MatPlus.Net

 Website founded by
Milan Velimirović
in 2006

7:26 UTC
ISC 2024
 
  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
1-Jan-2024

B P C F





 
 
MatPlus.Net Forum Competitions WCCI 2019-2021 - Results
 
You can only view this page!
Page: [Previous] [Next] 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
(101) Posted by Viktoras Paliulionis [Thursday, Sep 15, 2022 20:16]

 QUOTE 
Misha, I meant a possible "dual" (I use this for lack of a better word) to be the two possible answers to 2.Sc8 AFTER 1.Ta5 Be4 2.Sc8?. Now both 2...Tb1 and 2...Bd3 defend, not just 2...Bd3 as you said.

I think Marcos is right. Trial 1.Ra5 Be4 2. Sc8? has two refutations - 2...Bd3! and 2...Rd1! Therefore, it would be more accurate to write as follows:

1...Be4!!! 2.Be6+ Bd5 3.Bxd5#
(2.Qc2+? Bxc2!)
(2.Sc8? Bd3/Rd1!) -- it is not true trial
(2.Sxe8? Bd3!)

I don't know if this is a flaw, because the important thing here is not the trial itself, but the fact that 2.Sc8? is not suitable here. In the solution, trials could be written without refutations, for example, like this: (2.Qc2+?/Sc8?/2.Sxe8?).

At first I had doubts due black errors (weakenings) marked with letters of the alphabet. I'm no expert on direct mates, but I think that, like in helpmates, an effect is a true effect only when it's used in a variation. But, for example, in the variation 1...Be6 2.Sxe8, the opening of the line a5-e5 is not used. This black weakening is fictitious, it is only a visual (pseudo) effect. But, on the other hand, the opening of the line is used in the try 1...Be6 2.Qc2+? I began to understand the idea of the problem when I wrote the letters in a more mathematically correct way:

1.Ra5! [2.Rxa4+ Sb4 3.Rxb4#]
1...B~ 2.Qc2+ Kb4/Kxd4 3.Rxa4/Sf5# (a)

1...Bc6! 2.Sc8 ~/Rb1 3.Sb6/Be2# (b) (Note: weakening a is fictitious here)
2.Qc2? Kb4 3.Rxa4? Bxa4! (a) opening of the line a5-e5 is used here

1...Be6!! 2.Sxe8 ~/Sc5 3.Sd6/Rxc5# (c)
2.Qc2? Kxd4 3.Sf5+ Bxf5! (a)
2.Sc8? Bxc8! (b)

1...Be4!!! 2.Be6+ Bd5 3.Bxd5# (ad)
2.Qc2+? Bxc2! (a)
2.Sc8? Bd3/Rb1! (b)
2.Sxe8? Bd3! (c)
 
   
(Read Only)pid=23755
(102) Posted by Marcos Roland [Thursday, Sep 15, 2022 23:56]

Viktoras, I think I see differently. The errors are attributed to the entire variation, not to the subvariations. The variation which implies just error a) is 1...B ~; the variation which implies errors a) and b) is 1...Bc6; the variation which implies errors a), b) and c) is 1...Be6; and the variation which implies errors a), b), c) and d) is 1...Be4. The correction of any particular error is seen in just one try-subvariation, not in all try-subvariations. So, when Black plays 1...Be6, error a) is felt and corrected in the try-subvariation 2.Qc2+?, while error b) is relevant in the try-subvariation 1...Sc8? But when you consider the entire variation 1...Be6, both previous errors count.
 
   
(Read Only)pid=23759
(103) Posted by Marcos Roland [Friday, Sep 16, 2022 00:06]

Regarding the importance of the "tries", well, I think it would be nice if all the previous refutations should fail for just one reason. Maybe not essential, but nice. Because of this, I thought it would be better to have the bRb1 and the bPb2. However, now I see that, after 1...Be4, also 2.Qc2+ fails for two reasons: both c2 and f5 are under the fire of the Be4.
 
   
(Read Only)pid=23760
(104) Posted by Marcos Roland [Friday, Sep 16, 2022 01:51]

Misha's problem is the only example of black quaternary correction specifically quoted in the Encyclopedia of Chess Problems, by Milan Velimirovic and Kari Valtonen.
 
   
(Read Only)pid=23762
(105) Posted by Miodrag Mladenović [Friday, Sep 16, 2022 06:42]

Marcos gave an excellent explanation about black errors.

About positive effects. I can agree that it would be nice if there is only one black defenas against previous variations. However it's not requirement by the theme. But then on the other hand if I add bRb1 and bPb2 then there will be never mate 3.Be2# and it's nice to have a bigger role for wB.

By the way Milan Velimirovic liked this problem a lot. Of course he was a fully aware of difficulty of this theme because he did compose on his own many problems showing this theme. So he did understand right away why is this a real quartenary black correction theme. He selected this problem for his book most likely because its the most economical problem showing this theme.
 
 
(Read Only)pid=23764
(106) Posted by Viktoras Paliulionis [Friday, Sep 16, 2022 14:50]

Marcos, I admit that I wrote not quite correctly, so you misunderstood me. I know we have to sum all the black errors, but I didn't write it. For example, the last variation can be written more precisely as follows:

1...Be4!!! (abcd - the set of all used black errors)
2.Be6+ Bd5 3.Bxd5# (ad)
2.Qc2+? Bxc2! (a)
2.Sc8? Bd3/Rb1! (b)
2.Sxe8? Bd3! (c)

The alphabet used became clearer to me when I specified for each variation and sub-try what black weaknesses they used. I think you wrote the same thing, only in different words.

Miodrag's problem is excellent, but it takes effort to understand it.
 
   
(Read Only)pid=23766
(107) Posted by Marcos Roland [Friday, Sep 16, 2022 21:38]

I think the best thing, Viktoras, is that we've learned something, now we know a little bit about quaternary correction. This small debate provoked us to think more analitically and concretly. I put the pieces on the board, I figured out some of the difficulties involved, and I incidentally realized that some effects would be nice to achieve, but at the same time almost miraculous, so that they cannot be a thematic requirement. The debate is always healthy and enriching. That's precisely my point: what is lacking in the WFCC procedures of judging is some debate. If we were judging Misha's problem, maybe we would change our opinion.
 
   
(Read Only)pid=23767
(108) Posted by shankar ram [Saturday, Sep 17, 2022 08:40]

For those whose appetite for tertiary, quaternary and higher degree correction has been whetted by this discussion, these earlier MPF threads may be of interest:

http://matplus.net/start.php?px=1663395631&app=forum&act=posts&fid=gen&tid=471&pid=3072&mark=yes&#n3072

http://matplus.net/start.php?px=1663395753&app=forum&act=posts&fid=xshow2&tid=74&pid=5402&mark=yes&#n5402

http://matplus.net/start.php?px=1663396106&app=forum&act=posts&tid=647&fid=xshow3&page=0
 
 
(Read Only)pid=23768
(109) Posted by Viktor Syzonenko [Wednesday, Sep 21, 2022 13:10]

8th WCCI 2019-2021, Section E
And we read the announcement of an interesting competition!

Сразу к делу.
Уважаемые судьи, мне не понравилось ваше отношение к работе.
Смотрим числа, ваши идентификаторы моего интеллекта.
Смотрим.

40 Syzonenko, Viktor 26.5 UA
(2 2.5) 2.5 + 2 + 2.5 =7
2 + (2 1.5) + 1.5 + 2 =5.5
(2) 2.5 + 2.5 + 2.5 (3) =7.5
1.5 + 2 (2.5 1.5) + 2 =5.5
(1.5 2) 1.5 + 2 + 1.5=5
(3 2) 2 + 2 + 2.5 =6.5

И вот судьи, которые их ставили. Ставили СВОЕМУ пониманию.
MC Michel Caillaud FR 1.7735
JC János Csák HU 2.1597
EK Emil Klemanič SK 2.0347
MK Mykola Kolesnik UA 1.9201
VN Vladislav Nefyodov
Уважаемые судьи, ваше понимание - неудовлетворительно.

Автор открыто и прямо показывает числовые идентификаторы СВОЕГО понимания.
Вот они:
E1 =4
E2 =3
E3 =4
E4 =3.5
E5 =3
E6 =4
Отклонение в 0.5 балла обосновать невозможно.

The criterion of truth is practice. We present a competition.
Example and content.
Критерий истины - практика. Обьявляем конкурс.
Пример и содержание.

E1WCCI8 (See G4WCCI8 too!)
Viktor Syzonenko
3 ehr. Erw.
H1596 Probleemblad 4 2019 Oct-Dec
(= 5+10 )

5K2/3r3p/3N2k1/2qN2rR/3Ppbp1/7n/4n3/8 b - - 0 1
H#2 3.1. 5+10=15

1.R*d6! Rh6+ A 2.Kf5 Se7# B new free square "f5"
1.R*h5! Se7+ B 2.Kh6 Sf7# C new free square "h6"
1.Q*d5! Sf7 C 2.Qf5 Rh6# A new free square "f6"

Each white figure controls a CLEAR field near the black king. To help, Black eliminates one figure.
Cycle of moves and captures.
Каждая белая фигура контролирует ЧИСТОЕ поле возле черного короля. Чтобы помочь, черные устраняют одну фигуру.
Цикл ходов и взятий.

Briefly
1 Elimination of control near the black king
2 Cycl moves
3 "Cyclic Zilahi"

Конкурсное задание:
в одной позиции интегрировать три слоя содержания.
1 Черная фигура или пешка (не король) своим первым ходом устраняет белую фигуру которая контролирует ЧИСТУЮ клетку (свободную от черного материала) возле черного короля.
Черный король может или двигаться на произвольную доступную клетку или вообще не двигаться.
2 Ходы белых выполняются по циклу.
3 Назначение белых фигур циклически меняется (циклический "Зилахи").
-Другие (вспомогательные) белые фигуры могут быть.
-Технические белые пешки могут быть.
-Тематическая белая пешка - это тематическая фигура!
-В начальной позиции превращенные фигуры запрещены.

Bid:
integrate three layers of content into one item.
1 A black figure or pawn (not a king) in its first move eliminates a white figure that controls a PURE square (free of black material) near the black king.
The black king can either move on an arbitrary accessible cage or not move at all.
2 White moves are performed in a cycle.
3 The purpose of white figures changes cyclically (cyclic "Zilahi").
-Other (auxiliary) white shapes can be.
-Technical white pawns can be.
-Thematic white pawn is a thematic figure!
-Converted shapes are not allowed in the starting position.

! Rus
Конкурс для судей проводится в период 21 сентября - 20 октября 2022 года.
Надо обнаружить в любом источнике пример (по состоянию на 31 декабря 2021 года) соответствующий изложенным требованиям.
Если в прошлом времени такой пример отсутствует, то его надо создать: своими знаниями, своей фантазией, своим трудом.
Если на 20 октября 2022 года такой пример не будет показан, то 21 октября 2022 года каждый судья вносит по 100 евро в "Творческий Фонд Виктора Сизоненко".
! Eng
The competition for judges is held between September 21 and October 20, 2022.
It is necessary to find in any source an example (as of December 31, 2021) that meets the above requirements.
If in the past there is no such example, then it must be created: with your knowledge, your imagination, your work.
If on October 20, 2022 such an example is not shown, then on October 21, 2022, each judge contributes 100 euros to the Viktor Syzonenko Creative Foundation.

!! Rus
В период 21 октября - 20 ноября 2022 конкурс открыт для всех (международный тематический конкурс).
Если на 20 ноября 2022 года такой пример не будет показан, то 21 ноября 2022 года каждый судья вносит еще по 100 евро в "Творческий Фонд Виктора Сизоненко".
!! Eng
In the period October 21 - November 20, 2022, the competition is open to everyone (international thematic competition).
If on November 20, 2022 such an example is not shown, then on November 21, 2022, each judge contributes another 100 euros to the Viktor Syzonenko Creative Foundation.

!!! Rus
В период 21 ноября - 20 декабря 2022 конкурс продолжается и открыт для всех (международный тематический конкурс).
Если на 20 декабря 2022 года такой пример не будет показан, то 21 декабря 2022 года каждый судья вносит еще по 100 евро в "Творческий Фонд Виктора Сизоненко".
!!! Eng
In the period November 21 - December 20, 2022, the competition continues and is open to everyone (international thematic competition).
If on December 20, 2022 such an example is not shown, then on December 21, 2022, each judge contributes another 100 euros to the Viktor Syzonenko Creative Foundation.

!!!! Rus
И так далее, И так далее, И так далее ...
Этот алгоритм будет работать БЕЗ перерыва.
Остановка:
Или перемена судьями СВОЕГО понимания моих творческих результатов,
Или показ требуемого примера.
Иного не дано.
В любой момент времени каждый судья может легитимно согласиться с автором.
Но деньги не возвращаются.
!!!! Eng
And so on, And so on, And so on...
This algorithm will work WITHOUT interruption.
Stopping:
Or the judges changing THEIR understanding of my creative results,
Or show the desired example.
There is no other given.
At any given time, each judge may legitimately agree with the author.
But the money is not being returned.

!!!!! Rus
Возможное распределение Фонда:
1/3 для сайта MatPlus
1/3 для автора (если он не судья) вновь созданного примера
1/3 для автора показанного примера, генератора идеи
!!!!! Eng
Possible allocation of the Fund:
1/3 for MatPlus site
1/3 for author (if not judge) of newly created example
1/3 for the author of the example shown, the generator of the idea

!! !! !! Rus
Создано zone64 для популяризации шахматного композиционного творчества.
!! !! !! Eng
Created by zone64 to popularize chess compositional creativity.

V
 
 
(Read Only)pid=23778
(110) Posted by Juraj Lörinc [Wednesday, Sep 21, 2022 19:02]

What about the following?

Wichard von Alvensleben
Die Schwalbe 1999
(= 10+9 )
h#2, 3.1.1.1

1.Q×b7+ Sc6+ 2.Kd6 B×g3#
1.R×e7 B×g3+ 2.Kf5 Sd6#
1.g×f2 Sd6 2.Kd4 Sc6#
 
   
(Read Only)pid=23782
(111) Posted by seetharaman kalyan [Friday, Sep 23, 2022 04:24]

I suppose Syzonenko will pay $100 to each judge and Lorinc
 
   
(Read Only)pid=23794
(112) Posted by Viktor Syzonenko [Saturday, Sep 24, 2022 13:24]

8th WCCI 2019-2021, Section E

+1rus) Замечательный пример. 2021 - 1999 = 22. Спасибо.
Конкурс живет, идет дальше. Без денег. И для судей это большое облегчение. Теперь они свободно входят в творческий поток.
++1eng) A wonderful example. 2021 - 1999 = 22. Thank you.
The competition lives on, goes on. No money. And for the judges, it's a great relief. Now they freely enter the creative stream.

+2rus) Для начала арифметика.
За 22 года появляется одна работа.
Вопрос:
"Это средний уровень, который повторит мастер?“
"Это высокий уровень, который повторит гроссмейстер?“
"Это выдающийся уровень, повторение которого непредсказуемо и связано с неопределенностью во времени?“
++2eng) To begin with, arithmetic.
For 22 years, one work appears.
Question:
Is this the middle level that the master will repeat?
"Is this a high level that the grandmaster will repeat?"
"Is this an outstanding level whose repetition is unpredictable and linked to uncertainty over time?"

+3rus) Уважаемые судьи, вас закрутила повседневность. И вы не видите комичности ситуации. Поэтому отвлекусь.
Всю жизнь слышал одну басню. Вот она.
"За миллион лет обезьяна напечатает на пишущей машинке все сочинения Вильяма Шекспира".
Вы поняли юмор ситуации?
Ни одна обезьяна не живет миллион лет. И нет такой пишущей машинки. ...
Нет у нас 70 мастеров которые это повторят. И нет у нас 20 гроссмейстеров которые это повторят.
И нет у нас 22 года для ожидания "случайного" повторения.
++3eng) Dear judges, everyday life has twisted you. And you don't see the comicity of the situation. Therefore, I will be distracted.
I've heard one fable all my life. Here she is.
"For a million years, the monkey will print on the typewriter all the works of William Shakespeare."
Did you understand the humor of the situation?
No monkey has lived for a million years. And there is no such typewriter....
We don't have 70 masters who will repeat it. And we do not have 20 grandmasters who will repeat this.
And we don't have 22 years to wait for an "accidental" repeat.

+4rus) Поэтому дилемма прежняя:
Или вы соглашаетесь со мной,
Или на практике подтверждаете свою правоту.
Уважаемые судьи, вы сами создали себе трудности своей невнимательностью.
++4eng) Therefore, the dilemma is the same:
Or you agree with me,
Or in practice, you confirm your case.
Dear judges, you yourself have created difficulties for yourself with your inattention.

+5rus) Ситуация: или - или.
Или вы внимательно смотрите, думаете, советуетесь и соглашаетесь.
И мои творческие работы получают числовые идентификаторы:
E1 =4; E2 =3; E3 =4; E4 =3.5; E5 =3; E6 =4.
Или подтверждаете невозможное и игнорирование здравого смысла.
Если игнорировать дистанцию 22 года,
Если отказываться видеть развитие: устранение дополнительной фигуры и уменьшение количества материала,
- То это очевидный отрыв от действительности.
++5eng) Situation: or - or.
Or you look carefully, think, advise and agree.
And my creative work gets numerical identifiers:
E1 =4; E2 =3; E3 =4; E4 =3.5; E5 =3; E6 =4.
Or you confirm the impossible and ignoring common sense.
If you ignore the distance of 22 years,
If you refuse to see development: eliminating an additional figure and reducing the amount of material,
- This is an obvious gap from reality.

+6rus) В частном случае, действительность такова:
"Мы все ехали в поезде с названием СОЦИАЛИЗМ, но я на станции ПОЛЬША вышел (Юзеф Пилсудский)“.
"Мы все ехали в поезде с названием FIDE ALBUM, но я на станции WCCI вышел. А судьи поехали дальше."
Пожалуйста, возвратитесь на станцию с названием WCCI.
++6eng) In a particular case, the validity is as follows:
"We were all on a train called SOCIALISM, but I got out at the POLAND station (Józef Piłsudski)."
"We were all on a train called FIDE ALBUM, but I got off at WCCI station. And the judges moved on."
Please return to the station named WCCI.

V
 
   
(Read Only)pid=23800
(113) Posted by Viktor Syzonenko [Friday, Sep 30, 2022 00:39]

To the President of the WFCC Harry Fougiaxis ...
Director 8th WCCI 2019-2021 Valery Kopyl ...

Participant 8th WCCI 2019-2021 ViktorSyzonenko ...

Epigraph
International Master - basic title. 100 USD, no higher. And there are no doubts.
The international grandmaster is the highest title. 200 euro, 300 euro, 500 euro. Maybe higher. And there may be doubts.

Introduction

I remind you that Viktor Syzonenko is an international master. And the minimum quality identifier of its operation in the worst case cannot be lower than 2.
Real, beyond doubt: 2.5 - 3.
The numerical value less than 2 must be supported by fact. Not an emotion.
There are no facts.
Identifiers 3.5 and 4 indicate "exclusivity is likely" and "exclusivity is beyond doubt."


8th WCCI 2019-2021, Section A

There is no indication that it is incorrect.
Therefore, by mutually ignoring in particular, YOU will change the value of each "estimate" of my work by the value of "2" (two).
In total, each of my jobs will receive "6" (six).
This will "close" the problem in this section.


8th WCCI 2019-2021, Section B

Judges:
YG Yury Gorbatenko 1.8357
CN C.G.S. Narayanan IN 2.2107
ST Sergey I. Tkachenko UA 1.3686
KV Kenan Velikhanov AZ 2.6571
VV Viktor Volchek 2.0055
Identified the level of my work:
15-16 Syzonenko, Viktor 29.5 UA
2 + 2 (1 3.5) + 2.5 =6.5
2 + 2.5 (1 3) + 2.5 =7
2.5 + 2.5 (1 3) + 2 =7
2 + 2 (1 3) + 2 =6
3 + 2 (1 3.5) + 2.5 =7.5
3 + 2.5 (1 3.5) + 2.5 =8
It's not right. And for the third judge, it is generally unacceptable.

Here are the author's identifiers:
Problems 1, 2, 3 = 3 (if feeling unwell = 2.5)
Problem 4 = 2.5 (in good health = 3)
Problem 5 = 3 (in good health = 3.5)
Problem 6 = 4 (if feeling unwell = 3.5)

Third Judge and Director from the same country as me. And clearly inadequate to me.
The third Judge must be replaced. He probably has specific circumstances.
Appoint a single judge or collective judge from the
any country other than Ukraine, Russian Federation, Belarus, Slovakia.
To see six of my works, a mega-composition, will be both useful and honorable for any judge.
This is a historic moment.
In front of you are six creative works that contain one formula, but have different looks.
In total, I have 14 such works. And not a single predecessor.

The judge (and any critic in general) must answer the question.
Question:
Is this the middle level that the master will repeat?
"Is this a high level that the grandmaster will repeat?"
"Is this an outstanding level whose repetition is unpredictable and linked to uncertainty over time?"

Change the values of the estimates of the third judge to values ​ ​ from "2" to "4" and get new summary estimates.
This will "close" the problem in this section.


8th WCCI 2019-2021, Section C

There is no indication that it is incorrect.
Therefore, ignoring specifically, YOU will change the values of "0.5," "1," "1.5" for my works with numbers C1, C2, C3, C4, C5.
These works will receive new summary estimates.
This will "close" the problem in this section.


8th WCCI 2019-2021, Section E

(( As published by MatPlus
(109) Posted by Viktor Syzonenko [Wednesday, Sep 21, 2022 13:10]
(112) Posted by Viktor Syzonenko [Saturday, Sep 24, 2022 13:24] ))

Judges:
MC Michel Caillaud FR 1.7735
JC János Csák HU 2.1597
EK Emil Klemanič SK 2.0347
MK Mykola Kolesnik UA 1.9201
VN Vladislav Nefyodov
Identified the level of my work:
40 Syzonenko, Viktor 26.5 UA
(2 2.5) 2.5 + 2 + 2.5 =7
2 + (2 1.5) + 1.5 + 2 =5.5
(2) 2.5 + 2.5 + 2.5 (3) =7.5
1.5 + 2 (2.5 1.5) + 2 =5.5
(1.5 2) 1.5 + 2 + 1.5=5
(3 2) 2 + 2 + 2.5 =6.5
It's not right.

Here are the author's identifiers:
E1 =4; E2 =3; E3 =4; E4 =3.5; E5 =3; E6 =4
The deviation of 0.5 points cannot be justified.

Question:
Is this the middle level that the master will repeat?
"Is this a high level that the grandmaster will repeat?"
"Is this an outstanding level whose repetition is unpredictable and linked to uncertainty over time?"

Dilemma:
Or you agree with me,
Or in practice, you confirm your case.
Dear judges, you yourself have created difficulties for yourself with your inattention.

Anyone who manages to create something similar will agree with the author.

Only changing to the suggested value will "close" the problem in this section.
In any other case, this situation will continue.
This is "WCCI," not "FIDE Album."


8th WCCI 2019-2021, Section F

Abbreviated option.

The first
The values of all "scores" cannot be less than "2."

The second
Here are the author's identifiers for two "key" works.
F1 number = 3.5 or 4
Number F5 = 3.5 or 4
Or
"Anyone" will show "Something Similar."
This will "close" the problem in this section.


8th WCCI 2019-2021, Section G

Judges:
BG Borislav Gadjanski RS 2.2867
AK Anatoly Karamanits UA 2.4354
JL Juraj Lörinc SK 1.6391
FP Franz Pachl DE 2.3180
PP Petko Petkov BG 2.1118
Identified the level of my work:
59-60 Syzonenko, Viktor 25.5 UA
2 + 2 (1 2.5) + 1.5 =5.5
2 + 2 (1 3) + 1.5 =5.5
2 + 2.5 (1 3) + 1.5 =6
2 (2.5 0.5) + 1.5 + 1.5 =5
2.5 + 2.5 (1 2.5) + 2.5 =7.5
2.5 + 2 + 2 (2.5 1.5) =6.5
The first
The values of all "scores" cannot be less than "2."
The second
Again, "the problem of the third judge."
The third Judge must be replaced.

Appoint a single judge or collective judge from the
any country other than Ukraine, Russian Federation, Belarus, Slovakia.
It will be useful and honorable for any judge to see six of my works.

The judge (and any critic in general) must answer the question.

Question:
Is this the middle level that the master will repeat?
"Is this a high level that the grandmaster will repeat?"
"Is this an outstanding level whose repetition is unpredictable and linked to uncertainty over time?"

Change the values of the estimates of the third judge to values ​ ​ from "2" to "4" and get new summary estimates.
This will "close" the problem in this section.


29.IX.2022, VS.

Created by zone64 to popularize chess compositional creativity.
.
 
   
(Read Only)pid=23872
(114) Posted by Juraj Lörinc [Friday, Sep 30, 2022 08:14]

I know from my own experience that anyone (even grandmasters) can create compositions of low quality (as understood or assessed by general opinion). The most important point in general is: does the composer enjoy the creative process, preparation of the composition for magazine/tourney, seeing it printed or included in the award, showing it to chess friends, discussing it? If yes, then it does not matter if the composition is fantastic or is total crap. If no, then he should reconsider, he does something wrong.

But as soon as the composer goes public and requires judgement of his works by others, he should be able to accept the general opinion of them. I can disagree with their opinion, even point something missed by judge(s), but if many people feel similarly about my composition, most often it is because the composition deserves its assessment. And if grandmaster publishes some crap (like me sometimes), although I might feel differently, I am not going to run and scream that YOU DO NOT UNDERSTAND, YOU DO NOT ASSESS MY WORK FAIRLY. (Of course, if some rule is broken, this is something different, we should behave in line with rules, including judges.)
 
   
(Read Only)pid=23876
(115) Posted by Kevin Begley [Friday, Sep 30, 2022 19:20]

Well said, Juraj.

If a judge is unable to correctly appreciate the undeniable thematic beauty of a problem, it's generally best to blame the composer for not expressing the problem in a more undeniable fashion. :)
Composers willing to fault themselves for getting robbed by some judge(s) are on the path to minimizing the likelihood they will be robbed again and again.

If your goal is to win awards in the present day, make problems that no present day judge could possibly deny.
If you still feel robbed, have faith that the ultimate judge (future problem enthusiasts) will discover and value your good works (especially those that present day judges could not appreciate).

The most critical and honest judge alive would not compose problems to please lesser judges in the present day.
Only one judge can truly rob a composer (the one refusing to be self-critical and self-honest about the feedback they are receiving) -- worry most about that judge's faults.
 
   
(Read Only)pid=23883
(116) Posted by Viktor Syzonenko [Friday, Sep 30, 2022 22:56]

"Arkady, don't speak beautifully!"

These are words from the play of the Russian writer Anton Pavlovich Chekhov.
The great Alfreds Dombrovskis began with these words his reviews of the development of twomovers.
See the magazine "Shakhmaty" (Riga).
 
   
(Read Only)pid=23884
(117) Posted by Juraj Lörinc [Friday, Sep 30, 2022 23:40]

Frankly speaking, I do not understand. I was trying to be as clear as possible, but I find Kevin's paragraphs incomprehensible. Am I alone?
 
 
(Read Only)pid=23886
(118) Posted by Viktor Syzonenko [Saturday, Oct 1, 2022 01:41]

Numeric identifiers from "0" to "4" are used in championships.

Each Author selects SIX BEST creative works to participate in the World Championships.
BEST WORKS! Therefore, the works of international masters and international grandmasters are guaranteed to receive the identifier "2" from each judge. And, in the worst case, with the sumar identifier "6," they do NOT claim either prizes or entry into the "FIDE Album." That is, they do not interfere with anyone.
The essence of the work of judges: to identify OUTSTANDING creative works of the awarded period of time (2019-2021) and to elevate.
But instead, we see an insistence on "sinking" the creative work of lifetime title holders. Why? At its core, this is an extra and ungrateful work. And then to make it easier to "pick up" other works.
And to hide your INABILITY to see outstanding creative achievements.
See who used the "4" ID how many times.
Keep quiet and think.
 
   
(Read Only)pid=23887
(119) Posted by Jakob Leck [Saturday, Oct 1, 2022 07:24]

"Das Tolle am Internet ist, dass endlich jeder der ganzen Welt seine Meinung mitteilen kann. Das Furchtbare ist, dass es auch jeder tut." - Mark Zuckerberg

Joking aside (and it is kind of an insider, based on a German book), I do understand Kevin and I agree: He is implying that a) you either should compose better problems to force the judges to rank them higher instead of just making demands or b) that you are disappointed because you think the judges did you wrong, Viktor, but actually you are disappointed because your expectations towards the judges' opinion are too high.

Two points about your concrete judgement, Viktor, I find troubling:
The first is your understanding of originality. As far as I'm concerned, basis for judgement is not whether a problem is repeated frequently or less frequently. What is important is that it itself is no repetition of a previous problem. And of course originality is only ever a matter of degree because elements in the problem will have been seen before. The question is then whether improvements on or thematic additions to previous problems are sufficient for it to be of value and maybe receive an award.

The second is the idea that because someone is a master their problems should receive a minimal number of points. This is utter nonsense. Statistically, of course, problems from a master composer would obtain higher marks more frequently, but there is no guarantee of their quality, sadly.


Not agreeing with the judges is quite a natural part of artistic competitions. But making criticism public should be warranted by very good reasons, and if it is not, you risk making a fool of yourself.
 
   
(Read Only)pid=23894
(120) Posted by Nikola Predrag [Saturday, Oct 1, 2022 13:08]

One of the questions about WCCI is: are some judges (mis)using the power of their duty to judge people (or their titles,style...), instead of the problems? Quite a weird 'coincidence' is a fixed 1 point for all 6 Viktor's problems by the same judge.

15-16 Syzonenko, Viktor 29.5 UA
2 + 2 (1 3.5) + 2.5 =6.5
2 + 2.5 (1 3) + 2.5 =7
2.5 + 2.5 (1 3) + 2 =7
2 + 2 (1 3) + 2 =6
3 + 2 (1 3.5) + 2.5 =7.5
3 + 2.5 (1 3.5) + 2.5 =8
 
   
(Read Only)pid=23898

Read more...
Page: [Previous] [Next] 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

MatPlus.Net Forum Competitions WCCI 2019-2021 - Results