[Retros] Fwd: Proof game promotion task
kevinjbegley at gmail.com
Tue May 11 14:44:36 EDT 2010
I'm familiar with the Probleemblad article...
Saavedra's study was an outrageous choice.
In the Fairy category, the series mover selected (very lovely, but
perhaps not even the best series mover) was very likely the result of
a bias towards orthodox.
As for the PG57.5, it certainly must be on the table when making such
We must forgive the FIDE judge who awarded this a mere 2.5 points --
probably suffering from "dogmatic fervor" (very widespread, and
patients are highly resistant to treatment).
If only our judges had a better vantage point in time, immunity from a
nationalized title-mania, and some ability to manufacture antibodies
against the dogmatic conventions...
Then, we'd only have to deal with historical bias (rooted in a
primitive mindset which constantly seeks -- but never obtains --
approval from chess players).
Few could argue with their other selections: Forsberg's h#2,
Dombrovskis' #3, Yarosh's #4, Lacny's #2 (I can't remember for sure,
but I assume Lacny's #2 was in there)...
Except that the categories themselves are so inherently biased, that
the complete project becomes a fiasco (3 categories for directmates,
but only 1 for Retros/ProofGames).
If these were real divisions, why do they not manifest themselves as
sub-categories under Fairies?
I don't trust these folks to judge problems.
Maybe after another millenium, they will have a proper appreciation.
More information about the Retros