Annex to WCCT General Rules
This annex aims to provide clarification of some of the WCCT General Rules and, for the 10th WCCT in particular, is to be considered as an integral part of those Rules. The paragraph numbering corresponds to that used in the General Rules.
Paragraph #7: The announcement and the award will be written in the English language. Team leaders and judging countries are kindly asked also to use only English, including any comments to the problems. Director keeps the right to translate the country’s comments into English (including automatic translation means, like Google translator) to ensure anonymity of entries. Communication between the Director, the team leaders and the judging countries will be via e-mail.
Paragraph #9: The team leader of the organising country will send the entries to the appointed WFCC Presidium member in a password-protected ZIP archive. The Director will ask the team leader for the password upon receipt of the file with the entries.
Paragraph #10: Even though the submission of versions is not encouraged, it is not forbidden. Similar problems by different countries are all legitimate; they are not considered to be versions and are not subject to the procedure described below. The procedure for versions in the current tournament is as in the previous WCCT:
- Every participating country must inform the Director if it submits groups of 2 or 3 problems which are versions of each other.
- The judging countries do not receive this information. They allocate points to all the entries as if there were no versions.
- Among versions submitted by the same country only the highest-graded one is kept in the award and may score points for that country.
- After the judging countries have submitted their marks, the Director informs them of seemingly undeclared versions which he has detected among the entries submitted by any country.
- The judging countries in the relevant section must then state whether they consider these entries to be versions of each other. If there is a majority decision that an entry is a version, action is taken according paragraph (c). If there is a tie, the Director must exercise a casting vote and inform the judging countries of his decision.
Paragraph #11: The team leaders will submit the entries in electronic form. Acceptable file formats are: WinChloe, Fancy CCV, Problemiste PBM, MatPlus Librarian PBZ/PBX, Microsoft Word DOC and DOCX, OpenOffice ODT, Rich text format RTF and Adobe Acrobat PDF. For section D (Endgame studies) in particular, the entries must be submitted in PGN format. If the entries are submitted in DOC, DOCX, ODT or RTF format, team leaders must also include in these documents, or in separate plain text files, the positions in standard FEN (preferably) or algebraic notation. If the entries are submitted in PDF format, team leaders must provide the positions in separate plain text files. Acceptable notations are: FEN (KQRBNP), English (KQRBSP), French (RDTFCP), German (KDTLSB) and FIDE (KDTLSP).
Paragraph #12: The document including all the entries will be made available by the Director in PDF format. The WCCT Committee considers that no printed booklet is necessary.
Paragraph #14: Each judging country is free to determine its own judging method, whether it uses one, two or more judges. To reach the best result, it is recommended that a country’s judges work in consultation with each other. The country should itself resolve any dispute among the judges; for example an appointed person in charge may make the final decision. It is not required for judges to be international FIDE judges. The judging countries are trusted to appoint their best experts to carry out the work and they are not obliged to provide the names of the persons who have made the award.
Guidelines for the allocation of points:
|
Points
|
Description
|
|
4.0
|
An outstanding problem: an accurate and intensive rendering of the set theme, without blemishes in any of the main lines, and showing originality and flair. Perfect construction and economy. |
|
3.0
|
Either: a very good problem showing the theme clearly but perhaps not intensively or very originally, Or: a task rendering of the theme which does not reach the highest artistic standard. In either case, good construction and economy. |
|
2.0
|
A good problem, very likely worth an honourable mention or commendation in a reasonably strong tourney, but not a very intensive rendering of the theme, and perhaps not very original. Adequate to good construction and economy. |
|
1.0
|
A very ordinary piece of work, typical of many average columns but hardly up to award standard. Adequate construction and economy. |
|
0.0
|
Unsound, unthematic or fully anticipated. |
Paragraph #18: The final awards document will be made available by the Director in PDF format and as a printed booklet.