|
|
| (1) Posted by Oliver Petrov [Monday, Sep 27, 2010 13:09] |
one beginner question
Forgive my big ignorance but I am wondering: Is the theme of a problem his greatest merit? Couldn't it be that a problem is beautiful without a theme? For example a problem that consists of several silent moves but having no defined theme!
P.S.Now I realize that I am still pretty much a beginner. I really haven't been into composition for a very long time.
|
|
| (2) Posted by Dmitri Turevski [Monday, Sep 27, 2010 14:20] |
QUOTE
a problem that consists of several silent moves but having no defined theme!
"Silent moves" is its theme then.
From Wikipedia:
QUOTE
Theme - the underlying idea of a problem, which gives it logic, coherence and beauty.
The essential part is that there is an idea not that somebody has defined it. The real merits are logic, beauty, etc.
That's how i see it, i'm not long into composition myself.
|
|
| (3) Posted by Oliver Petrov [Monday, Sep 27, 2010 14:58]; edited by Oliver Petrov [10-09-27] |
I think that all themes are well-defined and "silent moves" is not among them.
In the time when I did not know there must be a theme, I made a problem with about 15 variations. It would be a pity to lose this chess problem just because it has no theme, I think.
|
|
| (4) Posted by Frank Richter [Monday, Sep 27, 2010 15:52] |
You may save this problem as a puzzle or a task.
No need to lose it - but of course it will not be awarded ...
|
|
| (5) Posted by Juraj Lörinc [Monday, Sep 27, 2010 15:57] |
Also, depending on the solving difficulty, it might be interesting as a problem for the solving competition.
|
|
| (6) Posted by Oliver Petrov [Monday, Sep 27, 2010 16:02]; edited by Oliver Petrov [10-09-27] |
Its only merit, in my view, is that it features a silent sacrifice of the queen on the key move. :-)
|
|
| (7) Posted by Hauke Reddmann [Monday, Sep 27, 2010 16:16] |
Hic Rhodes, hic WCSC 2007 :-)
Just show your problem and we can discuss it.
(If it's unpublished, publish it first.)
I'm a "art and moral have to be discussed on a
case-to-case basis" fanatic, so I'm hesitant
to give a generic comment based on a generic
description.
Hauke
|
|
| (8) Posted by Oliver Petrov [Monday, Sep 27, 2010 16:25]; edited by Oliver Petrov [10-09-27] |
The main topic was other -- about themes. I gave this problem just as an example of a problem without theme. It probably has no big value.
|
|
| (9) Posted by Georgy Evseev [Tuesday, Sep 28, 2010 09:35] |
The problem is great if it is interesting and beautiful. Quite often "interesting" and "beautiful" mean different things for different people, but the problem's quality is always evaluated on contents and form. The contents is a set of ideas the author presented in his problem, the form is a set of means used to present these ideas correctly.
"The list of themes" is simply a way to catalog or to classify the contents of the problem. It allows, for example, to describe the contents orally, not showing the problem itself.
If the author is generally unable to describe the contents of his own problem in the terms of known themes, this may mean any of the three things (or a combination of them).
1. The problem contains extremely original idea not shown before. This is the best case), the idea will soon be classified and may even be named after the author.
2. The author is not well-versed in themes and so is unable to explain the contents of a problem in conventional terms. This may be healed by self-education.
3. The problem does not contain anything worth mentioning. So, it is not really a chess problem, but a formally correct construction. It will be never reprinted and soon forgotten).
Simple things like "sacrificial key", "zugzwang" or "long moves" are themselves sometimes considered a theme of a problem.
|
|
| (10) Posted by Hauke Reddmann [Tuesday, Sep 28, 2010 18:20] |
I can't resist to post this problem of my own:
 (= 5+2 )
Schach-Report Nov 1992 (Nr.4129) #2
Although I myself deem it rather lame-o (the theme is *just* the triple
mirror after 1.Ra6! Ra1 2.Qxa1, the key is at best average) it got
rather good critiques.
Hauke
|
|
| (11) Posted by Marjan Kovačević [Wednesday, Sep 29, 2010 00:34] |
Hauke,
I like your Miniature a lot. The reason is not entirely in the main theme you explained. It’s rather in some additional features, like the inviting position composed from the curiously placed mobile line-pieces, then the tempting tries (1.R1f6? Ra6! 1.R6f6? Ra8! 1.Rc7? Kd7 1.Rc8? Ra8! 1.Rd6? Ra1!) and the set-mate to compensate a bit for the flight-taking key: 1…Ke4 2.Re6#, a “single-mirror” one).
Concerning Oliver’s question: even without a known theme, and without Hauke’s explanation about the main idea (alone it wouldn't be enough), I find this little problem worth remembering and reproducing. A perfect one for the Solving Show!
|
|
| (12) Posted by Jean-Marc Loustau [Wednesday, Sep 29, 2010 10:42]; edited by Jean-Marc Loustau [10-09-29] |
Nice miniature… Also can be seen another idea = theme :
in the solution the following couple of variations shows a 2nd degree correction (with accurate 1st degree): 1… Rxa6/Rd5 2 Qd5#; 1… Ra1! 2 Qxa1# (not 2 Qd5?)
You can add the random try: 1 Rc~on 6th line? (2 Qd6#) but 1… Rxa8! The key 1 Ra6!! is thus a 2nd degree white correction; the try 1 Rd6!? Ra1! is also a 2nd degree white correction, but a threat correction (2 Qd4#).
You have also the following set of tries: 1 Rc~on c file? (R mates on e file#) but 1… Ke6! Then, possibly the following try can be also seen as a white correction:
1 Rc8? (2 Re8#) 1… Ra6/Ra7/Rd5 2 Qd5# But 1… Rxa8! (not 2 Qd5? again correction)
Probably such combinations (black+white correction) already exist in miniature, but I don’t think there are very numerous...
|
|
| (13) Posted by Frank Richter [Wednesday, Sep 29, 2010 16:51] |
QUOTE
1… Ra1! 2 Qxa1# (not 2 Qd5?)
1... Rd5 2. Qxd5# (not 2. Da1?) with reciprocal effects to 1... Ra1
no 2nd degree here in my opinion, may be dual avoidance
|
|
| (14) Posted by Jean-Marc Loustau [Wednesday, Sep 29, 2010 17:06] |
Well, it's a matter of discussion, anyway without great importance I think; in my opinion, after 1... Rd5, the Rook still controls Qa1 as a mate, and thus there is not a real anti-dual... But again a matter of opinion or even "feelings"; the 2nd degree is clearer in the variation 1... Rxa6.
|
|
| (15) Posted by Hauke Reddmann [Wednesday, Sep 29, 2010 18:33] |
I'm greatly amused what the modernists find in my little piece -
I take your word it exists but take my word it was never intended
to play a role (not even any plausible tries). Sometimes
dumb positional luck happens.
Hauke
|
|
No more posts |
MatPlus.Net  Forum General one beginner question |
ISC 2024
