 |
Updates as of 18-22.Dec, 2012:
|
- (20.12) Happy to show you a joint problem by two authors – Alain BIÉNABE & Sébastien LUCE, No.193 – and to welcome a new author – Sébastien LUCE, France! Thanks to the authors!!
- (19.12) And now I have no doubts we’ll have 200 problems by the end of year! – I’ve a pleasure to present you 4(!!) problems by Peter Harris – all different, all complicated! See them all – No.189,190,191,192! Thank you for support, Peter!!
- (18.12) I’ve a pleasure to show you a joint problem by two Hungarian authors – see No.188 by Tibor Érsek & János Mikitovics! This problem is also quite complicated! Thanks a lot to the authors!
- (18.12) See a complicated (as always!) problem by Peter Harris – No.187! Thank you, Peter, for coming again and again with your new problems, and for your support! I have to count who from us has more problems here – either Peter or myself! 🙂
(18.12) Will we have 200 problems here by the end of year??
You can click on the Original Problems tab on the top to see the whole list of published problems. Problem numbers are links to the problems – click on any number to see the problem. Standard search using Ctrl+F also works for the list.
Your original problems are very welcome!!
I’m sure.. I already predicted it when 100 was crossed.. 🙂
>>Will we have 200 problems here by the end of year??
It may be 200 already taking into account the originals in the articles and the improved versions !!
Oh, yes! And today I have 5 more problems to publish! Should I publish more then 200 ? 🙂
But I’m happy to see Shankar’s optimism about the future work!!
I was not talking about the future work. I was merely mentioning that the count needs reverification 🙂
I presume that the question, whether to publish more than 200 is should wait for our Judge’s response !
Regardless of the exact number of originals, the judge’s work will be enormous. Especially, since the level of the competition appears to be high. If such numbers are achieved in less than a year, in the beginning of this site, one may expect almost twice as many originals for the next year.
A suggestion might be to break the tourney into two or more pieces, either chronologically (e.g. January-June and July-December) or according to the type of problems published (e.g. directmates, helpmates, helpselfmates), and have two or more judges do all the work.
This is really advisable for 2013.
Breaking by types of problems published is better in my view as it also helps judge.
Kostas, Juraj, thanks for your advises!! This is really what I’m thinking about the last days. I thought about breaking the tourney into 2(3) parts of 6(4) months. Although, Juraj is right that for the judge it might be better to work with a problems of one (or several) preferable type of problems. Honestly, I don’t know what to start from. I don’t know the preferences of most potential judges, and also I can’t predict how many problems of which types I will have… I’d appreciate a lot any advises about the judging, splitting problems and judges’ candidatures for each type of problems!
About this year.. Of course, publishing each new problem I think about Shankar Ram and his future work! While I see smiles in his comments, I believe he is ok! I believe we should split the problems of this year into some sections as well. But it is up to Shankar. As also the question if a longer term for the judging is needed or some more person to help. I will discuss these things with Shankar and I believe in his experience!
“How to break the tourney into 2,3 parts, because there are so many entries…” A dream question for all editors – so I congratulate you for your success Julia!
I remember when I was a judge of Fairy tourney for the first time some years ago – there were more than 100 entries and it was a hard work… I decided to split the tourney in 2 sections: problems without fairy pieces and problems with fairy pieces. This looks logical. Even now the Fairy Originals section of Strate Gems is like that. The problem is where should be the compositions with the condition KoBul Kings – probably in Fairy pieces section?
Of course another logical way is the tourney to be split for problems with fairy conditions and problems without fairy conditions.
Actually I think that some of the pointed methods above should be done even for FIDE Albums – It is not normal Helpmates to be with separated sections (H#2 and H#n), but all Fairies to be collect together. This genre is very rich now. What is the opinion of another composers about that?
I think Mr. Shankar Ram have to take this decision now, but for the next year the sections should be announced from the beginning.
Of course the another way of breaking the tourney in 4 or 6 months period is also acceptable (as in Orbit magazine for H# section).