|
| Page: [Previous] [Next] 1 2 3 |
| (21) Posted by Miodrag Mladenović [Tuesday, Oct 13, 2015 09:42] |
You are comparing chess problems with Football. Why not compare it with athletic long jump discipline? There is no rule that you have to make at least 4 jumps to be a winner. You can make a single jump and then to skip all other 5 series and to be a winner. By the way I do not know if ever happened that all jumpers made 4 to 6 jumps. Usually good jumpers make a good jump in 1st or 2nd series and then they skip the others.
And then again. By forcing people to send at least 4 problems there will be lots of junk problems sent just to fulfill the required number of problems. That's why I think that there should be no this rule that composer should send at least 4 problems.
By the way at WCCT there is no rule about minimum number of problems per section that should be sent. Country can send 1 endgame and that problem will participate in competition. Why should be different rules for WCCI?
|
|
| (22) Posted by Sergiy Didukh [Tuesday, Oct 13, 2015 10:36]; edited by Sergiy Didukh [15-10-13] |
I know what to do with junk problems. That's not a problem for me. At least it's a much smaller problem than unprepared participants who couldn't compose 4 problems in three years. Thanks to the requirement of 4 compositions the judges don't have to waste their time on these pathetic losers!
|
|
| (23) Posted by Sergiy Didukh [Tuesday, Oct 13, 2015 11:03] |
In other sports it's not easy to earn the right to compete in the World Championship. In chess composition everyone has the right to participate in the WCCI. If you think that the requirement to publish 4 compositions in three years is a big obstacle you look like the one who has a very high opinion of himself! Be humbler and respect the competition as well as the work of judges.
|
|
| (24) Posted by shankar ram [Tuesday, Oct 13, 2015 11:13] |
Sergiy, you can make your point without resorting to language like "pathetic losers". As noted by you, chess problems are an endangered hobby. We should avoid alienating the remaining people!
But I think your point is valid - If somebody wants to be called a "World Champion", He/She should necessarily participate with the required frequency(decided by the world body. in our case, the WFCC).
Dragging "art" into the picture confuses matters!
|
|
| (25) Posted by Darko Šaljić [Tuesday, Oct 13, 2015 14:25] |
The fact is that we already had rules and that the rules are CHANGED by a few half-drunk delegates,
without consultation with those this competition is intended and only necessary to accommodate the lazy judges.
|
|
| (26) Posted by Sergiy Didukh [Tuesday, Oct 13, 2015 14:43] |
Darko, I think you are a little too insignificant composer to make such a big statement.
|
|
| (27) Posted by Miodrag Mladenović [Tuesday, Oct 13, 2015 14:52] |
@Sergiy Didukh
The easiest way for someone without arguments is to start using offensive words. That just tells me that my point of view is completely right and that you do not have any arguments to defend this bad rule of minimum 4 problems per section. By the way I've been judge to both WCCI and FA. You took the stand like you are defending judges but I do not know why do you think you have the rights to do this. You can just represent your point of view. And if you do not have time to be a judge you should be not accepting that at all. Actually after the posts you posted here I think you should be removed to be a judge at all. I can see that you will be just in hurry to spend minimum time making an award without looking into details of problems you are judging. And personally I am sure that I'll never send any problem to any competition where you are a judge.
|
|
| (28) Posted by Darko Šaljić [Tuesday, Oct 13, 2015 15:13] |
Sergiy,
I am flattered that such a greatness dedicate some of his precious time to google my work.
Do you dislike my problems or there are too few for giant like you?
But maybe the fact that I am FIDE Album judge too, gives me some rights to say something?
|
|
| (29) Posted by Marjan Kovačević [Tuesday, Oct 13, 2015 15:42] |
Let's make things more clear, and avoid future unnecessary offenses. I missed checking MPF last 3 days, and now I see this discussion has heated too much, without a single word of those who suggested the change of the rules.
As the spokesman of WCCI Committee, I supported the proposal made by member of the Committee David Gurgenidze, and the WFCC accepted such proposal made by WCCI Committee. I don't recall anyone drinking during these meetings!
The WCCI is radically different from Album selection, being a competition in the first place. Album may also be perceived as a competition, but it is in the same time a collection of valuable works. There are composers who participate in a) WCCI only, b) Album only, and c) in none of these two.
The WCCI in my opinion got a very unlucky format, based on the PCCC decision from 1998. Instead of current format of competition for published problems, I would like to have the format of World Cup, to stimulate originals of highest quality, but that's completely different topic.
The demand for having at least 4 sent works had a purely sportive logic. The WCCI as it is now, doesn't produce quality or art (it has already been produced before, or it hasn't). The WCCI produces RESULTS olny.
Have you ever thought of the fact that WCCI 2007-09 presents Milan Velimirovic as being on 23rd place in #3 section? In the future, no one will know how many entries he sent...
To my understanding of sport, such rules were not good, and they gave a poor picture about problem chess competitions in general (the same as seeing the teams of 2 members in ECSC, where 3 best results are counted).
After expressing my thoughts, I would like to thank all of you who think differently. This is a chance to think together and come to better solutions, while avoiding any personal offenses, they don't help at all.
|
|
| (30) Posted by Ian Shanahan [Wednesday, Oct 14, 2015 09:30]; edited by Ian Shanahan [15-10-16] |
@Mr Didukh
What an offensive comment! Has it not occurred to you that, beyond inability, good composers might have perfectly valid reasons for falling short of the stated target (4 problems)? Maybe they worked in another genre of chess composition during the three-year period under consideration. Or maybe life circumstances prevented them from composing the requisite number of compositions. In my own case, chronic illness (renal failure, with complications) has caused a radical drop in the quantity - hopefully not the quality! - of my compositional output, such that, for some genres, I cannot hope to reach the minimum demanded. Does that make me a "pathetic loser"? I certainly hope not! Please desist henceforth from making such pathetic judgements of your colleagues.
|
|
| (31) Posted by Andrey Selivanov [Wednesday, Oct 14, 2015 10:08] |
@Sergey
Sergey, you are undoubtedly a talented composer, but asking you to be correct in your comments.
|
|
| (32) Posted by Darko Šaljić [Wednesday, Oct 14, 2015 10:20]; edited by Darko Šaljić [15-10-14] |
I feel responsible too,because I think that he was also provoked by my comments. I apologize first to Sergey,who is undoubtly great composer and to others that I have offended without any reason.
|
|
| (33) Posted by Marcel Tribowski [Wednesday, Oct 14, 2015 10:44] |
It's a widespread error - unfortunately promoted by the current title system - that good composers can be recognized by talkativeness, i.e. their quantitative output.
A problem event which doesn't produce quality or art (as Marjan rightly pointed out) may satisfy some personal vanities, but is meaningless for any development or progress.
The automatism between WCCI results and FA has been established just as an advertising campaign for this event. Considering quality of Album selection, it has been a mistake from the beginning which should be withdrawn as soon as possible.
|
|
| (34) Posted by Sergiy Didukh [Wednesday, Oct 14, 2015 13:19] |
No apologies from me. Because everything I wrote is correct. The composer with 3 problems won't have a good result in the competition where 4 problems are taken into account. He will lose, that is, he will be a loser.
Marjan K. is not right about the quality of compositions in the WCCI and FA. Studies in the WCCI are of higher quality than in the Album.
|
|
| (35) Posted by Darko Šaljić [Wednesday, Oct 14, 2015 14:10]; edited by Darko Šaljić [15-10-14] |
Whatever. But no one has answered to Misha and his arguments.
|
|
| (36) Posted by Marcel Tribowski [Wednesday, Oct 14, 2015 15:45] |
„Studies in the WCCI are of higher quality than in the Album.“ [34]
Let's talk about facts:
From the period 2007-09, 8 studies both were published in WCCI award (as far as available in Internet) where they received 78.5 judgement points together, and FIDE Album where they got 78 points.
From 2004-06, the same 7 studies were judged with 69.5 points in WCCI, and 61.5 points in FA.
Examinations of other sections lead to similar results: WCCI level usually is lower than the Album's.
|
|
| (37) Posted by Nikola Predrag [Wednesday, Oct 14, 2015 16:15] |
Is it really so hard to understand what Marjan has actually said about the problems at WCCI?
|
|
| (38) Posted by Darko Šaljić [Wednesday, Oct 14, 2015 16:30] |
You are not the only one..
|
|
| (39) Posted by Darko Šaljić [Wednesday, Oct 14, 2015 16:36] |
And it would be good to know when delegates were familiar with this proposal and how much time they had to think about it and consult with colleagues thay are representing.
|
|
| (40) Posted by Branislav Djurašević [Wednesday, Oct 14, 2015 17:09]; edited by Branislav Djurašević [15-10-15] |
Only for comparison, in the scientific circles, the significance of the scientists' work is measured not by the quantity of publications, but by the citation of those publications. Unfortunately, I think that in the world of chess problem, this can hardly be established, i.e. the significance of some problems (or composers) would be proportional to how many times they are reproduced. The best examples are L.Yarosh or L.Lacny with theirs masterpieces. I'd like that we, the composers, rather compare ourselves with the scientists and their work than with the athletes. The deeds should be remembered, not the titles or the current results. If composing of chess problems is looked at only as sport, for some people it can be rather frustrating in terms of how their problems will be ranked. Some problems gain on significance only later, with the flow of time. Time is the best judge.
|
|
Read more... |
Page: [Previous] [Next] 1 2 3
MatPlus.Net  Forum Competitions WCCI 2013-2015 |
ISC 2024
