Provisional award of Marcel Doré JT-80 tourney
par Abdelaziz Onkoud
popularité : 1%
Provisional award of Marcel Doré JT-80 tourney
By Alain Pallier
To celebrate his 80th birthday, Marcel Doré (born on 6viii 1932) has organized (and sponsored) a study tourney, five years after a first tourney for his 75th birthday. This time, there were two sections : a first one with free theme (A) and a second one (B) with the theme of the ‘petite difference’ (small difference), for studies featuring a strong logical try with foresight effect, as defined in the announcement.
First of all, I would like to thank Abdelaziz Onkoud who had to replace, as the director of the tourney, Jean-Marc Ricci as well as Harold van der Heijden, for his anticipation research and, of course, Marcel Doré himself, with whom I exchanged a lot during the judging process. I received, in anonymous form, 52 entries (26 in A section and 26 in B) : 33 composers from 20 countries took part in the tourney (16 entries were joint compositions). Marcel Doré and I warmfully thank all participating composers who made this tourney a success :
Participants JT Marcel Doré 80
(*indicates a joint composition)
Aberman Victor (USA) :22 (Kb2/Kh6) ; Afek Yochanan (Israel/the Netherlands) : 44 (Kf1/Kh2) ; Akobia Iuri ( Georgia) : 9 (Kd1/Kh4),10 (Kf8/Kh6),11*(Kb4/Kb1),12* (Kd2/Kh5),32* (Ka3/Kb1),33* (Ke3/Kh2) ; Arestov Pavel (Russia) : 32* (Ka3/Kb1),33*(Ke3/Kh2) ; Bazlov Yuri (Russia) : 28*(Ka1/Kc8) ; Becker Richard (USA) : 6 (Kd6/Kh4),7(Kc4/Ka7) ; Blundell David (Great Britain) :49 (Kh7/Ka5) ; Campioli Marco (Italy) : 14 (Ke8/Ka4),15 (Kb6/Kg6),16 (Kg1/Kg6),17 (Kf8/Kg5),18 (Kd7/Kd5),19 (Kh3/Kf8) ; Eilazyan Eduard (Ukraine) : 35 (Kb8/Kg7),36 (Kb3/Kg2),37 (Kc6/Kb4) ; Garcia Mario Guido (Argentina) : 11* (Kb4/Kb1),12* (Kd2/Kh5),43*(Ke4/Ke1) ; Gonzalez Luis Miguel (Spain) : 50 (Ke5/Kh7),51 (Kh1/Kf2) ; Hlebec Darko (Serbia) : 29 (Kg3/Ke5),30 (Kd4/Kb1) ; Hlinka Michal (Slovakia):47* (Ka6/Kg7) ; Jasik Andrzej (Poland) : 27 (Kd4/Kg7) ; Kalashnikov Valery (Russia) : 3* (Kd8/Kd3),4* (Kd2/Kg4),45* (Kc5/Ka8) ; Keith Daniel (France) : 5* (Kf2/Kc2) ; Kovalenko Vitaly (Russia) : 23 (Kh8/Kf8),24 (Ke1/Kc1),25* (Kc7/Ka8),26 (Kf1/Kf4) ; Krug Peter (Austria) : 31*(Kd1/Kc7),43* (Ke4/Ke1) ; Micaloni Mario (Italy) : 40 (Kh6/Kc2),41 (Kh8/Ke8),42 (Kc5/Kb2) ; Mikitovics János (Hungary) : 1* (Kh7/Kb7),2*(Ka8/Kd8),3* (Kd8/Kd3),4* (Kd2/Kg4) ; Minski Martin (Germany) : 5* (Kf2/Kc2),20 (Kh2/Kb6),31* (Kd1/Kc7) ; Slumstrup Nielsen Steffen (Denmark) : 34 (Ka6/Kh3) ; Oganesyan Alexeï (Russia) :13 (Kb8/Kd8) ; Olin Per (Finland) : 52 (Kc1/Ke7) ; Osintsev Sergeï (Russia) : 45* (Kc5/Ka8) ; Palermo Stefano (Italy) : 46 (Kh8/Kc4) ; Pervakov Oleg (Russia) : 48* (Kf4/Ka8) ; Polášek Jaroslav (Czech Republic) : 47* (Ka6/Kg7) ; Shpakovsky Alexander (Russia) : 38 (Kg2/Kg7), 39 (Kh5/Kd7) ; Skripnik Anatoly (Russia) : 1* (Kh7/Kb7),2*(Ka8/Kd8),28*(Ka1/Kc8) ; Staudte Rainer (Germany) : 25*(Kc7/Ka8) ; Tallaksen Geir Sune (Norway) : 8 (Kh6/Ka8),21(Kd7/Kb8) Tarasyuk Vladislav (Ukraine) : 48* (Kf4/Ka8).
The level in each section was quite different : as it could be expected, average quality in B section was better, the necessity of working on a specified (and difficult) theme rising the level of entries, with some very good studies among them. This explains why, with the same number of entries in each section, the number of rewarded works is very different. This also explains why money prizes are not exactly as announced (the total fund remains the same). Prize division is eventually as follows :
A section :
Prize : 100 € ;
Special prize : 50 €
1st honourable mention : 50 €
B section :
1st and 2nd prize equal : 125 € each
3rd prize : 50 €
1st and 2nd special prize equal : 50 € each.
In A section, I removed 17 entries : some of these were found unsound (g2g7, h5d7, h8e8), for the other studies, it was a ‘matter of taste’ and I don’t give below specific reasons for each of them. In B section, preference was given to studies in which theme was clearly expressed, and with a subtle difference. 13 studies did not make it into the award for the following reasons :
(h7b7) : only three first half-moves are original, see J.Mitikovics, commendation, Fritz JT-100 (EG 192 # 18978) ;
(d8d3) : play in main line and in thematic try quickly diverge, no actual foresight effect ;
(f8g5) : in second thematic the choice of a bad square leads to a capture of thematic piece (this is not a ‘little’ difference) and, in both thematic tries, the sequences with similar play are too short ;
(d7d5) and (h3f8) : black duals, especially in thematic tries (in both tries in study d7d5, and, for h3f8 in 3.Kf3 ? thematic try, as in 5.Rb1 ? try) ;
(h8f8) : with position of kings in initial position, the rest is fairly predictable ;
(e1c1) : mechanical play with a character of a more-mover ;
(a3b1) : logical try on first move is not fully satisfying (black dual 6…Rg1 after 6.Kd3 and difference hidden in sublines). This would have penalized the study that deserves a better reward in a non thematic tourney ;
(c6b4), (c5a8) and (c1e7) : heavy positions without enough compensation in the play for the material ;
(c5b2) : an ending without study moves ;
(h7a5) : after a quite satisfactory beginning (nevertheless marred by a black dual on move 6 in thematic try), interest quickly falls off.
Alain Pallier, 26 xi 2013
|Provisional award of Marcel Doré JT-80 tourney|