Minski & Nielsen-100

1 Комментарий
Межтекстовые Отзывы
Посмотреть все комментарии
Jan Sprenger
Jan Sprenger
1 месяц назад

My two preferred studies are by Oleg & Co. (second prize with Kopylov from the WCCT and first HM with Gromov). Coherent, dense and pointed with clear content.

Of course, in a jubilee tournament, the subjective taste of the judges should prevails even more than in normal tournament, but I still would like to weigh in with my personal opinion.

I find the first prize much less fascinating than the judges. I have no idea what is supposed to justify all the technical flaws (pawn configuration, BTM, lack of pointed finish). Where is the idea? The domination of the black pieces? If we interpret it instead as an “epic tale”, as Steffen suggests, then I find the work less convincing than for example Pasman’s 3rd prize from Springaren with pointed play and much better economy.

The third prize has similar problems: limited or not fully elaborated main idea (the pin of the pawn) which is masked by several bombastic, but essentially empty sacrifices in the introduction. Of course, it is technically better because it is by Pasman & Afek and not by Sanz & Gonzalez, but the introduction and the main scheme are not connected. Steffen writes this very clearly, too.

The judges point out a lot of these problems themselves. It seems to me that in the end, they decided to reward ambition instead of perfection. 🙂

More to follow as soon as I have more time to look. It is easier to criticize than to explain what is really good about the studies I liked. 🙂