[Retros] Marco Bonavoglia 60 JT

[Kevin Begley]

Hi Bernd,

See the Marianka Bulletin, July 30 - August 2, 2009, where Michel devoted
his lecture time to sharing some top prizes.

*"Exclusive premiere: First prizes in M. Caillaud-50 Jubilee Tourney" *
*
*
*"Michel Caillaud has revealed a secret: two first prizes from his jubilee
tourney. As the award is not yet published the problems could not be
included in the bulletin." *

I think everyone who read the bulletin (or attended Marianka, nearly 4
years ago), was anxiously expecting that Phenix would soon publish an award
for this very high profile tournament.
After a few issues of Phenix rolled passed, without any mention of the
contest, it seemed reasonable to imagine that they were delayed (but had
the award in the pipe).

There were even whispers that Phenix was the cause of delay.
Regardless, the assumption that they were sitting on a finished award
ultimately proved incorrect.

Some time later, I happened upon a multi-solution Proofgame (which appeared
without solution) on the "france-echecs" website (
http://www.france-echecs.com/), claiming to have won a top prize in
Caillaud 50JT.

If my strained memory is reliable, I seem to recall reading that this had
earned a second (or perhaps third) prize, and was the product of a talented
French composer, eager to share a remarkable discovery.

I think somebody had hinted at the possibility that this might be construed
to be a publication.

Shortly afterwards, Michel enjoined the thread, acknowledging that this was
indeed an award winner, and suggesting that this author alone was given
permission to effectively share his result.
It may have been claimed that this was not a publication, on the grounds
that no solution was provided, but here my memory is quite blurred.

Sorry, I have lost an exact pointer to this thread.
Perhaps a search engine will help, or maybe somebody else can provide you
with more details.
aside: I have the problem saved somewhere (along with the two solutions I
had found), but I will not share that information.

At any rate, I read the response rather incredulously -- because, it read
as if intended to caution other notified winners against premature
publication.

If no complete award was ever published, why the cautionary tone?
How  many had seen their results?

All this left me with the strong impression (suspicion) that publication
was perhaps delayed, in order that some author(s) might be provided an
opportunity to make corrections (which have proven more extensive than
initially imagined).

I will deliberately avoid drifting into conspiracy theories.
Given limited information, I find it difficult to subscribe to a more
elaborate explanation.

To be clear, even if my suspicion here is correct, I am certainly not
alleging favoritism was a malicious intent.
The trouble is, results do not entirely depend upon conscious intentions:
 there is no denying that favoritism would constitute a formidable
component, if such a selection process were indeed applied.

I hope my suspicion proves entirely incorrect;  but, the point remains:
steps should be taken to insure the integrity of formal tournaments.
In the interest of restoring some integrity to formal competitions, I would
strongly encourage that a one-way cipher be adopted (which would confirm
that problems are unaltered, without allowing a premature reconstruction).

In all contests where corrections may be needed (such as Proofgames), this
has frequently proven a source of rampant unfairness.
I would like some assurances that this will not occur, before I even
prepare to enter such a tournament.
I hope Marco will consider this.


Finally, let me say this...
*It is critically important to remember that MC50JT remains an ongoing
tournament.*
As such, open conversations should generally be avoided.

I know that a judge may consider this an uncomfortable discussion, and may,
therefore, refrain from discussion.
For this reason, it is best to delay speculation, or criticism.

However, it becomes increasingly difficult to avoid this topic, after so
much time has passed, and given the way this tournament seems to have been
conducted.

Nor is it my intent to hijack this thread.

I raise this issue only to illustrate that, prevalent today is a cavalier
lack of formalism (and opportunities for corruption).
I wanted to make some suggestions for improvement, and encourage Marco to
layout a plan.

If steps are taken to prevent extensive delays (and swirling suspicions), I
am confident this will prove a very successful tournament.
It is my wish that this discussion might help make his a birthday happier.

Best,
  Kevin.






On Sat, Jun 8, 2013 at 10:49 PM, "Bernd Gräfrath" <retromode at web.de> wrote:


> Dear all,

>

> I have also been wondering about the fate of the MCaillaud-50JT (to which

> I contributed). Where did the award "slip out" some years ago? I never saw

> anything of it.

>

> Best wishes,

>

> Bernd

>

>

> *Gesendet:* Sonntag, 09. Juni 2013 um 02:45 Uhr

> *Von:* "Kevin Begley" <kevinjbegley at gmail.com>

> *An:* "The Retrograde Analysis Mailing List" <retros at janko.at>

> *Betreff:* Re: [Retros] Marco Bonavoglia 60 JT

>  Speaking of multi-solution Proofgames, has anybody yet seen the award

> for MCaillaud 50JT ??

> Much of the award slipped out years ago (with named authors!) -- which

> does make one wonder...

> Can this still be considered a formal tourney?

> Have specific entrants been afforded opportunities to make extensive

> repairs?

>

> It is possible to create a redundancy checksum, based upon a one-way

> cipher, which could be immediately published as entries arrive, providing

> entrants time to verify correct receipt, prior to the hard deadline.

> This would provide strong assurances against any post-deadline alterations

> (which should never be tolerated in such tournaments) -- presuming somebody

> has authority to nullify an award which does not agree with the checksum.

>

>  What is your policy on these issues, Marco?

>

>  best,

>  kevin.

>

>

> _______________________________________________

> Retros mailing list

> Retros at janko.at

> http://www.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/retros

>

>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.pairlist.net/pipermail/retros/attachments/20130609/c9379bfd/attachment-0001.htm>