Български (България)English (United Kingdom)
Problem 738: Nikola Stolev - Helpmate
nikola.stolev(06.06.2016) Nice helpmate threemover by Nikola Stolev with rich thematic content - cross checks, self pins/unpins and black selfblocks on the initially bK squares.
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
738
 
a) 1.Rxe3+ Se4 2.Kd1 d3 3.Re1 Sc3#
b) 1.Rd2+ Sd3 2.Kh3 e4 3.Rh2 Sf4#
 
A setting of pin/self-unpin of the wSf2 with alternate capture of the white Pawns, black self-blocks on the BK’s initially square and model mates in a Meredith position. (Author)
 

Comments  

 
+1 #1 Seetharaman Kalyan 2016-06-06 15:40
WCCT 10 theme!
Quote
 
 
+1 #2 Rodolfo Riva 2016-06-07 10:48
No model mate in a), wK and wB both guarding c1.
Model mates and slightly better economy need some adjustments (bR+S+2P instead of bQ+3P).
Quote
 
 
+1 #3 Rodolfo Riva 2016-06-08 06:35
Also a 5+4 version is possible, with identical solution and two model mates.
Quote
 
 
+1 #4 Miodrag Mladenovic 2016-06-08 06:37
Yes, this problem is showing theme from 10th WCCT that deadline for submission of problems just ended few weeks ago. I think that there is recommendation not to publish problems showing themes from this competition until award is done. I am wondering what will happen if someone sent similar problem to the 10th WCCT. Which problem will have an ownership of the scheme? This that has been published first or problem that is perhaps composed earlier but sent to the 10th WCCT.
Quote
 
 
0 #5 Seetharaman Kalyan 2016-06-08 08:46
Quoting Miodrag Mladenovic:
I am wondering what will happen if someone sent similar problem to the 10th WCCT. Which problem will have an ownership of the scheme? This that has been published first or problem that is perhaps composed earlier but sent to the 10th WCCT.


Of course entries to the WCCT 10 will get priority, as the date of closing of entry is the criterion. Because the entries get precedence, the prohobition applies only till the closing date for the WCCT 10.
Quote
 
 
+1 #6 Kostas Prentos 2016-06-08 13:58
The relevant part from the WCCT announcement is as follows: "Editors of chess magazines are asked not to publish originals with themes of this tournament before the closing date of 10th WCCT: May 1st, 2016". I am not sure about priority questions, but I presume that the organizers of the WCCT know what they are doing.
Quote
 
 
+1 #7 Vitaly Medintsev 2016-06-08 20:12
Quote:
Also a 5+4 version is possible, with identical solution and two model mates.

True. I'v found a 5+4 version, too.
Let the author find this position.
Quote
 
 
0 #8 Harry Fougiaxis 2016-06-09 06:47
Quoting Kostas Prentos:
The relevant part from the WCCT announcement is as follows: "Editors of chess magazines are asked not to publish originals with themes of this tournament before the closing date of 10th WCCT: May 1st, 2016". I am not sure about priority questions, but I presume that the organizers of the WCCT know what they are doing.

Kostas, please refer to the Codex Chapter VI, articles 22 to 24. Seetheraman's remark in post #5 is correct.
Quote
 
 
+1 #9 Rodolfo Riva 2016-06-09 15:54
To #5 and #6

From a logical point of view: all problems suitable for the 10WCCT published before the release of the Entries booklet have PRIORITY - Article 22-(1) (2) (3)
and the fully anticipated works participating in the WCCT are not eligible for any award - Article 24-(1).

"Editors are asked..." does not mean they are subjected to proihibition and there are works suitable for the WCCT in magazines, PDB and Award of FIDE Olympic Tourney 2016.
Quote
 
 
+1 #10 Kostas Prentos 2016-06-09 17:18
Thank you Harry. Now, I can answer one particular question about priority: The WCCT entries have priority over any problems published after May 1st. This will cover Misha's worries.

However, it does not seem as simple to me. The Codex considers all formal tourneys as equal, but they are not. While the WCCT is well organized and there are rules that safeguard its reliability, there are many formal tourneys that are organized privately and there can always be questions of misconduct by the tourney directors.

Even if everyone is trustworthy, there is still the time variable. For example, composers A and B compose the same, or a similar problem, independently. Composer A submits his problem to a formal tourney and composer B to a magazine, or online, after the closing date of the formal tourney. The award of the formal tourney appears months or years later and this is when the problem A becomes available to the public. In the meantime, problem B has been awarded, even if it is post-anticipated by A per the Codex.

To make things worse, let's say that the two problems of the previous example are composed close to the end of the three-year period of the FIDE album. The award of problem A appears in the next FIDE album cycle and this date counts as the actual date of publication (not the closing date). Problem B has already been selected in the previous FIDE album, even if it is considered post-anticipated by A according to the Codex. Can you blame the FIDE album judges for not considering the anticipation by a problem that has not been published, yet? Can you blame the next FIDE album judges for not considering problem A, even if it has priority per the Codex? Or is it better to have the same problem in two different FIDE albums? In these examples you can make things worse, if you add other variables, like misconduct and bad intentions.

The problem is that the closing date of a formal tourney does not correspond to the actual publication date of the award. Sometimes, like in the WCCT, priority can be relatively simple, but other times it can be a very complicated matter, especially when the award of a formal tourney may take years to appear.

I don't know if the Codex was changed, presumably to protect the WCCT, or to resolve some of the problems that were caused in previous WCCTs, but in my view, setting priority according to the closing date of a formal tourney and not the actual publication date of the problems may become the source of unpleasant complications.
Quote
 
 
0 #11 Seetharaman Kalyan 2016-06-09 18:21
Quoting Kostas Prentos:

I don't know if the Codex was changed, presumably to protect the WCCT, or to resolve some of the problems that were caused in previous WCCTs, but in my view, setting priority according to the closing date of a formal tourney and not the actual publication date of the problems may become the source of unpleasant complications.


Thanks Kostas Prentos for your reasoned comments.

Regarding your last point, I think the priority date protection for problems competing in Formal tourneys was there even before the WCCT. In the absence of such protection, it is possible there could be much less participation in Formal tourneys.
Quote
 
 
+1 #12 Kostas Prentos 2016-06-10 00:09
Thank you, Seetharaman. Maybe the way things are is better - I can't really tell. Pointing out some possible complications regarding the present status on priority does not mean that there are not problems if priority is decided in a different way. One thing is certain: The WCCT problems are safe.

In general, what can improve things is to minimize the gap between the closing date of a formal tourney and the actual appearance of the problems. This is done pretty well with the present system of the WCCT (in a few weeks we will have the document with all the entries), but unfortunately, it is often not the case with other formal tourneys, whose awards may appear years later.
Quote
 
 
+1 #13 Harry Fougiaxis 2016-06-17 11:33
@ Kostas: Seetharaman's post #11 is again correct. Nothing was changed in the Codex. It was always like that:

- Priority date of a problem participating in a formal tourney is the closing date of the tourney.

- Priority date of a problem participating in an informal tourney is the date of publication of the problem (which is the date indicated on the cover page of the magazine or on the web page).
Quote
 
 
0 #14 Kostas Prentos 2016-06-19 02:18
Harry, yes. I did not argue Seetharaman's post #11, although I admit that I searched several recent WCCC minutes documents to make sure. However, it is surprising that even though priority issues were always settled the same way, previous WCCT announcements (with the exception of the current one) always requested the ban of publication of thematic problems in magazines until the printing of the WCCT award and not until the WCCT closing date, as it is now. That's why I had the impression that something changed recently. Just to be clear, I strongly prefer the current WCCT rules regarding publication of thematic originals in magazines (according to the closing date, rather than the date when the award is published).
Quote
 
 
0 #15 Seetharaman Kalyan 2016-06-19 05:00
Quoting Kostas Prentos:
However, it is surprising that even though priority issues were always settled the same way, previous WCCT announcements (with the exception of the current one) always requested the ban of publication of thematic problems in magazines until the printing of the WCCT award


You are right of course. What has changed is the WCCT rules. Previously only the top 20 or 25 problems appeared in the WCCT award and the rest were avilable to the composers for publishing elsewhere! So, in the past, protection was needed till the publishing of WCCT award. Now (9th and 10-WCCT) all WCCT entries score points and are considered published (unless cooked or anticipated).
Quote
 
 
0 #16 Kostas Prentos 2016-06-19 11:04
Thank you again, Seetharaman. This explains a lot, but not everything. The booklet with all the entries was always published before the final award. Even in WCCT-9 (with the rules already changed) the request to not publish thematic problems elsewhere applied until the printing of the award.

However, the most important question is whether the Codex is inaccurate. Does the priority net, according to the closing date, cover all the problems of a formal tourney, or only those that appear in the award? Do the problems that do not appear in the award of the formal tourney lose their priority? I suppose these problems lose priority, or have their priority reset according to the actual publication date. In this case, priority according to the closing date in a formal tourney is conditional. Something like the Schrondinger's cat paradox. Everything depends on the actual date that the entries to a formal tourney appear in public view. Until that time, the problems that entered the formal tourney, may or may not have priority. The current system of the WCCT has all entries retain priority, but this is not the case with every formal tourney out there.

Unfortunately, pointing out the problem with priority does not automatically solve it. I honestly don't know if there is a solution, or if there is a problem in the first place. Until an actual problem occurs, we can say that we are covered with the present system.

In the meantime, we follow in adjacent posts, the discussion about another formal tourney that is still open (the 4th Azemmour), with publication of new originals and versions, even by the tourney director and judge. The idea of protecting the formal tourney (see the last part of Seetharaman's post #11) is abandoned by the very person who would have interest to protect the tourney.
Quote
 

Add comment


Security code
Refresh


Deprecated: Function ereg() is deprecated in /home/youcult/public_html/chessbul/templates/edenrock/s5_tab_show_ER.php on line 5

Deprecated: Function ereg() is deprecated in /home/youcult/public_html/chessbul/templates/edenrock/s5_tab_show_ER.php on line 9

  P1110623

KOBULCHESS.COM

site for chess composition

 General editor:

Diyan Kostadinov

Co-editor:

Seetharaman Kalyan

Recent comments