admin – Page 18

11^th WCCT: Claims

By admin 29/12/2021 14/01/2022 WCCT

Important notes:
1. The claims concern only formal soundness, comparison problems and misprints. Claims regarding thematic contents and quality of expression or construction were not allowed in this phase of the tournament. After consultation with the spokesman of the WCCT committee, matters related to conventions were also left to the opinion and evaluation of the judging countries.
2. Replies to claims should be sent to the tournament director Harry Fougiaxis by March 1st, 2022.
3. Only the appointed national team leaders may send replies.
4. The judging countries should start the judgment process immediately, in order to save time. The judgments should be received no later than June 1st, 2022.
My warm wishes for 2022, hopefully free of viruses and restrictions! – Harry Fougiaxis

Update of 06.01.2022: The PDF files of the introduction, section D, section E and of the whole document have been updated with a few additional comments. Please download the files again!

Update of 14.01.2022: The PDF files of section H and of the whole document have been updated with the notification that H29 is cooked. Please download the files again!

Limontas Online Solving Tournaments (LOST)

By admin 29/12/2021 29/12/2021 Other

Arvydas Mockus has announced a new series including 6 rounds of Limontas Online Solving Tournaments called “L.O.S.T.” with the first round on 9 January 2022. Each round will start on a Sunday at 10:00 CET and will last 108 minutes. Rounds will have one solving category only – each round with one of the 6 categories of the WCSC.
Like the previous ones the tournament will be directed by Arvydas Mockus and it is mainly organised for strong solvers with a rating of more than 2200. More information including the registration’s procedure -> see the invitation in PDF.

WCCI 2019-2021: Announcement

By admin 03/12/2021 14/12/2021 WCCI

The WFCC is inviting composers of all countries to participate in the 2019-21 WCCI. The tourney director is Valery Kopyl (email: v.kopyl@i.ua). The competition will be held according to the system used in the previous championship, with changes in point 9 of the rules.

WCCI 2016-18	WCCI 2013-15
4. A composer may submit to each section no more than 6 and no less than 4 compositions published in the defined three-year period. For informal tourneys the date of publication of the issue containing the composition is decisive; for formal tourneys the date of appearance of the award is decisive (NB: not the closing date of the tourney). If a composition has been published in a magazine which is labelled 2015 on the front but it appeared in 2016-2018, the composition is eligible for the 2016-18 WCCI. If a composition has been published in a magazine which is labelled 2018 on the front but it appeared in 2019, the composition is eligible for the 2016-18 WCCI provided that the magazine was published before the deadline. If a composition has been published in a magazine which is labelled 2019 on the front but it appeared in 2018, the composition is not eligible for the 2016-18 WCCI. Later corrections or versions could be accepted if they are submitted before the deadline. If the date of publication is in doubt, the director should ask the composer for evidence. Joint compositions and versions created in collaboration with other composer(s) are not allowed. It is not allowed to submit compositions on behalf of someone else without explicit statement of the other person’s consent.	4. A composer may submit to each section no more than 6 and no less than 4 compositions published in the defined three-year period. For informal tourneys the date of publication of the issue containing the composition is decisive; for formal tourneys the date of appearance of the award is decisive (NB: not the closing date of the tourney). Later corrections should normally be accepted. If the date of publication is in doubt, the director should ask the composer for evidence. Joint compositions are not allowed. It is not allowed to submit compositions on behalf of someone else without his written consent.
5. Entries must be sent to the director by email and in PDF format only. In each section composers have to submit one PDF file, which will include all their entries to this section with one composition per page. Composers must have already marked their entries with No. 1 to 6. The compositions should be in diagrams of a uniform size, with the author’s name, publication data, any award, stipulation, full solution and a comment if desired. Algebraic notation is to be used. In section D (endgame studies) composers may alternatively submit a PGN file of their entries or both. In section G (Fairies) composers must provide the definitions for the less common fairy elements.	5. Entries must be sent to the director by email and in PDF format only. In each section composers have to submit one PDF file, which will include all their entries to this section with one composition per page. Composers must have already marked their entries with No. 1 to 6. The compositions should be in diagrams of a uniform size, with the author’s name, email address, publication data, any award, stipulation, full solution and a comment if desired. Algebraic notation is to be used. In section D (endgame studies) composers may alternatively submit a PGN file of their entries.
8. Using a scale of 0 to 4 including half-points, each judge will allocate points to all compositions in the section(s) which he has agreed to judge, except for his own entries and entries that were excluded from the competition on technicalities. Compositions which are sound and not anticipated should receive at least 0.5 points. The judges must explain their reason(s) for giving a score of 0 points to any composition. Judges in section D (endgame studies) are requested to allocate points to the studies as if they had been composed in the traditional manner before the advent of the computer into compositional chess. It should also be noted that studies are not to be regarded as anticipated by any position appearing in a computer-generated database.	8. Using a scale of 0 to 4 including half-points, each judge will allocate points to all compositions in the section(s) which he has agreed to judge, except for his own entries. Compositions which are sound and not anticipated should receive at least 0.5 points. The judges must explain their reason(s) for giving a score of 0 points to any composition. Judges in section D (endgame studies) are requested to allocate points to the studies as if they had been composed in the traditional manner before the advent of the computer into compositional chess. It should also be noted that studies are not to be regarded as anticipated by any position appearing in a computer-generated database.
12. The director will send the tables with the results to the 3 members of the Supervising Panel, who cannot be participating or judging in any section. If he feels it necessary he will point out any potential irregularities, e.g. the average score of any one judge is much higher or much lower than that of the other four, or cases where there is a wide disparity (e.g. more than 1.5) between the judges’ points allocated to a given composition (in such cases the director should email the outliers with the average score of the other judges). The members of the Supervising Panel should also point out irregularities and ask the director for a resolution.	12. The director will send the tables with the results to the 3 members of the Supervising Panel, who cannot be participating or judging in any section. If he feels it necessary he will point out any potential irregularities, e.g. the average score of any one judge is much higher or much lower than that of the other four, or cases where there is a wide disparity (e.g. more than 1.5) between the judges’ points allocated to a given composition. The members of the Supervising Panel should also point out irregularities and ask the director for a resolution.

Update (14.12.2021): The changes in the announcement appear in red colour.

Participants may submit their entries by January 20, 2022. Details can be found in the announcement.

World Solving Cup 2021/2022 – Bern 27.11.2021

By admin 28/11/2021 28/11/2021 Other

36^th Open Swiss Solving Championship 2021 | 1st tournament of World Solving Cup 2021/2022:
Participants: 15 | Winner: Danila Pavlov (RUS) ahead of Roland Baier (SUI – Swiss Champion) and Vidmantas Satkus (LTU)
Average rating of top ten solvers: 2336.64 | WSC category: 7
Top 5 World Solving Cup: 1. Danila Pavlov (RUS) 19 points, 2. Roland Baier (SUI) 16 points, 3. Vidmantas Satkus (LTU) 13 points, 4. Martynas Limontas (LTU) 10 points, 5. Andrey Selivanov (RUS) 8 points

More details are published in Competitions → Solving → World Solving Cup → 2021/22 Calendar.

WCCC 2021 final: Minutes & future meetings

By admin 15/11/2021 15/11/2021 WCCC/WCSC

The page of the 63^rd WCCC is updated with Minutes with annexes (PDF, 22 p.).

Future meetings:

15^th European Chess Solving Championship (ECSC) in Riga, Latvia 13-15 May 2022

64^th World Congress of Chess Composition (WCCC) and 45^th World Chess Solving Championship (WCSC) in Fujairah, United Arab Emirates 12-19 November 2022

WCCC 2021 final: agenda and bulletin

By admin 24/10/2021 31/10/2021 WCCC/WCSC

The 63^rd World Congress of Chess Composition was closed on October, 22^nd. Some more details about the events will be added to the related posts, including results and galleries.

The page of the 63rd WCCC is updated with WFCC Agenda and
Bulletin 63^rd WCCC and 44^th WCSC (PDF, 132 pages, v.1.1 – 31.10.2021).

63.WCCC – 5.YCCC results

By admin 22/10/2021 13/11/2021 WCCC/WCSC, YCCC

The 5^th YCCC with 50 participants from 12 countries has doubled the results of the record breaking 4^th YCCC. 12 judges were involved in the process of the evaluation. The winners of all three sections were announced on the final banquet of the 63^rd WCCC:

Section A – twomovers (Judge David Shire): 1. Ural Khasanov (Russia),
2. Ilija Serafimović (Serbia), 3. Hajime Tachioka (Japan)

Section B – endgames (Judge Steffen Nielsen): 1. Alexey Popov (Russia),
2. Ilija Serafimović (Serbia), 3. Andrii Sergiienko (Ukraine)

Section C – free theme / genre (The panel of 10 judges):
1. Toshimasa Fujiwara (Japan), 2. Benjamin Defromont (France), 3. Itay Richardson (Israel)

The full booklet presenting the gallery of participants and 3 awards: