Website founded by
Milan Velimirović
in 2006
13:46 UTC
| |
MatPlus.Net  Forum General WCCI problems assessed as 8+ straight to FIDE Album |
| |
|
|
|
|
You can only view this page!
| | Page: [Previous] [Next] 1 2 3 | | (21) Posted by Marjan Kovačević [Thursday, Jan 10, 2013 00:59] |
Back to the main topic:
The new WCCI-Album relation was suggested years ago, following many critics of the old one. The last official proposal was made by Klaus Wenda, honorary president of the WFCC. Contrary to his well documented proposal (2011), the old system was formulated and accepted in a haste, during the 1998 Congress. The opinions about both systems have always been divided, as proved again by voting in Kobe, 2012.
We will surely not come to an agreement here, since some of us are against the WCCI in principle, others against titles, others against Album, others against the WCCT, others against others, etc.
However, we could try to explain our views. May view is that possible drawbacks of the new system may be less important than the possible advantages.
Michael,
Could you explain your conclusion:
“As Marjan writes, this will change nothing for the bests. But we are a community, and what is the future of a community who cares only for the bests?”
Who are “the bests”? If you meant “the best composers”, I believe giving the second chances to 6 best problems by each composer should be the most democratic little bonus for each member of our community, and for the quality of Album, too. I still don’t see what harm it could bring, and to whom?
| | | (22) Posted by Sergiy Didukh [Thursday, Jan 10, 2013 01:28] |
The reproduction of problems is free but the Album is not just a book. It's a competition and only authors have the right to decide if they participate there or not.
| | | (23) Posted by Kevin Begley [Thursday, Jan 10, 2013 01:36] |
I'm sorry, but I have to go back to something Harry said.
I agree 100% with Jacques -- Harry, the Album has NO AUTHORITY to publish a composition as "A + NN" (dropping composer B's name) -- even if B requests this, you can not abide such a wish!
An author may decline to accept points/titles, but can not (and SHOULD NEVER!) decline to accept credit for their part in a joint problem.
If you allow this, the mis-credited problem will spread (as if it were published by "A+NN" -- which is a falsehood!).
This is a bad mistake, which will only propagate an error.
I, myself, have refused to send problems to the Album.
However, I have no authority to refuse a joint author from submission (nor have I any right to prevent my name from appearing on said problem).
The points are no matter to me -- should I ever prove in danger of earning 12 points from joint problems, I will simply refuse any non-honorary title.
So far, I do not compete in the WCCI, either -- truth is: I don't believe, at all, in the title that this competition pretends to decree upon an individual.
But, I certainly reject that participation in the WCCI, should indicate a de facto participation in the Album.
| | | (24) Posted by Kevin Begley [Thursday, Jan 10, 2013 01:48]; edited by Kevin Begley [13-01-10] |
@Sergiy,
>The reproduction of problems is free but the Album is not just a book.
Do tell -- what is it?
A magical book?
Is it the infallible bible of chess problems?
>It's a competition and only authors have the right to decide if they participate there or not.
Define participate.
I have the right to not participate in sending problems for consideration, yes -- and, I exercise this right, every time.
But, I have no right to prevent the publication of my problems (especially joints).
I have the right to refuse specific titles, too -- and, I would never accept anything other than an honorary FIDE title (though I'm presently in no danger of having to reject anything).
But, I have no right to force the Album (or even some magical book) to mis-credit the authors of a chess problem!
To specifically ask for this would constitute a participation in the Album -- albeit a very warped participation!
ps: As far as I'm concerned, anybody can take any set of problems (providing the collection itself does not fall under copy protection), from any period, enter them all into a competition (grade them however you like), award whatever fanciful titles, and publish the results in a book.
The first FIDE Album did this -- there's no way to prevent it.
| | | (25) Posted by Jacques Rotenberg [Thursday, Jan 10, 2013 01:57] |
@Sergei
'...the Album is not just a book. It's a competition...'
no the album is an album. A kind of 'best off', this is what it should be. It is not a competition. W.C.C.I. is a competition.
| | | (26) Posted by Kevin Begley [Thursday, Jan 10, 2013 02:05]; edited by Kevin Begley [13-01-10] |
@Jacques,
Maybe the Album should be a "greatest hits" collection -- that's how it started.
But, you well know that it now exists primarily as a FIDE title competition.
It does not matter what the Album's principal purpose -- the point is, people should be afforded an opportunity to decline specific titles (perhaps points, too); but, they have no right to distort the true publication credit for a chess problem.
No book, no collection, and no competition should ever willingly distort a known composer's name into "NN" (for any purpose).
NN has a specific meaning, which is quite different from that which the Album intends to apply.
The only legitimate right that a publisher has to request un-publication is:
1) in cases where the original publication was erroneous, or
2) in cases where the publisher's participation was somehow coerced.
Even in cases where an improvement has been published, the publisher is entitled only to an indication of the improvement -- the publication stands (and can not be undone).
| | | (27) Posted by Jacques Rotenberg [Thursday, Jan 10, 2013 02:42] |
The main purpose of the Album is to be a great collection of problems. Why people buy it ? for titles ??
I don't think that the main objective is lost.
Titles is the main part of the discussions - that's comprehensible too - but it remains a secondary subject.
We should not forget these simple things.
W.C.C.I. is a competition and only that.
| | | (28) Posted by Vlaicu Crisan [Thursday, Jan 10, 2013 02:54] |
Thank you very much for the answers, Nikola! That prompts me another set of questions:
1. Why are [international] titles automatically granted to composers?
I do not challenge the current awarding system based on the number of FIDE Album points, but I think it would be correct to grant a title only if the composer explicitely files up an official request for that. To my knowledge the same principle is adopted for international judges, so why not apply a consistent approach for ccmposers?
In this way, a composition can appear under the real name of the authors in the FIDE Album and the second author is not in danger to receive an international title, even if he qualifies for such a title.
Moreover, we can preserve both the collection purpose of the FIDE Album and the current competitional aspect.
2. Why should judges apply different appreciations of the scale 0 - 4 for different competitions (WCCI, WCCT and FIDE Album)?
This can lead to a dangerous situations. Let's give the example of a composition receiving an encouraging 2.0 from Michel in the WCCI.
The same composition receives 0.5 from Michel in the FIDE Album. What does the composer learn from these marks?! But the community?
Let's try to be more consistent in using the same scale / criteria in all the official competitions.
3. Why did the rules changed after appointing the WCCI judging team?
That's not fair at all! Both Juraj and Michel accepted to be part of the WCCI competition based on their knowledge of the old format.
What they can do - refuse to act as judges, after giving prior accceptance to the invitation?!
It is at least unpleasant for anyone to be just put in front of a "fait accompli" and I think Juraj and Michel reactions are quite very moderate.
Let's do it in the right order in the future and avoid such situations.
| | | (29) Posted by Kevin Begley [Thursday, Jan 10, 2013 03:15]; edited by Kevin Begley [13-01-10] |
@Vlaicu,
>"...Moreover, we can preserve both the collection purpose of the FIDE Album and the current competitional aspect."
The FIDE Album no longer serves its original collection purpose.
The original Album required no participation, and awarded no points toward titles.
The Album is the principal measurement by which titles are awarded; and, title competition is now its primary purpose.
You're not going to preserve that which we have already abandoned.
The Album can not serve two masters.
That said, I do generally agree with all your other points... but, I don't understand your first question:
>"Why are [international] titles automatically granted to composers?"
They can not be automatic.
There are several composers with more than 12 Album points, who never received a "FIDE Master of Composition" title -- are you suggesting that they ALL formally requested to opt out of the title competition?
| | | (30) Posted by Jacques Rotenberg [Thursday, Jan 10, 2013 09:59]; edited by Jacques Rotenberg [13-01-10] |
"...There are several composers with more than 12 Album points, who never received a "FIDE Master of Composition" title -- are you suggesting that they ALL formally requested to opt out of the title competition?..."
Yes all should receive (or received) the title.
| | | (31) Posted by Harry Fougiaxis [Thursday, Jan 10, 2013 12:52] |
QUOTE
Vlaicu wrote: Why are [international] titles automatically granted to composers?
I do not challenge the current awarding system based on the number of FIDE Album points, but I think it would be correct to grant a title only if the composer explicitely files up an official request for that. To my knowledge the same principle is adopted for international judges, so why not apply a consistent approach for ccmposers?
There was a proposal in the 2010 congress in Crete that composers should first submit an official request for titles. According to the minutes of meeting: "The proposal to introduce an application procedure for the grant of composing titles was not recommended by the qualifications committee and was rejected by the Assembly (vote: 4 in favour, 17 against, 5 abstentions)."
QUOTE
Vlaicu wrote: In this way, a composition can appear under the real name of the authors in the FIDE Album and the second author is not in danger to receive an international title, even if he qualifies for such a title.
You probably refer to the very uneasy case of composer NN that I brought up, don't you? The specific issue is not related to points, titles, etc. (in fact, the composer NN is an IM). I think that it has to do with internal affairs / personal disputes in the country of composer NN. The composer NN was very sharp in his letters. We tried to have him change his mind, but he was particularly stubborn and he kept insisting that he does not want his name shown in the album. We tried to find a realistic solution. Maybe it is not the right one. We shall re-consider the issue during the next congress.
QUOTE
Vlaicu wrote: Why should judges apply different appreciations of the scale 0 - 4 for different competitions (WCCI, WCCT and FIDE Album)? Let's try to be more consistent in using the same scale / criteria in all the official competitions.
Very good questions. Frankly speaking, I do not fully understand Michel's arguments re. the different approach of judges in the WCCI and in the album. Before the establishment of the new judging system in WCCI last year, we tried to have (as much as possible, of course) same judges in the WCCI and in the album, in order to minimise the album judges' efforts. It is true that there are no guidelines what the 0-4 scale means for WCCI. If a WCCI judge is asking for clarifications on the scale, we always advise him to refer to the guidelines issued for the album. Personally, I was appointed as WCCI and album judge in the 2001-03 cycle and I copied flat my scores from the WCCI to the album.
| | | (32) Posted by Kevin Begley [Thursday, Jan 10, 2013 17:53]; edited by Kevin Begley [13-01-10] |
@Harry,
I'm glad the NN issue is going to be revisited.
It is both disturbing and sad that an author would so strongly desire to purge their own name.
And, whatever can be done, to accommodate this unusual desire, should be examined.
But, the delegates should kindly explain, to this NN character, that under no circumstances can the Album misrepresent the authors, or publisher, of a published chess problem.
There is no way the Album can honor such an ignoble request.
| | | (33) Posted by Vlaicu Crisan [Thursday, Jan 10, 2013 23:48] |
@Harry:
I did not refer to the case of composer NN, but to another situation. As you probably know, I use to compose many joint problems, particularly because is more funny and the level of such compositions is generally higher than those of my solo attempts.
One of the composers to whom I shared the pleasure to create such "joints" (no smoking reference here!) clearly expressed the wish that none of our future collaborative problems will be submitted to the FIDE Album. The main reason was his reluctance against any FIDE titles that he could unwantedly earn.
That's why I think it would be useful to make a dissociation between automatic granting an internation title and the number of FIDE Album points. I understand the qualification sub-committee already expressed another point of view (and I am very sure they had very good reasons).
But, as I think we are a real community, we must do something for those that have a different opinion and just listen to what they are trying to say. So, is it possible to reconsider this decision in a future WFCC congress?
I am perfectly aware this might be also a political issue, as divergent opinions can (and certainly will!) occur between the interests of the country represented by the official delegate appointed to the WFCC - on one side and the composer - on the other side. But I strongly believe the composers (and not the countries!) must have the final and decisive word in such cases.
| | | (34) Posted by Harry Fougiaxis [Friday, Jan 11, 2013 10:33] |
Thank you, Vlaicu, for your contribution. I forwarded your proposal to the spokesman of the QC for further actions.
I agree that the WFCC should revisit the issue during the congress in Batumi.
| | | (35) Posted by Neal Turner [Friday, Jan 11, 2013 15:17] |
If I'm correct there's been two possibilities for giving titles discussed on here:
- automatic
- wait for the composer to apply
but there are at least a couple of other options:
- ask the composer if he would like to receive the title when he gets the points
- a method for the composer to opt out of the points/titles system when submitting the problems
Have these been considered?
| | | (36) Posted by Kevin Begley [Saturday, Jan 12, 2013 23:31]; edited by Kevin Begley [13-01-13] |
I agree with Neal.
It seems absurd to expect an application for a title.
Should a composer pass away, prior to having reached some number of points, Vlaicu's suggestion would offer nothing.
And, even if the suggestion were amended, to allow posthumous titles (as a default position), it would then require that composers have an opportunity to opt out.
So, what is gained by Vlaicu's suggestion (other than more petitions)?
It is better that the congress default to automatic titles, and provide any composer with an opportunity to opt out of receiving specific titles.
This, if nothing else, would minimize the amount of petitions made.
Similarly, I would provide a reasonable mechanism for those persons wishing to opt out of the official point tally.
Furthermore, I would suggest allowing that the reception of any title may be based upon some stated contingency -- e.g., I may prefer to not accept titles awarded based upon quotas, in the context of ill-defined sub-Albums (wrongly termed to be 'genres').
This provides a better opportunity to protest specific discrepancies with the title system (something we all should welcome -- especially those wishing to voice the grounds for their protest, and those willing to listen).
| | | (37) Posted by Harry Fougiaxis [Sunday, Jan 13, 2013 19:44] |
QUOTE
It is better that the congress default to automatic titles, and provide any composer with an opportunity to opt out of receiving specific titles.
This, if nothing else, would minimize the amount of petitions made.
In fact, this system is what the WFCC uses for the titles right now. The reason that the proposal was rejected in 2010 was that it would increase bureaucracy.
QUOTE
Similarly, I would provide a reasonable mechanism for those persons wishing to opt out of the official point tally.
The option is not available yet, and all composers' points are calculated automatically and listed in public. It is just a technical issue to do it, if requested by a composer.
Returning to Sergiy's question a few posts above, WCCI >=8 points compositions qualify automatically for the album, but they must also be submitted by the composer to the album in order to be reproduced in it and count for points.
| | | (38) Posted by Jacques Rotenberg [Sunday, Jan 13, 2013 21:25] |
"...they must also be submitted by the composer to the album in order to be reproduced in it and count for points...."
This sounds new to me.
When was it decided ?
And what does it mean exactly ?
1) if a composer A sends a problem by composer B (and B does not say anything) the problem may be selected ?
2) what about joint problems if A sends a problem by A+B (and B does not say anything) will the problem be eventually selected ? if yes will B receive points ?
3) if B has points for a title and says nothing (and did not send problems) will he receive it ?
as far as I know all the answers were "yes" but it seems, due to what you say, to be different now ?
| | | (39) Posted by Harry Fougiaxis [Sunday, Jan 13, 2013 22:35] |
QUOTE
1) if a composer A sends a problem by composer B (and B does not say anything) the problem may be selected ?
Composers are supposed that they respect the recommendation of WFCC: "Anyone entering compositions by another composer should, where possible, obtain the agreement of that composer beforehand."
QUOTE
2) what about joint problems if A sends a problem by A+B (and B does not say anything) will the problem be eventually selected ? if yes will B receive points ?
3) if B has points for a title and says nothing (and did not send problems) will he receive it ?
Joint compositions are not allowed in the WCCI.
| | | (40) Posted by Jacques Rotenberg [Sunday, Jan 13, 2013 23:41]; edited by Jacques Rotenberg [13-01-14] |
Sorry for misunderstanding. I speak of the Albums, you don't ?
| |
Read more... | Page: [Previous] [Next] 1 2 3
MatPlus.Net Forum General WCCI problems assessed as 8+ straight to FIDE Album |
|
|
|
ISC 2024
