense but causes another error, so defense Y works now.
For me the issue is, since defense Y does not work after move X, why isn't that a recursive thing? Why isn't all correction just of one or two degrees?
|
|
| (51) Posted by Georgy Evseev [Saturday, Jul 16, 2016 11:40] |
Ok, here is detalied comment to mentioned C.G.S.Narayanan problem. (I wrote it, but decided not to post earlier. Fortunately, it was not lost.)
 (= 9+9 )
1.Qg3! [2.Qf3+ Bxf3 3.gxf3#]
1...S~ 2.Sc4 [3.Sxd6,Re7#] Bf7/Qa3/Qxc4 3.Sxd6/Re7/Rxc4#
First error - loss of control over e-file. Disappearance of Sf4 automatcally creates this error (that is why generally correction moves are made by same piece: basic error is as a rule a departure effect). Correction moves are to cover this error - to put e-file under control again.
1...Sg6! 2.Sf3 [3.Sg5á] Qd2/B◊f3 3.Rc4/Q◊f3,g◊f3á (2.Sc4? Qa3!)
First error is still loss of control over e-file (covered by corrective move).
Second error is disabling the defensive effect of 1...Qg8.
1...Se6!! 2.Sd7 [3.Sf6á] (2.Sc4?,Sf3?)
First error is still loss of control over e-file (covered by corrective move).
Second error is disabling the defensive effect of 1...Qg8 (covered by defence of g5).
Third error is disabling the defensive effect of 1...Qe6.
1...Sd5!!! 2.Sf7 [3.S◊d6,Sg5á] f4/B◊f7 3.S◊d6/Qf3á (2.Sc4,Sf3,Sd7?)
First error is still loss of control over e-file (covered by corrective move).
Second error is disabling the defensive effect of 1...Qg8 (covered by closing of 5th rank and possibility of 2...f4).
Third error is disabling the defensive effect of 1...Qe6 (covered by defence of f6).
Fourth error is disabling the defensive effect of 1...Qf7 (no alternative defences are now available).
The most obvious difference with Baturin's problem is that you are not able to arbitrarily change the order of defences (there is an interesting comment by Sweden in 9th WCCT booklet which is not fully correct from my point of view).
|
|
| (52) Posted by Sarah Hornecker [Saturday, Jul 16, 2016 12:39] |
But isn't it true that all white moves also must contain errors, which are not explicitly talked about?
For example, 2.Sd7 also loses control over the e-file but that does not matter because Black defended against the threat there already?
I think that also answers my question above, and it is error and correction play by both players, not only by black.
|
|
| (53) Posted by Georgy Evseev [Saturday, Jul 16, 2016 14:15] |
Correction implies that something was "done wrongly" and should be done right (that is, corrected).
Multigrade grade correction has very interesting effect of "avoidance by repetition" - in case of (black) correction Black make same errors again and again but white heve to exploit them in different ways.
|
|
| (54) Posted by Miodrag Mladenović [Saturday, Jul 16, 2016 14:47] |
@George
This example is not a clear example of fourth degree black correction. The big problem for me is that third defense 1...Se6 also creates fourth black error (disabling Qxf7). This is a nice problem but I would say it's questionable if this is a fourth degree black correction. Definitely this is not a clear example of this theme.
|
|
| (55) Posted by seetharaman kalyan [Saturday, Jul 16, 2016 15:13]; edited by seetharaman kalyan [16-07-16] |
Narayanan's beautiful problem probably does not show fourth degree correction. Geory Evseev initially mentioned 'tertiary correction' in his first post. There is of course merit in his argument about the fourth degree corection. But it is perhaps not a definitive problem of fourth degree correction. Of course Narayanan has composed several other equally good examples in which there are disputed on the theory !!
|
|
| (56) Posted by Georgy Evseev [Monday, Jul 18, 2016 11:19] |
I would like to see better definition of "Nth degree black correction".
To have a "simple" correction (first degree?) one needs a basic variation ("random move") and at least one correcting move, so at least two variations.
For me, this means that to have Nth degree correction at least N+1 variation is required.
But according to general opinion here it looks like N thematic variations is enough for Nth degree correction. (Is it possible to have 2nd degree correction in this case? Or is there no 1st degree correction and what I had called "simple correction" is already 2nd degree?).
Concerning Narayanan's problem for me it is obvious that there are three consequentially correcting defences after initial random move of bS. I would say that due to analogy of errors there are really two instances of, let's say, three consequential correcting black moves, depending on the order they are presented. There is no reason for the doubt.
|
|
| (57) Posted by shankar ram [Monday, Jul 18, 2016 12:54] |
Georgy,
The word "correction" immediately implies at least a 2nd degree or secondary correction. You can only correct something which has happened already.
There is no "primary correction".
The concept of "random move" is useful but not necessary.
What we need is:
1. A move committing an error A - the primary error ("1st degree" though not much used, since any problem except a fleck theme problem will have such moves)
2. A move committing an error A, correcting it and committing error B - the secondary error (2nd degree)
3. A move committing an error A and error B and correcting both and committing error C - the tertiary error (3rd degree)
...
...
And so on.
I was able to get a clear understanding of these things, thanks to T.R.Dawson's exposition in his "Systematic Terminology" series of articles in the BCM. Later published in collected form by Ken Whyld.
|
|
| (58) Posted by Georgy Evseev [Monday, Jul 18, 2016 13:54] |
ОК, I'll check some sources to confirm this definition.
I was always thinking that grade of (black) correction is the number of _repeated_ errors.
Anyway, according to this definition, Baturin's problem does not contain correction at all, as black has only one error (interference of black bishop), and two positive effects: opening a rank line for black rook (affects variations 1... d5, 1...e4, 1...f3, 1...g2) and limiting the movement of white bishop (affects 1...c6). These effects are not errors - if Bh1 simply disappears, then all wB moves will solve - so we cannot talk about correction.
|
|
| (59) Posted by shankar ram [Monday, Jul 18, 2016 15:52] |
Well, it all depends on HOW you define the errors..
We can define as:
1. Prevent BB access to b7
2. Ditto to b7, c6
3. ...b7, c6, d5
4. ...b7, c6, d5, e4
5. ...b7, c6, d5, e4, f3
But, as I said before, all may not agree..
You are among the dissenters!
|
|
| (60) Posted by shankar ram [Monday, Jul 18, 2016 15:52]; edited by shankar ram [16-07-18] |
<<double posted>>
|
|
Read more... |
Page: [Previous] [Next] 1 2 3 4 5
MatPlus.Net  Forum Threemovers More Nth degree black corrections in 3# |
ISC 2024
