|
No.1145 |
Original Problems →Previous ; →Next ; →List 2016(II) Please send your original fairy problems to: julia@juliasfairies.com |
|
No.1145 Ya’aqov Mintz |
Solution: (click to show/hide) |
|
white Bf1c1 Ke1 Qd1 Ph2g2f2e2d2c2b2a2 Sg1b1 Rh1a1
black Bf8c8 Ke8 Qd8 Ph7g7f7e7d7c7b7a7 Sg8b8 Rh8a8
PG 4.5 (14+14) |
|
|
|
|
|
No.1145.1 Ya’aqov Mintz |
Solution: (click to show/hide) |
|
white Bf1c1 Ke1 Qd1 Ph2g2f2e2d2c2b2a2 Sg1b1 Rh1a1
black Bf8c8 Ke8 Qd8 Ph7g7f7e7d7c7b7a7 Sg8b8 Rh8a8
PG 7.5 (12+11) |
|
Neat…. but I suppose basic scheme !
To Seetharaman: What is interesting is that after the initial (uneconomical version with the victim black queen) I found 4 games in 5-6 moves with Impostor (s) and only after that this Original.
I’m fairly certain that I’ve published the following composition, but unfortunately I can’t find it anymore.
rsb1kbsr/pppp1ppp/8/8/8/8/PPPPPP1P/RSBQKB1R
dia4.5
zero b2->g2
twin b1->g1
Please decrypt addition: zero b2->g2
twin b1->g1
Found it:
http://anselan.com/CHEP.html
Dear M. Mintz, Joost
PLEASE USE WINCHLOE !
It is the best way to know what is done and what is not done in Chess Composition ! And please send your problems to M. Christian Poisson (christian.poisson@free.fr)
In Winchloe database, I didn’t find the position of M.Mintz but indeed it has great chances to be anticipated.
Some of PJs of M. Joost de Heer are very similar…
I mean the position in my first remark after:
1.Sa3 e5 2.Sc4 Qg5 3.Sxe5 Qxg2 4.Sf3 Qxg1 5.Sxg1.
Mr Joost remembered something else – in his position there is no solution. It seems he forgot all the details, but I very much doubt that someone will find PG 4,5 fifth position on the subject.
The first two were in my comments to the problem P0002288..
Sorry, now I understood the conditions. And I see the fifth game
I received a reply from France – thanks to Luis!
My original position in the collection was not found.
Thank you very much Christian for a queckly answer and especially for your Fairy Babson Task’s, etc.
Ya’aqov, your position appears here already:
http://wismuth.com/chess/diagrams/at-home09-sol1.txt
Oh…. I was hoping that this short PG with imposter piece might escape.
To seetharaman: I hope that in the next “Phenix” and “Die Schwalbe” will be published by my earlier PG in 8.5 and in 7.0 with more interesting content…
WOW! Dear Adrian, now I’m sure PG in 5.0 also was C+.
But what about:
r1bqkbsr/1ppp1ppp/8/8/8/8/PPPP1PPP/R1BQK1SR
PG in 6.0
rsbqkb1r/ppp1ppp1/8/8/8/8/PPP1PPPP/RS1QKB1R
PG in 6.0
rsbqkb1r/ppp1pppp/8/8/8/8/1PPPPPPP/RSBQKBSR
PG in 6.0
r1bqkbs1/pppppp2/8/8/8/8/1PPPPPP1/1SBQKBSR
PG in 6.5
François Labelle’s site shows quite a few examples of “at home” SPGs here:
http://wismuth.com/chess/statistics-positions.html
See under the heading: “At home” diagrams (table + reference to another page on the topic).
Not all his computer-assisted results are shown.
Adrian many thanks to You. The main thing is that the tables do not have problems with open solutions in 5.5 moves and longer. Also is interesting that are less than 20% probems PG in 4.5 moves with Imposter (8 of 41). And as it turned out today, 5 of 8 was “hand made” – I don’t say “mind made” because now PC helps very well to check such problems. Not like half a century ago, when only the elect admitted to the first computers.
Today, making sure that the fastest way to check the originality of this appeal to colleagues directly, I do not want to expose Mrs. Julia in a situation where all the most important things become clear only after the publication.
So I propose to replace PG in 4,5 on the following PG in 7,5:
1sb1kb1r/1pp1pppp/8/8/8/8/1PPP1PPP/1SBQKB1R, (12+11).
1.e4 d5 2.ed Qxd5 3.Se2 Qxa2 4.Sec3 Qxb1 5.Rxa7 Sf6
6.Rxa8 Sd7 7.Rxb8 Sxb8 8.Sxb1, which (after all the checks)
I hope will replace №1145.
Since François has computed all at-home positions with unique proofgame up to 16 plies (8.0 moves), this 7.5-mover was part of that computation. Does this mean that his search results anticipate this 7.5-mover, even though he hasn’t published a full list of FEN positions for ply 15?
It is a disquieting thought…. is it not? I remember Dickins reporting in the 70s… (or is it 80s) of a collection (he called it Black Book!) in which someone who had access and expertise (in initial computer days) published all the helpmates possible with the content of KS/KS. Now, will someone try anything with this material…. ?
See explanations to the above at http://pdb.dieschwalbe.de/search.jsp?expression=PROBID=%27P1319771%27
Claude Shannon published a paper “Programming a Computer for Playing Chess” in 1950 in Philosophical Magazine.
Verified by Popeye in 22 seconds.
Interesting question, Joost!
Suppose that in a century someone using a quantic computer claims he has quoted (on a one billion tera-octets hard-disk!) every sound proof game till 20.0. Does it means that each such “new” PG would be anticipated?
The opinion of the Codex subcommittee of the PCCC (present-day WFCC) was that an anticipation can only exist if the work (=problem) has been published previously.
“Published” means “being made available to the public”. Exactly where the line between publication and not-publication is to be drawn is not always quite clear, but someone having a collection of x positions on his hard disk does not make them published. Likewise if he sends copies of this hard disk to some of his friends. But if he offers copies for sale on the Internet, or if he send copies to all subscribers of some magazine, I believe that would count as a publication.
Interestingly, Helmut Mertes declared (if I remember correctly) when his collection of all sound helpmates with the material KS-KS in book form, that he did NOT want this to count as a publication – so everyone was free to search for interesting problems in his lists and publish those under his own name. Some people did so, usually publishing as “by N.N., ex D. Relp”.
Perhaps I write too long sentences? 🙂
“material KS-KS in book form” should be “material KS-KS was published in book form”.
Another addition: the above-mentioned opinion of the Codex subcommittee is reflected in the present Codex.
I carefully had examined the site of François Labelle and saw a new
(to me) English term: Wanderer, corresponding Impostor on PDB site.
At the conclusion of his work on the “Homebase” theme, the author makes
it clear that he sees the value of their research help other composers, and
I quote him:
” Discussion
Common thematic elements in homebase compositions are Promotions (Pronkin & Frolkin), Wanderers, Circuits, Switchbacks and more rarely Tempo & Opposition. That so much is possible is surprising, given that there are only a billion different homebase positions!
There appear to be many opportunities for new or improved compositions (Emphasis added by me), for example:
Minimal representations of single themes.
Double promotions (PF, PP or FF).
Double promotion by the same player (prerequisite for triple promotion).
Single wandering (no rook wandering yet at all).
Double wandering.
Wandering + promotion
Wandering + double promotion (maybe easier than triple promotion).”
Discussion on J’F website shows that my problem PG in 7,5 is original.
For me – debate has gone little bit not on a practical plane…
My interest was – if anyone spent some more research with the addition of popular topics? And most importantly – was this position: GP in 7,5, published at some site (like No.1145)?
zu Kjells Anmerkungen zum D.Relp Buch, siehe
http://pdb.dieschwalbe.de/search.jsp?expression=PROBID=%27P0542797%27
http://pdb.dieschwalbe.de/search.jsp?expression=PROBID=%27P0542887%27
Dear Erich,
because an attention shifted to the Giants’ battles,
I decided to summarize.
From the table “At home” diagrams, if open blue numbers, we see that all
PG in 4,0 were realised 19 Jan. 2004;
PG in 4,5 were realised 24 Jan. 2004;
PG in 5,0 were realised 30 Jan. 2004.
Above, if to open the blue: “there exists an n that cannot be obtained”, we can see an activity on site in February 2005.
(Almost the all problems are PG in 7,0).
…On PDB Server I found some problems published between 30 Jan. 2004 to 4 Feb. 2005:
P1292894, P1013061, P1017475, P1017778, P1292895, P1067825;
…it was only the first round!
Very quick our world became a victim of the new guerrilla sabotages:
P1067859, P1080410; P1112018, P1180352, P1230063, P1214052, P1214054.
In my earlier private letters to Mr. Thomas Brand and Mrs. Julia, about “homease” table on François Labelle site, I drew attention to the general problemI: “An important additional question – how this table was constructed in time!?”
Of course, the remark Erich Bartel is acceptable for the PG short games published since the last update of the website: “Chess problems with a computer” François Labelle, (… Page last updated: March 2, 2016), but what about the many such problems published during the preceding around 12 years.
Is there any data on the changes in the table in all these years?