Website founded by
MatPlus.Net Forum General Riphey questions...
You can only view this page!
|(1) Posted by Kevin Begley [Sunday, Oct 18, 2009 15:22]; edited by Kevin Begley [09-10-18]|
A few simple, honest questions...
Quote: Interregional non-profit-making fund “New Regional Initiatives” carries out the competition for identifying the best chess composition of 2007 and 2008
1) How could a competition with such a plainly stated goal ("...for identifying the best chess composition") exclude all joint compositions?
Pronkin & Frolkin's jointly composed ProofGame 57.5 (Die Schwalbe, 1989) is widely considered a "millenium problem."
But, the Riphey excludes such a problem from competing for best Retro in a two-year period.
How can chess enthusiasts be so lacking in matters of logic?
2) Clearly, there is another agenda here -- what might it be?
3) Is any of this "PCCC sanctioned?"
Albums (supposedly) already select the best problems for the same span of time (over a two-year period).
Nevermind that the Albums are so heavily title-milked that a mundane collection of honey-genre unoriginals is to be expected.
How is Riphey more than a redundant outlet for the same result?
If the goal is to compare strictly "individual" compositions for a two-year period, why not comb through the FIDE Album, remove all joint compositions, compare points, and declare the winners?
4) This is like the Oscars for chess?
Sure, if there were a category for best performance in a film devoid of any supporting cast, this would be just like the Oscars!
Sadly, even the movie "Phone Booth" would not qualify.
And, shouldn't the winner say a few words?
My prepared speech goes:
Accepting for Kevin Begley is Sacheen Littlefeather.
I'd like to thank the mysterious non-profit fund for this truly redundant honor.
It was an honor just to be self-nominated.
I have only myself to thank, because nobody was allowed to help me compose the damn thing.
And, may I say -- what an honor it was to work with such magnificent solitude.
I am the Pawn of the world!
I don't mean to slam any winners of this award -- but, the irony of comparing this to the Oscars is too much.
In other words, please, blame my agent.
5) Who appoints the judges?
6) "New Regional Initiatives" => who is behind the curtain?
7) Are they aware the difference betwen Non-Profit / "Non-Money-Making" -- or can they honestly claim that nobody profits from this venture?
8) "Interregional" = anything capable of moving, or can I define "regions" such that any stationary object becomes an Interregional illusion?
Sincere thankyou for anyone who can provide any transparency.
|(2) Posted by [Monday, Oct 19, 2009 15:43]|
Kevin Begley asks:
>How can chess enthusiasts be so lacking in matters of logic?
Easy: logic isn't involved here. (Even if it were, enthusiasts of any kind are not known for preferring logic to their enthusiasm.)
If the purpose was as stated ('identifying the best chess composition of 2007 and 2008'), it would not be a requirement that individual composers send in their own problems, and also only one of them. That's a condition that has another purpose, namely reducing the number of entries that need to be judged.
However, as the terms are the conventional terms of chess problem tourneys, it seems more probable that the stated purpose is really more restricted -- 'identifying the best submitted chess composition of 2007 and 2008' -- but of course that does not sound equally impressive. (A mistake in translation is an alternative explanation, of course.)
As I think you already note, the relations of the NRI fund to any governing body are probably the key here. My first guess was that this may be related to the FIDE Special Project on Chess Composition that Andrei Selivanov is heading, but that's only based on the connection between his web site and the document, which I have not found anywhere else, so far. As there is a conspicuous absence of any mention of FIDE, I'm probably mistaken.
There is an email address to the fund directorate ... it would seem best to address questions directly there.
>7) Are they aware the difference betwen Non-Profit / "Non-Money-Making" -- or can they honestly claim that nobody >profits from this venture?
The english text has a somewhat 'translated' feel to it, so I'm not sure that terminological exactness is to be expected here. (The russian document seems to use a term more like 'noncommercial', but as that observation is not based on any sure foundation of Russian language, I better leave this point to experts. Beside which, I can't make out what a non-commercial problem tourney would be, either -- are commercial chess problem tourneys held anywhere? Profit-making problem tourneys seems to be a contradiction in terms...)
Interesting, though, that all participants (i.e. composers who send in their problems) are invited to take part in the judging process. It suggests some kind of judgment by mass voting (or 'melee' judging), which seems a bit out of place for a serious attempt to find the best problem -- unless there are further details of the process that are not described here. (Also, I would in theory, perhaps, expect any members of the 'fund directorate' to be barred from entering the competition to avoid even a remotest possibility of suspicions of special treatment, but as not even the Codex bars an Organizer, a Director or a Judge from participating in 'their own' tourney, I'm probably being excessively careful here.)
|(3) Posted by Vladimir Tyapkin [Monday, Oct 19, 2009 20:28]|
Word 'non-commercial' applies to the organization (NRI) not to the problem tourney. It is pretty often attached to the organization's name in today's Russia.
NRI fund is the founding body of Ural's Problemist magazine where Andrey Selivanov is the editor.
Anders, care to share any news from WCCC?
|(4) Posted by [Tuesday, Oct 20, 2009 19:19]|
I think that's best answered in a new thread -- not that I can report much myself, anyway
No more posts
MatPlus.Net Forum General Riphey questions...