|
| Page: [Previous] [Next] 1 2 |
| (21) Posted by Marek Kwiatkowski [Wednesday, Jan 23, 2008 04:42] |
I am sorry for my emotional and badly selected (translated) words.
Miodrag, you are right, that all my commentary should be removed by administrator.
|
|
| (22) Posted by Administrator [Wednesday, Jan 23, 2008 12:59] |
After a careful re-reading the posts in question I didn't find the reason to remove or change anything. Marek has clearly and openly stated his opinion about the problem. We may agree with it or not, we may like it or not, but we cannot blame him and force him to feel different... As we cannot expect the judges to adjust the marks they gave, which for somebody else may also seem inpolitely high.
Administrator
|
|
| (23) Posted by Miodrag Mladenović [Wednesday, Jan 23, 2008 13:50] |
OK, if you think that this comment is OK, I am fine. However my objection was not on his comment on FA marks as you stated in your reply. That's OK and everyone can have different opinion. I know that I already several times expressed my opinion if I do not like something. I am OK even when somebody does not like some problem but I still think it's wrong to write for problem that it's a trash. This is most likely as Marek stated language translation issue. Since you are maintaining this forum it's your decision at the end. However I think that comments like this one may make some beginners to quite chess problems and that they are not good for us.
Misha.
|
|
| (24) Posted by David Knezevic [Wednesday, Jan 23, 2008 15:11] |
QUOTE
Misha: I think that comments like this one may make some beginners to quit chess problems and that they are not good for us.
Well, maybe. But it would be worse to prohibit negative comments, even if they are harsh. Especially if it is obviously a personal, not a common opinion.
In the case that some beginner is discourraged by Marek's comment, perhaps he/she would be re-encourraged by the fact that three great masters, the judges for FIDE Album 1992-94, had quite a different opinion. Their marks for Sven's threemover show it: Michael Keller - 3 points, Mircea Manolescu - 3 points, Robin Matthews - 3.5 (!) points.
|
|
| (25) Posted by Uri Avner [Thursday, Jan 24, 2008 16:53]; edited by Uri Avner [08-01-24] |
Referring to Tromler's #3, I don't really see the problem with the two short mates after the King's flight. For me it is an agreeable part of the problem's idea which is to separate these mates in an attractive way, by using the royally created ambush in each variation.
|
|
| (26) Posted by Marek Kwiatkowski [Thursday, Jan 24, 2008 17:16]; edited by Marek Kwiatkowski [08-01-24] |
In fact, I did not find adequate words for my alternative that Sven’s problem may be incorrect (“a total trash”). If this problem is out of a good taste, “a big kitsch” seems to be a better comparison.
For me, do not exist a third possibility.
Miodrag, the theme Le Grand, in this problem, is questionable too. There is the choice of play instead of a change. Sometimes (!) a good taste can also clash with such a shrewd simplification.
The rules can only restrict a real creator. On the whole, they are good only for beginners or some quasi-judges.
If I am right, Sven may feel very well as a big wizard. His problem “would deceive” many great composers.
I am not afraid that somebody can write: “a total trash” about my problem. It would be better than a false or malicious silence (disregard).
Milan, I burned all bridges and now I feel free.
|
|
| (27) Posted by Thomas Maeder [Thursday, Jan 24, 2008 18:22] |
QUOTE
Miodrag, the theme Le Grand, in this problem, is questionable too. There is the choice of play instead of a change.
I am not Miodrag, but: would you care to elaborate? I don't see why Trommler's problem shouldn't show the le Grand theme.
|
|
| (28) Posted by Miodrag Mladenović [Thursday, Jan 24, 2008 20:46] |
Marek wrote:
QUOTE
Miodrag, the theme Le Grand, in this problem, is questionable too.
I agree that there are better threemover problems showing le Grand theme but for me the le Grand theme is not questionable in this problem. It's true that variations are question of choice but still this problem does match le Grand theme pattern definition. Also, there is no some major defect by the definition (flight taking key etc.). Also, it's not true that by definition problem is good if it's showing le Grand theme (like with any other theme).
By the way I do not want to comment on FA judges marks. There is no some strict definition or guidance what is a good or bad problem. The marks are always depending on personal taste of composers (judges). I know from my own experience. Some of my problems that I thought that are very good and should be in the album never made it. However some problems that I was not so sure got in. At some point I made decision that I should always submit all of my problems since I am never sure how they will be marked. Luckily I do not compose too much problems. My average is about 10 problems per year so it's not too much overhead for judges.
Misha.
|
|
| (29) Posted by Marek Kwiatkowski [Friday, Jan 25, 2008 15:49] |
Miodrag, you are right that the pattern of the Le Grand theme is saved in Sven’s problem.
There are many very nice problems based on a choice of play (instead of more difficult change).
By the way, In the same FA, there is a much better example, the Le Grand theme too. The set play is a thematic King’s move and it takes two thematic mates, which are separated later. Sorry, but I will not display (comment) it.
|
|
| (30) Posted by Marek Kwiatkowski [Saturday, Jan 26, 2008 14:23]; edited by Marek Kwiatkowski [08-01-26] |
B12 – FA 92-94, if somebody likes such “pattern” works.
Midrag, you wrote:
“By the definition (codex) this short variation is not variation at all and it does not decrease a value of the problem. Why should black play something where it will help white to achive a goal with a less moves? This is not a helpmate where it would be a cook.”
Regarding your words I recommend you another B12 - FA 86-88. It is your very nice problem. Especially “something” 1…Kxd5 2.Se3# has interested me.
Should somebody (solver) consider whether a shorter but obvious play (flight) exists as variation?
Would you like to see this play not clear?
|
|
| (31) Posted by Miodrag Mladenović [Saturday, Jan 26, 2008 20:54] |
Marek wrote:
QUOTE
Should somebody (solver) consider whether a shorter but obvious play (flight) exists as variation?
Any serious solver will check for sure all flights. Simple as a solver you have to look all possible moves and naturaly bK moves are first to be looked. However if there is an obvious short continuation after the flight move as a solver I'll move on the other moves. It will not bother me at all such variation if other variations are nice. Even if this move does repeat in some full length variation it will not decrease a value of the problem (that's my opinion).
QUOTE
Would you like to see this play not clear?
Nobody wants to see play that is not clear. However definition of "play not clear" is not so clear :). Different problemists will have different opinions what is clear and what is not clear. Can you define what does mean "play not clear"?
Actually there is much better example for different opinions what is clear and what is not clear. For example in my opinion it's not the same move if arival square is same but departure square has been changed. However there are hundreds of problems that are showing some complex theme in a trivial way by using this logic that it's a same move regardless if departure square is same or not. Nowdays majority of problemists are not even paying attention to difference in departure square (in all kind of problems, twomovers, threemovers etc.).
|
|
| (32) Posted by Marek Kwiatkowski [Sunday, Jan 27, 2008 16:55] |
I think that a trivial way (or trick) is possible, if a final (general) effect can be good (in taste) or it is impossible in another way.
If somebody does think that he has deceived others, let it be funny.
|
|
| (33) Posted by Marek Kwiatkowski [Monday, Jan 28, 2008 12:32] |
Thomas asked me (?) about my words „questionable the Le Grand theme”.
It is the pattern of the Le Grand theme (by FA): 1.X [2.A#] 1…a 2.B#; 1.Y [2.B#] 1…a 2.A#.
There is the pattern of the Dombrovskis paradox: 1.X [2.A#] 1…a 2.Y#; 1.Z 1…a 2.A# too.
Thus, the Le Grand theme is a reciprocal combination of Dombrovskis paradoxes.
Hence the Le Grand theme belongs paradox themes.
In both the problems: Sven’s and B12 (FA 92-94) the move 1…a is a very obvious King’s flight or set play so there exists a third phase 1…a with mates 2.A# and B# which are only separated later.
The layer of paradox effaces (does not exists) there.
There are some nice problems, where also exists such a unwanted phase 1..a 2.A# and 2.B#, but the move 1…a is not so obvious and visible.
Example:
Friedrich Chlubna
1st/2nd Pr Schach 1987
 (= 9+14 )
3#
*1...Sd4 2.Sd6# and Se3#
|
|
| (34) Posted by Thomas Maeder [Monday, Jan 28, 2008 19:08] |
QUOTE
Thomas asked me (?) about my words „questionable the Le Grand theme”.
Yes, that was addressed at you.
QUOTE
Hence the Le Grand theme belongs paradox themes.
Sure.
QUOTE
In both the problems: Sven’s and B12 (FA 92-94) the move 1…a is a very obvious King’s flight or set play so there exists a third phase 1…a with mates 2.A# and B# which are only separated later.
The layer of paradox effaces (does not exists) there.
Thanks! I can see your point now.
I don't share it, though. To me, it seems paradoxical enough that move a once defends against the threat A and once allows mate A.
The problem by F. Chlubna is very nice!
|
|
| (35) Posted by Axel Gilbert [Saturday, Feb 2, 2008 00:33]; edited by Axel Gilbert [08-02-02] |
In the Trommler, I think the short mates with BK at c6 are thematic, the strategy being to provoke Kc6 then mating with LeGrand theme
Therefore, I'm puzzled about the key. It's 'somewhat' thematic as it gives c6 but it's not that much "flight-giving" as c6 is the case the Black king must avoid.
Well maybe it's a mix of the opinions given before.
Anyway, I wouldn't say the problem is besides the limits of good taste.
|
|
| (36) Posted by Marek Kwiatkowski [Saturday, Feb 2, 2008 11:42]; edited by Marek Kwiatkowski [08-02-02] |
Somebody exactly knows that in the box “a” there are two marbles “A” and “B”. He wants to take out a concrete one but he always gets the other. How many tries does it take to consider it as paradox?
(regarding the phase 1..a 2.A# and 2.B# in the Le Grand theme)
|
|
| (37) Posted by Sarah Hornecker [Saturday, Feb 2, 2008 13:33] |
It couldn't be called a paradox, just a curiosity. It's quite common to do that ten times in a row (there was an experiment on TV where some illusionist said, viewers could toss a coin to the same side ten times - and some thousand people called - all within statistical probability).
So maybe it's unusual after 16 times, when the chances are at 1:65.535 (however, for your reasons on a good TV show aired in China maybe after 28 times (when it is around 1:260 millions) statistically only one person would get that result you'd call "paradox".
However, a real paradox is something else, like the barber of Sevilla paradox:
The (male) barber of Sevilla shaves all men that don't shave theirself.
But maybe my posting is offtopic.
|
|
| (38) Posted by Marek Kwiatkowski [Monday, Feb 4, 2008 14:17] |
The taste can be variable. One of the mentioned above judges (FA 92-94, 3#) marked my problem (B90, same FA) by 3 points, though he had not earlier noticed any good values of this one in the judgment of periodical tourney (!). Of course it is not a paradox too, only a correction of the mistake, probably.
|
|
| (39) Posted by Miodrag Mladenović [Monday, Feb 4, 2008 14:30] |
Marek, I have a similar experience but in the opposite direction. One of my problems judge ranked at first place at the regular tournament with a comment that problem does have Fide Album quality. However, later on same judge awarded only 2 points to that problem (by the way problem ended up in th FA becaus ef the marks by other two judges). So, yes the taste can be variable. I absolutely agree with you.
|
|
| (40) Posted by Marek Kwiatkowski [Monday, Feb 4, 2008 20:28]; edited by Marek Kwiatkowski [08-02-05] |
And let it be a happy end for this topic.
|
|
No more posts |
Page: [Previous] [Next] 1 2
MatPlus.Net  Forum Threemovers One of the bigger oversights |
ISC 2024
