MatPlus.Net

 Website founded by
Milan Velimirović
in 2006

21:20 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-Apr-2024

B P C F





 
 
MatPlus.Net Forum Competitions Announcement of Shakki 100 JT
 
You can only view this page!
Page: [Previous] [Next] 1 2
(1) Posted by Jorma Paavilainen [Thursday, Nov 23, 2023 17:20]

Announcement of Shakki 100 JT


Shakki, the Finnish chess magazine, was founded in 1924 with the name Suomen Shakki. The magazine announces an international composing competition Shakki 100 JT in two groups, both with free theme:
A. Studies, judge Pauli Perkonoja
B. Moremovers, judge Jorma Paavilainen
The entries, not more than three from one composer in each section, joint entries included, to the tournament director Neal Turner via email: nealturnerfinland(at)hotmail.com
The deadline is 30th of June 2024.
Russian and Belarusian composers are not eligible to participate.
In each section there will be three prizes of 100, 70 and 50 EUR. The awards will be published during the year 2024.
 
(Read Only)pid=25496
(2) Posted by Alain Villeneuve [Thursday, Nov 23, 2023 17:33]

Is hatred for Russian and Belarusian composers necessary ?
 
 
(Read Only)pid=25497
(3) Posted by Nikola Predrag [Thursday, Nov 23, 2023 18:55]

Alain, hatred runs the world and obviously makes people very proud and happy. At least it looks very much so.
 
   
(Read Only)pid=25498
(4) Posted by Alain Villeneuve [Thursday, Nov 23, 2023 19:47]

Yes Nikola, unfortunately you're right, but my Finnish memories were different.
 
   
(Read Only)pid=25499
(5) Posted by Jorma Paavilainen [Thursday, Nov 23, 2023 21:27]

The magazine 'Shakki' is published by the Finnish Chess Federation. Since the start of Russia's "special military operation" against Ukraine, the federation does not allow representatives of Russia or Belarus to participate in competitions or events organised under the supervision of the federation.
As far as I know, this is the reason to exclude composers from these countries from this competition.
 
   
(Read Only)pid=25500
(6) Posted by Alain Villeneuve [Thursday, Nov 23, 2023 21:51]

Dear Jorma, I've been in conflict with my federation for over 50 years. I don't dare suggest that you send it packing.
 
 
(Read Only)pid=25501
(7) Posted by Viktor Syzonenko [Thursday, Nov 23, 2023 23:56]

Dear colleagues!
There are two worlds: intelligence and feelings.
Please consciously exclude the use of sensual characteristics. We have different ones.
Discussing nonsense called politics makes no sense.
The organizer "did not allow" some to participate. This is the right of the organizer. No discussion.
---
Дорогие коллеги!
Есть два мира: интеллект и чувства.
Пожалуйста, сознательно исключите использование чувственных характеристик. Они у нас разные.
Обсуждать бред называемый политикой - нет смысла.
Организатор "не разрешил" некоторым участвовать. Это право организатора. Без обсуждения.
 
   
(Read Only)pid=25502
(8) Posted by Alain Villeneuve [Friday, Nov 24, 2023 00:17]

Is your world one of "intelligence" or of "feelings" ? Or neither ?
 
 
(Read Only)pid=25503
(9) Posted by Viktoras Paliulionis [Friday, Nov 24, 2023 02:18]

It is a pity that the competition is organized in only two sections.

@Alain Villeneuve,
It's not hatred. It is a peaceful protest against this war. My feelings and my mind say that we all have to fight against the evil in this world. This is a war not only against Ukraine, but also against the entire democratic world. We have to show that we are not indifferent to it. Otherwise, we will be seen as supporting the war.

I have friends among Russian composers who do not support this war. They understand that the sanctions are not directed against them personally, but against their country. Unfortunately, many Russian composers support their current government and this war.

I also invite those who care about peace in our world to participate in the tournament organized by Ukrainian friends:
https://chess-kopyl.com.ua/images/2023/Chess_Composition_Day_tourney_announcement_eng2.pdf
 
 
(Read Only)pid=25504
(10) Posted by Kevin Begley [Friday, Nov 24, 2023 06:14]

This is no place for politics.

Thus, anyone announcing a tournament which excludes specific individuals (especially based upon nationality, in service of an overtly political agenda) should not be posting in this forum.
Your politics are not welcome here (I don't care what your political viewpoint).

You claim a right to exclude individuals. Fine.
This forum has a moral obligation to ban all of your political announcements, and I call upon the moderators to exercise that authority immediately.

I would never tolerate a tournament announcement where Nazi organizers ban Jewish composers, and I can not consider this announcement any better than that.
Note: In no way do I suggest these organizers have any equivalency with Nazis (I reiterate: your political position is totally irrelevant), only that this belligerent announcement is equally distasteful.

This is not a tournament announcement if it bans individuals on the basis of nationality -- it is an announcement of discriminatory propaganda.
Only open tournament announcements should be welcome here.

Finally, shame on anyone who participates in such a sham -- to use this artform for the purpose of advancing political objectives demonstrates a profound disrespect for the artform and the chess problem community alike.

You also discredit your own problem journal, which should be proudly celebrating its 100 year jubilee.
Instead, you have defiled its proudest moment, and everyone who made that possible.
For what? Because your political viewpoint is more important?
I would encourage self reflection.

If it was your father's 100 birthday party, would you insist upon excluding in-laws of Russian ancestry, because your politics are more important than your family?
I would certainly hope not.
Why then can you not respect the problem community as a family?
Why can you not respect your problem journal as you would your father?

If you feel compelled to engage in this political fight, don't be the coward who seeks to wage war in a chess forum -- go enlist in the war effort.
 
   
(Read Only)pid=25505
(11) Posted by Sarah Hornecker [Friday, Nov 24, 2023 07:32]

Composers should be excluded if their participation would shed a bad light on chess composition as a whole, not solely based on their country.
Where is the ban for Chinese composers, Palestinean composers, North Korean composers, etc., otherwise?
Once we start that "game", where do we stop? What about the countless heroes who stand up against their genocidal dictators?

Would we exclude Garry Kasparov from a tourney, solely because he is Russian? Even though his entire life is dedicated to fighting against the corruption in his country?
Oh, wait, we don't need to answer that question. You already did. You excluded him.

I disagree respectfully.

I believe now, as I did back in February/March of 2022, that every person should be individually examined. Politics should not be left out, obviously. But there should not be blanket bans on some countries' composers. There are many Russians and Belarussians who are very good people, and many in other countries who might not be.

I am just a voice in a crowd, but I respectfully ask to overthink your decision and treat people on an individual basis. We should be one human race, not divided by the crimes of our leaders, all as equals participating in our art. Once our small group breaks apart, is divided, what hope is left for the world as a whole? Should not still the smallest drop of understanding cleanse an ocean of mistrust and hate?
 
   
(Read Only)pid=25506
(12) Posted by Kevin Begley [Friday, Nov 24, 2023 08:45]

@Sarah,

>> "...every person should be individually examined. Politics should not be left out, obviously."

Really? You think it's fair that a problem journal editor examines your political views, to determine if you have sufficient moral worth to compete in a tournament?
Respectfully, I would suggest you think very carefully before you answer that question -- you may not appreciate what direction that may take.

If would be folly even if we all agreed to an objective standard of morality.
Without such a standard, it is a complete farce to pretend tournament organizers have any capacity to determine who is (or is not) a good person.

From the start of these bans, I have insisted that anyone seeking to bad Russian composers should first retroactively ban me (along with any other composer from a country which aided in the illegal invasion and occupation of Iraq).
My government lied to the world about the justification for this invasion.

Am I a good person because I saw through this lie, and I voice opposition?
Would I necessarily be a bad person had I fallen for this lie?
Would I necessarily be a bad person had I seen through this lie, but refused to speak against my own country (so as to deprive legitimate enemies of my country from using my objections as a wedge)?

We don't know a person's circumstances. That person can not be obliged to share them with us; if they did share, we have little capacity to determine whether we should trust them. If that's not bad enough, who can trust a verdict we render upon an individual?

What you are advocating would place a demand upon composers: either tell us what we want to hear, or face exclusion.
What you are advocating is FAR, FAR worse than the political discrimination you are rightfully speaking against.
You are advocating for an inquisition, and seeding supreme authority to tournament organizers.

We don't need to wonder if that's a bad idea -- history shows this is among the worst ideas in history.
Ask yourself: how could such an evil scheme emerge from a good person (like you)?

The organizers of a problem tournament have no capacity to judge the merit of an individual's political views, nor the worth of an individual (on the basis of their political positions or otherwise).
Therefore, politics and goodness can never be a consideration for inclusion in a problem tournament.

It is funny that you believe you have the capacity to distinguish the good Russians from the bad.
Where was your good Russian, Garry Kasparov, on Iraq?
I seem to recall he criticized US leaders for their withdrawal of troops from Iraq.
And from Syria.
Did good Russian Garry Kasparov ever voice opposition to Obama arming Al Qaida terrorists in Syria?

If Kasparov is a good person, was he simply wrong to support the occupation of Iraq?
How can a problem tournament organizer distinguish between a good Russian composer who is mistaken, and an evil Russian composer?

And, even if you (quite foolishly) believe a problem tournament organizer has the capacity to judge Kasparov's moral worth, ask yourself: is it the job of a problem tournament organizer to investigate the political viewpoints of every entrant?

Would it be proper for an organizer to require you to complete a battery of questions, specifically tailored to you, on topics where they might hope to demonstrate your wickedness?

You are advocating a path that would lead to a very dark place, not only for others, but quite likely for yourself.
To a small group of sinners, you would surrender total authority to judge your moral value; it requires little imagination to recognize how you would have blindly ensnared yourself in unlimited horrors.

This is folly.


>> "Once our small group breaks apart, is divided, what hope is left for the world as a whole?"

On this point, we agree.
The problem community should be viewed as a family.
Only a fool divides a family on the basis of politics.

Our problem journals should be viewed as an ancestor.
Only a fool excludes family members from celebrating the jubilee of a common ancestor.

Let the problem community divide once, and you will have set a precedent. There will be no way to stop this division from happening again and again and again.
The organizer's politics will always be too important.
You'll have murdered this artform with a reckless greed to use problem tournaments as a means to discriminate against others.

And the damage will be INFINITELY WORSE if you use problem tournaments as a means to render value judgements on individuals.
You will have opened every problem composer to infinite lines of attack!

Should problem journal editors consider how well a composer tips their waiter?
The more bad people we exclude, the more cake for us, right?
Personal vendettas, and counter-vendettas. Feints and counter-feints.
You would help turn problem chess into a battlefield for petty, power-hungry cowards.
Then you'd watch the artform burn, because it's more important we purify our tournaments from wicked entrants (Good Russians Only).

Not one of us sinners is remotely qualified to judge our own moral value, much less render an opinion on the goodness of a composer (or Garry Kasparov).

I wouldn't even pretend I am capable of determining whether Kasparov (or Fischer? or Carlsen?) was the greatest chess player in history.
How can I judge the man's goodness away from the board, armed only with gossip?

Why do you want a chess problem organizer to pretend they are qualified to render an objective judgement on Kasparov's soul?
If you don't have the humility to leave that verdict to Kasparov's creator, then that must certainly be considered damning evidence against your moral worth.

This whole business if folly.
We are here to appreciate the contributions each individual brings to our artform, and we can barely get that right.

If you want to advocate for a morality police, with authority to ban bad folks from tournaments, I sincerely hope you have lived your life as a saint.
You will have invited your opponents to attack your character.
And the only thing that can destroy the cohesion of the problem chess community faster than political arguments is character attacks from people who proclaim supreme authority to judge the moral worth of every tournament entrant.
 
   
(Read Only)pid=25507
(13) Posted by Viktor Syzonenko [Friday, Nov 24, 2023 09:23]

Прекратите демагогию
1) 1939:
Утром 30 ноября советские войска без объявления войны перешли границу с Финляндией ...
2) 2022: Ранним утром 24 февраля российские войска без объявления войны перешли границу с Украиной ...
---
Я понимаю финнских коллег.
Поймут и российские авторы: их солдат наступил на давнюю рану.
 
   
(Read Only)pid=25508
(14) Posted by Kevin Begley [Friday, Nov 24, 2023 10:02]

This tournament announcement is demagoguery, and it doesn't belong here (therefore it should stop).
That is exactly my point.

I don't care if, in 1939, you were pro-Russia, pro-Nazi, or just pro-Finland.
I don't care if, in 2023, you are pro-Russia, pro-Ukraine, or just pro-Nato.

None of those positions merits attention in this forum.
None of those positions should be the basis to exclude participation in a Jubilee Tournament.
This belligerent exclusion (on the basis of nationality) only discredits Shakki and the participants.

If you want to fight about politics, go enlist in support of whatever your position, and resolve these issues on an appropriate battlefield.
Just don't bring your political baggage to this chess problem forum.
 
   
(Read Only)pid=25509
(15) Posted by Hauke Reddmann [Friday, Nov 24, 2023 11:01]

This is always such a hard decision to make.

Personally, whereas I'd wish Russia any bad luck in the war,
I would never exclude a composer. Not even one who was pro-war
on this forum. Perhaps not even if he actually fought.
Chess problems don't kill people. Bullets do.

Build a time machine, and beam 10-year old Hauke into
1933. (20-year old is already too intelligent :-)
Won't guarantee I wouldn't fight for my fatherland...

Eizes* are easily made, and worth nothing...


* Jiddish for "well meant, but not exactly helpful advice"
 
   
(Read Only)pid=25510
(16) Posted by Kevin Begley [Friday, Nov 24, 2023 15:19]

I see no problem with a tournament for only composers of:
1) a specific nation (Ukraine, Russia, Germany, USA, Finland, whatever nation you wish to highlight),
2) a specific group of nations (NATO, BRICS, ASEAN+5, G7, G8, G8+5, G20, African, South American, European, Baltics, OPEC, whatever group of nations you wish to highlight),
3) a specific age group (Under 18, Under 21, Over 50, Over 65, Boomers, Gen X, Gen Z, whatever age grouping you wish to highlight),
4) a specific gender (Women, Trans-Women, Trans-Men, Non-Binary, whatever gender classification you wish to highlight),
5) a specific sexual preference (Gay, Lesbian, Bi, whatever sexual preference you wish to highlight),
6) a specific religion (Catholic, Sunni Muslim, Orthodox Jewish, Mormon, Satanist, Scientologist, whatever religion you wish to highlight) or non-religion (Atheist, Agnostic).
7) a specific group of religions (Abrahamic, Christian, Muslim, Hindu, Buddhist, Non-religious, whatever religious grouping you wish to highlight)

The possibilities can go on (for incarcerated individuals, military personnel, members of a specific organization, etc), but by now the theme should be abundantly clear: these are fully inclusionary tournaments, despite being open only to a specific group, intended either to showcase talents of -- and/or to encourage greater diversity from -- certain groups, or to acknowledge top talents within a specific group.
That's all fair game, and we can all wish you great success in these endeavors.

However, it is never fair game to explicitly EXCLUDE specific individuals or specific groups of individuals.
It is never appropriate to ask an individual to alter their national flag, nor ask an individual to renounce their national identity, nor ask an individual to condemn their nation's actions, nor ask a person to renounce their gender identity -- none of this can be considered a valid precondition for participation.

It is certainly never appropriate to render an opinion on the moral worth ("goodness") of an individual, nor to hold a tournament for all persons deemed better than a specific individual. Such divisive actions constitute a foul and deliberate abuse of our artform, and they must never be tolerated by this community.

It is morally repugnant to exclude on the basis of hatred of a specific individual or group, and equally repugnant when this exclusion is based upon political self-interest.
By excluding specific individuals, an organizer undermines and discredits the publisher, all participants, and the artform itself.
They also undermine and discredit all who parrot their propaganda (which masquerades as an exclusionary tournament announcement).

By posting this on Mat Plus Forum, you are attempting to suggest that Mat Plus Forum agrees with your politics (or your hatred).
Whatever your political agenda, whatever your hatred toward a specific group, such tactics only insult this forum (and all its members).

The intent is as clear as it is reprehensible: to signal that certain groups of individuals are unwelcome in journals, in forums, and in the problem community -- to bully certain groups out.
This is disgraceful.
Shame on anyone who organizes such a tournament, shame on anyone who participates in such a tournament, and shame on anyone who parrots the announcement of such a tournament.
In so doing, you will have only injured our artform.
However enlightened you estimate your politics, it never justifies the evil carried in such an announcement.

Yes, it is evil -- the very same fundamental evil at the heart of the Nazi regime: a belief they could achieve purity (even utopia) by silencing groups of individuals deemed less worthy.
Frankly, I doubt even a 10 year old Hauke would participate in that effort, had he witnessed it in practice.
One can assert this exclusionary tournament is far less evil (as it involves a less deadly form of silencing), but it is driven by the same fundamental spirit: to silence a group deemed less worthy (or less enlightened).
Mat Plus should never allow such an announcement, and none of us should participate in a tournament clearly intended to silence and exclude.
Allow them to silence your political enemies, and you have surrendered to them the authority to silence you.
We all have a moral duty to oppose the evil exclusionary agents, if for no other reason than to preserve our own humanity.
For the sake of our artform (to preserve its integrity and demonstrate our determination to welcome full participation), we must insist that no problem tourney announcement is drafted to explicitly exclude any individual or groups of individuals. That evil practice must end (and it starts here, with each of you).

I urge all problemists to stand against these divisive and offensive tactics, even when they are attacking your political enemies.
We unite on insisting all are welcome (no hate, no politics, no bullying, no propaganda), or this community will forever splinter (by individuals who will continually use problem chess as a lever to advance their own agenda -- individuals who respect neither the problem community nor the best interests of our artform).
 
 
(Read Only)pid=25513
(17) Posted by Viktoras Paliulionis [Friday, Nov 24, 2023 15:42]

Hauke, do you think it was wrong that Germany was banned from participating in the 1920, 1924 and 1948 Olympics?
 
   
(Read Only)pid=25514
(18) Posted by Nikola Predrag [Friday, Nov 24, 2023 15:53]

Obviously, Germany presented the most acceptable values and was warmly embraced by the world in 1936.
Indeed, a nice point.
 
   
(Read Only)pid=25515
(19) Posted by Kevin Begley [Friday, Nov 24, 2023 16:33]

It was a poor decision for the Olympic Committee to ban Germany from participating in the 1920, 1924 and 1948 Olympics.
If they could not accommodate full inclusion (understandable, for safety and security), the Olympics should have been cancelled entirely.

A NATO Olympic Games might have been organized in 1948, but NATO had not yet been formed.
It was wrong for the world to gobble up medals while individual athletes were excluded (for no fault of their own).
Gold medals awarded in 1948 will never carry the same legitimacy.

USA (my own government, in the country I love deeply) clearly lied to the world -- and the UN -- about WMD in Iraq.
Did the Olympic Committee ban USA from participation after the illegal invasion (and prolonged occupation) of Iraq?
No, they did not.

Why not? Because the Olympic Committee is a biased (and highly corrupt) body which clearly favors a specific set of countries.
Is that fair? can this be considered a legitimate body?
They hardly banned Germany because the Olympics are run by a benevolent organization. They did so because they have no integrity, and they were controlled by countries hostile to Germany.
These actions were improper, as is clearly evidenced by their failure to impose similar penalties on USA (following the WMD in Iraq lie).

Had Germany controlled the Olympic Committee from 1920 to 1948, would they be justified in excluding participation from USSR, USA, UK, and all the allied nations?
Would you now accept those games as legitimate?

Are these determinations ever a proper function of an Olympic Committee? No, they are not. They should have insisted on preserving their own integrity.
If they can not welcome full participation, they should never continue in the pretense this is an Olympic event (open to the world).

Would you consider Ding Liren World Chess Champion if (rather than Magnus opting to relinquish his title) FIDE had banned Norway from participation?
Would you consider Ding Liren World Chess Champion if FIDE had excluded Ian Nepomniachtchi (or Fabiano Caruana) from the candidates tournament?
Would you consider that a WORLD Championship Event?

If it's not open to the world, it's not a World Championship, and it's not a legitimate Olympic Event.

FIDE can never allow the World Chess Championship to exclude any participants -- such an act would forever delegitimize that title.
And, shame on them for requiring participants to alter their flag.

Again, if an organizing body can not accommodate full inclusion, they have no legitimacy in organizing an event which claims to measure the best in the world.
An organizing body should never make overt political decisions. This is not their proper function, and they only succeed in undermining their sport/game.

It is fundamentally evil to believe that purity or enlightenment can be achieved by silencing your enemies.
You can try persuasion, you can try diplomacy, or you can enlist in warfare on a proper battlefield.
It is both evil and cowardly to exclude groups from a sporting/gaming federation, in the interest of advancing a political agenda.

Problem Chess tournaments are not a proper battlefield.
 
   
(Read Only)pid=25516
(20) Posted by Viktoras Paliulionis [Friday, Nov 24, 2023 16:49]

Kevin, where did you learn the whataboutism tactic? Is it from the propaganda of the former Soviet Union or from Putin's propagandists?
 
   
(Read Only)pid=25517

Read more...
Page: [Previous] [Next] 1 2

MatPlus.Net Forum Competitions Announcement of Shakki 100 JT