MINUTES
XLIV. Meeting in Wageningen, The Netherlands 28.7 – 4.8.2001
Bedrich FORMÁNEK, Slovakia, President
Jakov VLADIMIROV, Russia, 1st Vice-President
Kjell WIDLERT, Sweden, 2nd Vice-President
Milan VELIMIROVIC, Yugoslavia, 3rd Vice-President
Günter BÜSING, Germany, Secretary
Helmut ZAJIC, Austria, Delegate
Anatoliy PERIVERDIYEV, Azerbayjan, Deputy for Agshin Masimov
Ignaas VANDEMEULEBROUCKE, Belgium, Delegate
Fadil ABDURAHMANOVIC, Bosnia-Hercegovina, Delegate
Josip VARGA, Croatia, Delegate
Michal DRAGOUN, Czechia, Deputy for Jiri Jelinek
Kaare VISSING ANDERSEN, Denmark, Delegate
Hannu HARKOLA, Finland, Delegate
Michel CAILLAUD, France, Delegate
David GURGENIDZE, Georgia, Delegate
Bernd ELLINGHOVEN, Germany, Delegate
John RICE, Great Britain, Delegate
Byron ZAPPAS, Greece, Delegate
László LINDNER, Hungary, Deputy for Gábor Cseh
Uri AVNER, Israel, Delegate
Francesco SIMONI, Italy, Delegate
Tadashi WAKASHIMA, Japan, Delegate
Zivko JANEVSKI, Macedonia, Delegate
Henk le GRAND, The Netherlands, Delegate
Wladislaw ROSOLAK, Poland, Delegate
Mircea MANOLESCU, Romania, Deputy for Virgil Nestorescu
Marko KLASINC, Slovenia, Delegate
Thomas MAEDER, Switzerland, Delegate
Evgeni REITSEN, Ukraine, Delegate
Mike PRCIC, USA, Deputy for Newman Guttman
Klaus WENDA, Austria, Honorary President
Barry BARNES, Great Britain, Honorary Member
Initially 25 of the 38 member countries were represented. After the late arrival
of some delegates 29 of the 38 member countries were represented.
Alexandr Feoktistov participated in the opening session as deputy for Jakov
Vladimirov. Paul Valois participated in the final session as deputy for John
Rice.
Active visitors fulfilling tasks as members of subcommittees, tourney directors,
assistant directors, etc., were:
Peter Bakker, Dirk Borst (The Netherlands), Andrey Selivanov, Nikolai Kralin
(Russia), Zvonimir Hernitz (Croatia), Marjan Kovacevic (Yugoslavia), Marek Kolcák
(Slovakia), Hans Gruber (Germany), Marco Bonavoglia (Italy), Yochanan Afek (Israel),
Alexander Hildebrand (Sweden), Harri Hurme (Finland) and John Roycroft (Great
Britain). Also several Dutch assistants worked very effectively in the background.
§1 Opening address, remembrance for deceased problemists
After words of welcome President Bedrich Formánek expressed his thanks for
the organization of the meeting to Henk le Grand and to the Nederlandse Bond
van Schaakprobleemvrienden, and then declared the meeting open.
Then the President announced with regret the death of several prominent problemists.
The Commission paid tribute to the deceased composers Werner Speckmann (Germany,
21.8.1913-23.2.2001), Jaroslav Brada (Czechia, 26.5.1925-10.2.2001), Johan Hubert
Vlengals (The Netherlands, 24.3.1921-10.10.2000), Cornelis de Toom (The Netherlands,
7.10.1917-23.3.2001), Vilmos Schneider (Hungary, 5.1.1933-26.3.2001), Thomas
Russel (Great Britain, 27.9.1925-6.8.2000) and Colin Vaughan (Great Britain,
18.5.1917-6.7.2001).
§2 Verification of Attendance and Voting Rights
Initially, 25 member countries out of 38 were represented. The meeting was
declared legal.
§3 Approval of the Pula minutes 2000
The minutes of the 43rd Meeting in Pula (2000) were approved with the following
correction concerning §7.I:
The assistants to the 24th WCSC were Neal Turner and Christopher Jones.
§4 Checking of the Standing Subcommittees
1. WCCT:
U. AVNER (Spokesman), M. VELIMIROVIC, J. VLADIMIROV, B. ZAPPAS, Z. JANEVSKI,
E. REITSEN, J. RICE, B. ELLINGHOVEN (new member)
2. WCCI:
M. KLASINC (Spokesman), A. SELIVANOV, D. GURGENIDZE, K. WIDLERT, Z. HERNITZ.
Last year’s member V. Melnichenko was not present.
3. WCSC:
M. KLASINC (Spokesman), U. AVNER, J. VLADIMIROV, M. KOVACEVIC, M. KOLCÁK. Last
year’s member V. Melnichenko was not present.
4. FIDE-album:
K. WIDLERT (Spokesman), U. AVNER, B. ELLINGHOVEN, J. RICE, A. SELIVANOV, H.
GRUBER. K. Solja also took part in the work.
5. Qualifications:
I. VANDEMEULEBROUCKE (Spokesman), H. HARKOLA, M. BONAVOGLIA, M. MANOLESCU, K.
WENDA. The regular members J. Jelínek and V. Nestorescu were not present. They
were replaced for this year by M. Bonavoglia and M. Manolescu.
6. Computer Matters:
T. MAEDER (Spokesman), H. le GRAND, M. VELIMIROVIC, Z. JANEVSKI, L. LINDNER
7. Studies:
J. ROYCROFT (Spokesman), D. GURGENIDZE, Y. AFEK, N. KRALIN, A. HILDEBRAND. Last
year’s member H. Aloni was not present.
8. Terminology (Dormant):
J. RICE (Spokesman), B. FORMÁNEK, Z. JANEVSKI, M. DRAGOUN. Former member A.
Slesarenko was not present.
9. Codex:
G. BÜSING (Spokesman), B. FORMÁNEK, C. SYDENHAM, I. VERESHCHAGIN, K. WIDLERT
10. Presidium Election Procedure:
K. WENDA (Spokesman), J. RICE, T. MAEDER
11. Judging:
J. RICE (Spokesman), U. AVNER, J. ROYCROFT. Last year’s member A. Slesarenko
was not present.
§5 Proposals by Members
5.I Proposal by Denmark (Jan Mortensen)
The proposal to nominate Jan Mortensen as an Honorary Member of the Commission
was accepted by the Commission in a unanimous vote (all 27 present delegates
in favour). Kaare Vissing Andersen expressed thanks for this honor on behalf
of Jan Mortensen who, for health reasons, is no longer active as a problemist.
5.II Proposal by Israel (Titles for composing)
Günter Büsing reported to the Commission that the Presidium had discussed the
proposal submitted by Uri Avner. This proposal, in short, suggests modifying
the present system for granting the title of Grandmaster for Chess Composition
by awarding 1.4 points for each problem (not study) published in the album.
The Presidium also considered alternative possibilities for modifying the present
system; in particular:
a) maintaining the present point system but reducing the number of points required
for the title;
b) introducing the new title of a Honorary Grandmaster.
Although there was some feeling in the Presidium that the step from the title
of International Master to Grandmaster is very large (25 to 70 points), there
was no clear opinion which modification, if any, to the present system would
be best. It appeared that each of the possibilities that have been considered
has some advantage but also may cause difficulties. A general difficulty related
to each of the possibilities is the danger of title inflation, and the fact
that Grandmasters who obtained the title under the present system might feel
that the title is devalued.
Some particular problems of the possibilities were addressed:
i) the proposal as submitted by Uri Avner seems to result in practical difficulties.
Specifically, the retroactive part of the proposal requires a lot of recalculation;
ii) the introduction of a title of Honorary Grandmaster would make it difficult
for the Commission to refuse an application for this title because that might
be considered as an offence against a deserved composer, whereas acceptance
of such applications might result in title inflation.
As the Presidium had no clear opinion in favour of any one of the possibilities,
the matter was discussed in the full Commission.
In the ensuing discussion, Uri Avner argued that if there are composers in
the 50 to 70 album points range who are „really grandmasters" but do not have
the title, then something seems to be wrong with the system. He stressed that
the gap between the norms for International Master and Grandmaster is too large
and also observed an injustice between problems and studies. His proposal requires
having 50 problems in the album for reaching the norm of 70 points. Compared
to the 42 studies that are equivalent to 70 points under the present system,
there would still be a difference between study and problem but not as large
as before.
Several delegates expressed their concern about „changes with the winds", others
preferred to have more statistical information before taking a decision, and
still others considered it important to keep the level high. The President finally
summarized that obviously the general opinion of the Commisssion was not in
favour of introducing the title of Honorary Grandmaster and postponed the discussion
until the next meeting in Portoroz. The President invited everyone to send his
opinion to the Commission or write an article for the PCCC web site.
5.III Proposal by Israel (Presidential terms of office)
The proposal as submitted by Uri Avner was to limit the number of times any
one person can be elected as president to not more than two. Kjell Widlert reported
to the Commission that the Presidium (without the President taking part in that
discussion) did not support the proposal because it felt that it might be difficult
in some instances to find good candidates for presidency out of a restricted
number of eligible persons. It was not felt to be necessary to decide in advance
on a restricted period of office.
Uri Avner stood by the proposal and assumed that enough candidates would always
be available. Bernd Ellinghoven saw no need to change the system because it
is always possible to elect another president if the Commission feels that there
is a better candidate. John Rice observed that the situation in the Commission
is not comparable to various other organizations where presidents have a wide
spectrum of power, which may require more restrictive rules.
Before the Commission voted on the proposal, the President observed that the
acceptance of the proposal would imply an amendment of the Statutes and therefore
a two thirds majority was required. In the vote, the proposal was rejected (2
in favour, 15 against, 9 abstentions).
5.IV Proposal by Slovakia (Honorary Master for Chess Composition)
The proposal submitted by Bedrich Formánek to rename the present title "Honorary
Master of Problem Chess" as the more general "Honorary Master of Chess
Composition", which implies a corresponding amendment of the Statutes, was accepted
by the Commision with the necessary 2/3 majority in a vote (25 in favour, 2
abstentions).
5.V Proposal by John Rice and John Roycroft (Title of FIDE Judge)
The proposal not to accept awards made during WCCC and similar meetings or festivals
in support of applications for the title of FIDE judge when the closing date
is during that congress, meeting or festival, was generally accepted by the
Commission (no voting).
5.VI Proposal by Great Britain (solver norms)
Following Great Britain’s proposal to establish a system for gaining solving
norms in tourneys other than the WCSC, as submitted in 1995 and discussed during
the 43rd meeting in Pula 2000, the WCSC subcommittee was now satisfied with
the opinion of the experts who considered the details of the rating methods.
The system based on the documents annexed to these minutes (ANNEXES
1-3) was accepted by the Commission in a vote (19 in favour, 4 abstentions,
none against). Marko Klasinc, the spokesman of the subcommittee, expressed his
thanks to Harri Hurme and Marek Kolcák as well as the persons standing behind
them for establishing the rating system. Hannu Harkola especially mentioned
Timo Kallio as someone who was very influential when one of the systems was
created. Marko Klasinc further noted that the new system will be valid for future
events but that no retroactive application is foreseen in the accepted package.
Marko Klasinc observed that the Commission should now receive results from
solving tournaments which fulfil the criteria for gaining norms and asked to
whom these results should be given. The proposal to send the results to a working
group consisting of himself, Marek Kolcák and Harri Hurme was generally accepted.
5.VII WCSC
The spokesman of the WCSC subcommittee, Marko Klasinc, informed the Commission
that there are some proposals to change the rules for the WCSC. The material
has been collected and will be considered during the year. Presumably, a proposal
can be presented next year. Among the proposals, there are ideas to raise the
number of twomovers to 5, each scoring 3 points, and to change the order of
the rounds (e.g. not to start with the twomovers). The spokesman also reported
that a solver from Romania with an other nationality but permanently living
in Romania had been accepted as a member of the solving team. The Commission
also discussed the proposal to let juniors and/or women take part in next year’s
WCSC hors concours. The result, without a vote, was that this is acceptable
for the Commission provided the additional solvers participate unofficially.
It depends on the organizers of the event whether they offer a separate section
for juniors and/or women.
5.VIII Further proposals
Further proposals were discussed in various subcommittees and are referred to
under other paragraphs of these minutes (§6 Competitions, FIDE-Album, §7 Qualifications).
§ 6 Competitions
6.I 25th World Chess Solving Championship
Peter Bakker, assisted by Dirk Borst, directed the 25th WCSC. The spokesman
of the subcommittee especially thanked the organizers for a perfectly run tournament.
The final results were as follows:
a) Teams:
1. Israel 142.50 points (659 min).
2. Finland 135.50 (664)
3. Poland 134.50 (706)
4. Great Britain 132.50 (720)
5. Yugoslavia 129.50 (658)
6. Germany 127.50 (691)
7. Netherlands 127.50 (693)
8. France 117.50 (694)
9. Ukraine 115.50 (710)
10. Russia 115.00 (684)
11. Slovenia 114.00 (719)
12. Japan 111.00 (688)
13. Belgium 105.00 (715)
14. Romania 103.00 (712)
15. Slovakia 98.50 (679)
16. Macedonia 85.00 (719)
17. Croatia 83.00 (720)
18. Greece 54.50 (706)
19. Italy 37.00 (716)
b) Individuals:
1. Jorma Paavilainen (Finland) 75.00 points (330 min.)
2. Piotr Murdzia (Poland) 72.00 (346)
3. Boris Tummes (Germany) 71.50 (343)
4. Noam Elkies (Israel) 70.00 (337)
5. Vladimir Podinic (Yugoslavia) 66.00 (327)
6. Michel Caillaud (France) 66.00 (347)
7. Eddy van Beers (Belgium) 63.50 (355)
8. Tadashi Wakashima (Japan) 63.00 (339)
9. Ram Soffer (Israel) 61.50 (336)
10. Jonathan Mestel (Great Britain) 61.50 (360)
10. Alexandr Azhusin (Russia) 61.50 (360)
10. Bogusz Piliczewski (Poland) 61.50 (360)
and 62 further participants.
6.II 6th WCCT
On behalf of the tournament director Hemmo Axt (not present), Günter Büsing
informed the Commission that the tournament has been completed. The booklet
with the results had been sent to the team captains in June. Cups and diplomas
for the most successful teams and individual composers were presented during
the final banquet of this meeting. A letter from the tournament director including
suggestions for the organisation of future WCCTs was forwarded to the subcommittee.
Uri Avner, spokesman of the subcommittee, expressed his thanks to the tournament
director and his helpers but also raised harsh criticism about the awards in
some sections for not being at all satisfactory. He concluded that in future
WCCTs it might be important for the director to play a more active role and
look closer to the awards. Günter Büsing observed that the sections particularly
referred to were those from which the awards were received at a very late stage.
Additional contacts with the judges would therefore have resulted in further
delay.
6.III 7th WCCT
The announcement of the 7th WCCT was prepared by selection of themes and judging
countries. A table showing the judging countries for each section is annexed
to these minutes (ANNEX 4). Macedonia will organize
the tournament, with Zivko Janevski acting as the tournament director. It was
suggested (and actually happened) that the themes be published on the PCCC web
site even before the official announcement was distributed.
Uri Avner raised a question about who should be responsible for answering questions
from the team captains relating to the themes. Formerly this was done by the
judges, but that is not applicable with the new system of judging. It was agreed
that, in simple cases, the tournament director and the spokesman of the subcommittee,
if possible in consultation with the person who proposed the theme, should reply.
If necessary, the other members of the subcommittee should also be involved.
6.IV WCCI
Subcommittee spokesman Marko Klasinc informed the Commission that the announcement
of the WCCI for the period 1998 – 2000 had been made in the meantime, and that
first entries had already been received. The closing date is 31.10.2001. Marko
Klasinc was optimistic that the tournament might be completed by time for next
year’s meeting, provided the judges finish their work as swiftly as expected.
According to his time table, judges should receive the entries by 1.12.2001
and should finish their work within three to four months. The individual scores
could then be calculated in April 2002 and the results (point scores, not the
compositions on which the result is based) be published on the PCCC web site.
The final result, including the compositions, could then be published in summer
2002 in a booklet. It is intended to include into the booklet four the top rated
entries of the three first placed composers in each section.
A discussion arose because Jakov Vladimirov objected to the nomination of judges
in one section. He considered these judges did not have enough experience for
judging a World Championship and should therefore be replaced by others. Marko
Klasinc replied that the most difficult task in the preparation of the announcement
of the WCCI was to find judges. He stressed that the three nominated judges
have the title of international judge, although one of them in an other section,
and he strongly objected to any changes in the list of judges. He also noted
that the announcement had already been published on the PCCC web site and that
publication in various magazines is under preparation and could no longer be
stopped. After further discussion, it was decided not to change the judges (no
vote).
6.V FIDE-Album, Report by the Subcommittee
6.V.1 FIDE Album 1986-1988
The spokesman Kjell Widlert informed the Commission that the reprint of the
album 1986-1988, including some corrections to the first edition and now in
three languages, is now available.
6.V.2 FIDE Album 1992-1994
This album has just been published and the first copies were available during
the congress. Kjell Widlert expressed his thanks to the editors for this marvellous
book. Byron Zappas said that the albums were becoming increasingly large, owing
to repetitions in theme indexes which he considered as sometimes superfluous.
He also argued that there was too much statistical material in the album. Bernd
Ellinghoven replied that the present album is the result of an agreement between
the editors, i.e. Denis Blondel and himself. He further indicated that it is
under discussion whether the present form of the album will be maintained or
whether some modifications will be made in future.
Kjell Widlert addressed one specific problem which was also related to the
qualification subcommittee: After publication of the album but before a decision
by the Commission concerning the granting of titles on the basis of this album,
four compositions therein were found to be incorrect (3 studies, one selfmate).
The question now was whether the composers of the respective compositions should
or should not get the respective album points. In the ensuing discussion, the
general opinion was that upon publication the album is finalised and must be
taken as it is. Klaus Wenda pointed to the Statutes which merely require that
a composition must be "in the album". There is no rule that the Commission
has the power to confirm or refuse compositions once they are in the album.
It was also noted that it always happened that some compositions were found
to be incorrect after publication of an album and that the points were never
withdrawn. As there was general agreement on this issue, the President concluded
that the points would be counted.
6.V.3 FIDE Album 1995-1997
The judging of the entries for this album is being done now. In two sections
(retros and studies), the judges have already finished their work. In the helpmate
section, a problem has arisen because a reserve judge has to be nominated. An
optimistic time schedule foresees publication of the album in two years, provided
the judging is ready within one year.
6.V.4 FIDE-Album 1998-2000
The announcement for this album has been delayed and will be made in the coming
autumn or winter. The closing date will be fixed after the final nomination
of all judges and directors.
§7 Qualifications
Granting of titles, proposals and report by the Qualification Subcommittee:
Spokesman Ignaas Vandemeulebroucke gave a report on the work of the subcommittee.
He presented two forms that have been drafted by the subcommittee and which
should in future be used for the application for the title of International
Judge. One form relates to personal matters of the applicant, the other form
is related to the awards submitted by the applicant. These forms are annexed
to these minutes (ANNEXES 5, 6).
A list of international judges including 180 names, about 150 thereof with addresses,
was distributed. The Spokesman stressed that this list is to be considered as
containing restricted personal data; therefore it should not be put into the
internet. To keep the list updated, any changes of addresses etc. should be
forwarded to Ignaas Vandemeulebroucke.
After evaluation of the new FIDE-album, the solving tournaments and applications
for titles, the subcommittee made the following proposals concerning grant of
titles:
7.I Grandmaster for Chess Composition
The subcommittee proposed to grant the title of Grandmaster for Chess Composition
to
Virgil Nestorescu, Romania (72,17 album points).
7.II International Master for Chess Composition
The subcommittee proposed to grant the title of International Master for Chess
Composition to
Peter Gvozdják, Slovakia (32,83 album points)
Camillo Gamnitzer, Austria (30,00)
Viacheslav Kopaev, Russia (29,75)
Harry Fougiaxis, Greece (28,67)
Colin Sydenham, Great Britain (26,50)
Zdravko Maslar, Germany (26,50)
Viktor Sizonenko, Ukraine (25,50)
Hubert Gockel, Germany (25,00)
7.III FIDE Master for Chess Composition
The subcommittee proposed to grant the title of FIDE Master for Chess Composition
to
Wieland Bruch, Germany (19,83 album points)
Marcel Tribowski, Germany (19,33)
Aleksandr Postnikov, Ukraine (16,83)
Jacques Rotenberg, France (16,25)
Andrey Frolkin, Ukraine (16,00)
Gerhard Maleika, Germany (15,50)
Francesco Simoni, Italy (15,00)
Jury Gorbatenko, Russia (14,00)
Sergey Sacharov, Russia (14,00)
Marek Kwiatkowski, Poland (13,83)
Günther Jahn, Germany (13,67)
Christian Poisson, France (13,58)
Nikita Plaksin, Russia (13,50)
Amatzia Avni, Israel (13,33)
Pavel Arestov, Russia (13,22)
Christer Jonsson, Sweden (13,17)
Martin Hoffmann, Switzerland (13,00)
Donald Smedley, Great Britain (12,67)
Nikos Siotis, Greece (12,33)
Vladimir Kos, Czechia (12,00)
Manfred Rittirsch, Germany (12,00)
7.IV International Judges
There were 4 applications for the title and one for extension of the title.
The subcommittee recommended to award the title of international judge to:
Mario Parrinello, Italy, 2#, h#
Valerio Petrovici, Romania, 2#, s#
Harold van der Heijden, Netherlands, studies
Vladimir Petrovic Sytchev, Belarus, 2#, 3#
The subcommittee further recommended to extend the title of
Zvonimir Hernitz to the sections 3# and s#.
7.V Titles for solvers
Grandmaster in solving for
Noam Elkies, Israel
FIDE Master in solving for
Eddy van Beers, Belgium;
David Gurgenidze, Georgia;
Michael McDowell, Great Britain;
Wilfried Neef, Germany.
All the above proposals by the qualification subcommittee were accepted unanimously
(except for one case where a title candidate abstained from voting for himself)
by the Commission in a series of votes.
Norms for solvers
Based on the results of the open solving tourney and WCSC, norms as follows
were additionally fulfilled:
Grandmaster norms for Solving for
Piotr Murdzia, Poland (2nd norm).
International Master norms in solving for
Vladimir Podinic, Yugoslavia;
Eddy van Beers, Belgium;
Bogusz Piliczewski, Poland;
Peter van den Heuvel, Netherlands;
Mitja Ukmar, Slovenia;
Michael McDowell, Great Britain
FIDE Master norms in solving for
Bogusz Piliczewski, Poland;
Vladimir Podinic, Yugoslavia.
§8 Computer Matters, Report by the Subcommittee
Thomas Maeder gave a report on the activities of the subcommittee for computer
matters which had concentrated on the following points:
1.The Macedonian database containing personal data of problemists (name, age,
etc.) will soon be available, in some form which is not yet clear, on the internet.
2. With regard to collections (PDB and others), very little response has been
received to the questionnaire of two years ago. Thomas Maeder considered this
as a failure of the initiative to update collections on a broad basis.
3. The subcommittee suggested that the internet might be a suitable tool for
supporting the authors of the FIDE album indexes.
4. As the condition required in the fairy section of the 7th WCCT was not supported
by currently available solving programs, the subcommittee encouraged programmers
of solving programs to add the condition to the respective programs, if possible.
(In the meantime, this has been done for "Popeye" and will presumably
also soon be included into "Chloe".)
5. The proposal of the subcommittee to consider Hannu Harkola’s website (http://www.sci.fi/~stniekat/pccc/)
as the official website of the Commission was generally accepted. The subcommittee
further suggested to provide links to other important sites, e.g. sites which
are run by magazines or national organisations.
6. The work on a standard format for exchange of chess problem data between
different programs is progressing but not yet finished. Some input concerning
studies is expected from Harold van der Heijden.
§9 Studies subcommittee
John Roycroft reported to the Commission that the studies subcommittee had
assisted the WCCT subcommittee and provided a theme for the 7th WCCT. The selection
of the study of the year for the period 1995-1997 has been delayed until the
album judges have made their decisions. He was optimistic that the results might
be available within a short time, and the result will then be given to the PCCC
internet site.
§10 Codex, Report by the Subcommittee
The subcommittee had no meeting because there was no subject-matter to be discussed.
§11 Presidium Election Procedure, Report by the Subcommittee
Klaus Wenda, spokesman of the subcommittee, presented to the Commission a draft
for a new § IV of the Statutes. The draft was discussed and modified in some
minor points, and a modification of §III.6 of the Statutes in consequence of
the amendment to § IV was also discussed. The wording of amended §III.6 and
of new §IV is annexed to these minutes (ANNEX 7). In
a vote, these amendments were accepted by the Commission (22 in favour, 1 abstention,
none against).
§12 Judging, Report by the Subcommittee
The subcommittee had no meeting, owing to other commitments.
§13 Future Meetings and future WCSC
Invitation 2002: The invitation by the Slovenian Federation to have
the meeting in Portoroz, which had been accepted during the previous meeting,
was confirmed and a date (August 31 to September 7, 2002) and location for the
event was announced by Marko Klasinc.
Invitation 2003: The invitation by the Ukrainian Federation to have
the meeting in Truskavets, which had been accepted during the previous meeting,
was confirmed. A PCCC delegation, presumably the President and the First Vice-President,
will visit Truskavets in May 2002. In reply to the question how Truskavets can
be reached, Vladislav Rosolak said that it might perhaps be possible to arrange
bus transport from Warsaw directly to Truskavets. Marko Klasinc asked whether
a reserve venue would be available in the event of Truskavets being unable to
organise the meeting. The President replied that in such a case Russia would
be in a position to organise the meeting in Sochi.
Further Invitations: At present, there are no invitations for further
meetings.
§14 Any other Business
14.I On the occassion of the 25th WCSC, the Commission expressed its
gratitude to Nicolai Dimitrov who initiated the international team solving championships.
14.II Marko Klasinc mentioned that there is a website run by Lubomir
Siran which concentrates on solving competitions (http://www.geocities.com/solvingchess/index.html).
14.III Marko Klasinc reminded the Commission that it is now time to
establish the title of international judge for solving tournaments. Lists should
be prepared with names of good and experienced judges. The matter was postponed
until next year.
14.IV Byron Zappas suggested putting on the agenda for the next meeting
how chess composition can be represented in the Chess Olympics.
As there was no further other business, the President finally noted that the
meeting took place in a friendly atmosphere and he expressed his thanks for
the good work of the delegates, the Secretary, the subcommittees and the organizers
of this meeting, and then declared the meeting closed.
| Bratislava, September 2001 | München, September 2001 |
| Dr. B. Formánek | G. Büsing |
| President | Secretary |
Annexes:
1 Rules for rating calculation
2 Solvers rating & Criteria for acceptability of the tournaments
at which ratings can be gained
3 Criteria for gaining norms & Criteria for gaining titles
4 Table of judging countries for the 7th WCCT
5 Application form for internationl judge (personal)
6 Application form for international judge (awards)
7 Amendment of Statutes
(List of addresses)
Rules for rating calculation
The basis for calculating ratings at a solving tournament is
the average of ratings of all solvers with ratings (AveRat) and the
average of achieved results of those solvers (AveRes).
AveRat = average rating of all solvers with ratings (subtracting
by 1600)
AveRes = average result of all solvers with ratings
New rating for a solver without rating is calculated
as a performance rating at a tournament upon the formula:
NewRat = AveRat × Res / AveRes
NewRat = new rating
Res = result of a solver achieved at a tournament
Solver’s first new rating is called half-rating. At his
second tournament he gets his second half-rating. The average of his both
half-ratings is calculated and put to the rating list.
Change of rating for a solver with rating:
The expected result (ExpRes) is calculated for
all solvers with ratings upon the formula:
ExpRes = AveRes × OldRat / AveRat
OldRat = rating of a solver before tournament
The expected result cannot exceed 100% of the winner’s result.
In such a case the correction (CorrExpRes) is made upon the
formula:
CorrExpRes = AveRes + (ExpRes –AveRes)
× (MaxRes – AveRes) / ( MaxExpRes – AveRes)
CorrExpRes = corrected expected result (cannot exceed
100% of the winner’s result)
MaxRes = result of the winner
MaxExpRes = the highest expected result before correction (higher than
the winner’s result)
Change of rating (ChOfRat) is calculated from
the difference between the expected result and the achieved result upon the
formula:
ChOfRat = KT × (Res – ExpRes)
KT = tournament coefficient (from 1 to 4)
If the problems at the tournament are not given 5 points each
the KT is corrected upon the formula:
CorrKT = KT × 5 × N / AbsMaxRes
CorrKT = corrected tournament coefficient
N = number of problems at the tournament
AbsMaxRes = theoretical MaxRes at the tournament
New rating is calculated upon the formula:
NewRat = OldRat + ChOfRat
If NewRat is negative it is corrected to zero. All calculations
are made to the second decimal place. Ratings are published as integers. For
publishing use the ratings are increased by 1600.
After five years of non-participating at the rated tournaments
a solver is expelled from the rating list. For the further participation his
original rating (half-rating) is accepted.
Solvers’ rating
A rating is a numerical value which a solver gains by solving
in two approved tournaments.
A rating can be gained at the WCSC, WCCC-Open, or other tournaments
which fulfil definite criteria.
The rating list is published twice a year. It is calculated
on the basis of the results of solving tournaments completed (including the
report) by the end of June and the end of December.
The PCCC gives authority to a person(s) or a commission responsible
for calculating the ratings according to the approved formula.
Criteria for acceptability of the tournaments
at which ratings can be gained
At the tournament at least 10 solvers with ratings from at least
2 countries (15 from at least 3 countries for gaining norms) should compete.
The selected problems should be originals or alternatively unknown
published problems. The selected problems should show a clear theme and a
good level of quality and difficulty and should represent different styles.
For tournaments organised according to WCSC rules, the full
coefficient may be used to calculate ratings.
For other tournaments at most one half of the normal coefficient
is used to calculate ratings. In those tournaments there should be at least
12 problems of different types to solve. Problems for solving can be chosen
from seven groups: twomovers, threemovers, moremovers, endgames, helpmates,
selfmates and fairy problems. At the tournament at least 5 groups with at
least 2 problems must be represented. No group can be represented with more
than 3 problems. The tournament could be divided into several rounds and/or
days. If the problems are not given the 5 points each the tournament coefficient
is corrected for calculating ratings.
All tournament documentation (problems with solutions, complete
list with the results and ratings, judge’s statement on the competition acceptability
and possible complaints, etc) should be sent to the responsible PCCC representative
(commission) within 30 days after the end of the competition. The representative
(commission) has the right to confirm or not the acceptability of the tournament
and may determine the tournament coefficient. The final decision is approved
by the PCCC.
Criteria for gaining norms
At least 5 solvers with the obligatory qualifying rating (2400 for FM, 2500
for IM, 2600 for GM) should compete at the tournament.
A norm for the title of International Solving Grandmaster of the FIDE: To obtain
a norm a solver must score at least 90% of the winner’s points. With the exception
of the WCSC he must be placed within the number of solvers with the rating of
at least 2600 (not counting his own rating), but not lower than in tenth place
(i.e. at least sixth place when there are six solvers with rating 2600 or higher).
At the official WCSC a solver must take one of the first ten places regardless
of the ratings.
A norm for the title of International Solving Master of the FIDE: To obtain
a norm a solver must score at least 80% of the winner’s points. With the exception
of the WCSC he must be placed within the number of solvers with the rating of
at least 2500 (not counting his own rating), but not lower than 15th place.
At the official WCSC a solver must take one of the first 15 places regardless
of the ratings.
A norm for the title of FIDE Solving Master: To obtain a norm a solver must
score at least 75% of the winner’s points. With the exception of the WCSC and
WCCC-Open he must be placed within the number of solvers with the rating of
at least 2400 (not counting his own rating), but not lower than within the top
40% of the solvers. At the official WCSC and WCCC-Open a solver must take one
of the top 40% places regardless of the ratings.
Criteria for gaining titles
International Solving Grandmaster of the FIDE: A solver must gain a norm 3
times (at least once at the WCSC) within a period of ten years.
International Solving Master of the FIDE: A solver must gain a norm twice (at
least once at the WCSC or WCCC-Open) within a period of five years; or score
once 100% of the winner’s points and qualify within the first 15 places at the
WCSC.
FIDE Solving Master: A solver must gain a norm twice; or score once 100% of
the winner’s points and qualify within the top 40% places at the WCCC-Open (or
at the WCSC if not within the first 15 places).
7th WCCT Judgement
Allocation of countries to sections
|
Country/Section |
#2 |
#3 |
#n |
EG |
S# |
H# |
f |
|
Austria |
J |
||||||
|
Belarus |
R |
||||||
|
Belgium |
J |
||||||
|
Bosnia-Herzegovina |
J |
||||||
|
Bulgaria |
R |
||||||
|
Czechia |
J |
||||||
|
France |
J |
J |
R |
||||
|
Georgia |
J |
||||||
|
Germany |
J |
J |
J |
||||
|
Great Britain |
J |
R |
J |
||||
|
Greece |
J |
||||||
|
Israel |
J |
J |
J |
||||
|
Italy |
R |
J |
|||||
|
Netherlands |
J |
J |
J |
||||
|
Romania |
J |
R |
J |
||||
|
Russia |
J |
J |
J |
||||
|
Slovakia |
J |
J |
|||||
|
Slovenia |
J |
||||||
|
Sweden |
J |
J |
|||||
|
Switzerland |
J |
||||||
|
U.S.A. |
J |
||||||
|
Ukraine |
R |
J |
J |
||||
|
Yugoslavia |
J |
J = appointed as judge in the specified section
R = appointed as reserve judge in the specified section
|
PERMANENT
COMMISSION OF THE FIDE FOR CHESS COMPOSITIONS Subcommittee on Qualifications |
A
Application for the
Award of the Title of International Judge on Composition
The Federation of
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….
herewith applies for granting the title of International judge on Composition
to:
|
1 |
Name |
|
|
2 |
First name(s) |
|
|
3 |
Place and date of birth |
|
|
4 |
Address (street a.o.) |
|
|
5 |
Place, region |
|
|
6 |
Country |
|
|
7 |
Telephone, and/or Fax |
|
|
8 |
E-mail or other(s) |
|
|
9 |
Section(s) applied for |
|
|
10 |
Knowledge of languages |
|
|
11 |
detailed information on |
|
Annex 6 to Minutes Wageningen 2001
|
PERMANENT
COMMISSION OF THE FIDE FOR CHESS COMPOSITIONS Subcommittee on Qualifications |
B
Application for
the Award of the Title of International Judge on Composition
|
Candidate
|
Country
|
Information
on Tournaments and Awards
| 1 | Name of the Tournament |
|
| 2 | Organised by |
|
| 3 | Country | |
| 4 | Period | |
| 5 | Section(s) | |
| 6 | Obliged theme (if so, which) |
|
| 7 | Closed Ty/Open Ty |
|
| 8 | Formal Ty/Informal Ty |
|
| 9 | Publication of Compositions |
|
| 10 | Original or published compositions |
|
| 11 | Judge(s) | |
| 12 | Number of entries |
|
| 13 | Number of participating composers |
|
| 14 | Number of participating countries |
|
| 15 | Number of compositions allowed in the award |
|
| 16 | Number of awarded compositions |
|
| 17 | Award published in |
form should be filled in as complete as possible and is to be sent, together
with the A-form and all B-forms
(one form for each tournament judged) to:
Amendment of the Statutes
New wording of §III.6:
- To support and assist the president and to represent him in the event of
a temporary impediment or at his special request, three(3) Vice-Presidents
shall be elected.
New wording of §IV:
§ IV. Election of Officers
- Elections to the Praesidium shall be held at every fourth meeting of
the Commission. Voting shall take place for all four posts in the same year.
However, if a Praesidium post falls permanently vacant during the term of
office, a special election may be held for the relevant post, if the commission
deems this appropriate, but the candidate elected shall serve only for the
remainder of the original four-year period. - In an election year a special meeting of the Commission shall be arranged
for the purpose of voting, not later than the penultimate day of the Congress,
and at no later than 21.00 on that day. - At the opening session of the Commission in an election year, the President
shall nominate a working party of three persons from different countries
to supervise the elections. One of the three should normally be the Secretary.
No current delegate or deputy may be a member of this working party. - A delegate wishing to stand for election to the Praesidium shall give
his name on paper to the working party by 22.00 on the day before the
elections are to be held. The paper must show clearly the post or posts
for which the delegate wishes to stand. - The working party shall display a list of the candidates for each post
by 9.00 on the day of the elections. No additions shall then be made to
this list, except as provided for in para. 7 below. Withdrawals, however,
will be permitted. - The election shall be held in a closed session of the Commission. One
member of the working party (not the Secretary) shall take the chair.
Each post shall be dealt with separately, starting with the President
and continuing through the Vice-Presidents in order. The chairman shall
read out the names of the candidates for the Presidency. At this point
each of these candidates may, if he so wishes, address the Commission
for a maximum of 10 minutes. Afterwards there can be a discussion. The
chairman shall then invite delegates to record in secret their vote for
one of these candidates, on paper provided for the purpose. Any candidate
obtaining a majority of the votes cast shall be declared elected. Otherwise
delegates will vote again between the two candidates gaining the most
votes in the first round. In the event of a tie in the second round, the
chairman shall call a recess of not more than 10 minutes, after which
the vote shall be taken again. If the result is again a tie, the chairman
shall determine the outcome by selecting one of two folded slips of paper
each bearing the name of one candidate. - Any candidate defeated in the vote for the Presidency may now declare
his candidature for any or all of the posts of Vice-President, if he has
not already done so. The chairman shall read out the names of candidates
for the post of 1st Vice-President. Any candidate may address the Commission
for not more than 10 minutes, provided he has not already spoken. - In the event of a tie, the same procedure shall be adopted as for the
Presidency. - The posts of 2nd and 3rd Vice-President shall be dealt with in exactly
the same way, with previously defeated candidates being entitled to stand,
and candidates having the same right to address the Commission for a maximum
of 10 minutes. - All the voting shall take place within the same session.
- The duties of the working party shall cease as soon as the new Praesidium
has been elected in its entirety.