Mr Heijden writes in his award about the studies I have published elsewhere with the same material :
1) Majority of these studies have hardly any study-like content
2) these studies are auto-anticipated
These words commit only Mr Heijden. They directly mean that first I am not intelligent enough to understand what is or should be the content of a study, and then that I am dishonest because I don’t hesitate to auto-anticipate myself - possibly, who knows, with the hope of getting multiple recognitions/awards (or may be am I too idiotic to understand that I am auto-anticipating).
Of course I completely disapprove these remarks : they are false, offensive, defamatory, obviously made for denigrating my work, and finally indirectly attacking my reputation. So to clarify things, here is my answer to Mr Heijden’s lies :
1) All the studies I have published have a thematic content (or a set of thematic contents) as a main point, in most cases explicitely nameable, with in all cases an aesthetic dimension (the magazines in which the studies were published sometimes have not underlined these thematic or aesthetic dimensions, in spite of the fact they were always indicated in my solution). Of course, aesthetics is a subjective matter : I don’t hope that everybody finds beauties in these studies, this is a matter of tastes or points of view, but all the aesthetic concepts have the right to exist and to be expressed, even if they are not shared. So I assert that these studies have a content, a thematic and/or aesthetic one, and I hope that, even if it is subjective, my point of view (based on my past and experience in the field of chess composition) deserves to be taken into account.
2) There is definitively no case of auto-anticipation in my published studies : each one has is own content (I don’t speak about the very rare cases of versions, which were always explicitely indicated, and even these cases could be discussed). I do think that Mr Heijden has decided, without checking anything, that the studies were auto-anticipated (may be he has been told that they were by someone who would prefer not to see any more these diagrams)… In any case, he cannot prove it, for the simple reason it is a pure lie.
(A parenthesis : Mr Heijden writes also that these studies are “exceedingly difficult to understand (which is not intended as a positive feature here)”. I agree that most of these studies are indeed difficult to understand, and I agree that it’s not a good point. All of them are nevertheless humanly understandable (I have indeed understood them), but that needs some work, particularly to understand some principles which today are not explained in the end-game theory books. I intend to publish some day in a book or a website some explanations which could help the player and people interested to get a better understanding of this material, and thus to get the tools to obtain a quicker understanding of the studies themselves (this is not just fine words : about 50% of the work is already done, but that needs time and I have not a lot). But the main question is not in this message about the understandability, nor the quality or interest of these studies. The question is : “can anybody make hurtful remarks, untrue and slanderous talks, denigrating the accomplished work and indirectly attacking the moral integrity of the targetted person ?”. End of the parenthesis)
By the way, if someone could kindly suggest to Mr Heijden to remove my studies from his database, I would be very grateful ! From his point of view, his base would have better quality (these studies being not studies “study-like”) and from my point of view there is nothing worse for my studies than being recorded with a badly written solution with unrelevant comments or no comment at all.
I apologize for this long message, but I hope it will be understood that I cannot let public insults without answering.
Louange a dieu le tout puissant
Merci cher abdealaziz ; merci beaucoups
Salut a toi et ala famille, tu nous manque ici a Azemmour,on t’aime , ya wld lbled, Jamais qu’on puisse t’oublier t’es l’une des stars de cette pauvre ville ;Salut et grand salut d’un de tes anciens camarades. Dami Mustapha
Do you rmember me ??????
Merci Jacques de tes sympathiques mots. La composition est un don du ciel. On est peu nombreux à profiter de ce paradis terrestre.
Bonne chance Houda dans les prochains tournois ..
Ton oncle Youness
Cher Jan ,
Je prépare de nouveaux couriers Problemaz. Je pense qui tu receveras les 2 numéros dans quelques jours. Merci de ta patience.
Joyeux Noël 2007 et félicitations pour tous ces beaux problèmes intéressants.
Amitiés de Guy MEISSONNIER.
Je vous ai envoyé hier par courrier,à STAINS, l’article du juge François FARGETTE paru dans Thèmes 64 de janvier-mars 1984 ainsi qu’une photocopie de la chronique du Figaro n°279 du 6 avril 1984 concernant le problème du révérend Horatio Bolton (2 juin 1793-15 août 1873) reproduit page 65 dans le livre de René MAYER intitulé "Problèmes pour les gens sans problèmes" (diagramme n°101). Je n’ai pas encore reçu à ce jour un exemplaire de la revue Problemaz d’août 2005. Bonne lecture avec toutes mes amitiés. Guy MEISSONNIER.
l’adresse que je vous ai donné est correct. je vous enverrai un exemplaire de la revue Problemaz Aout 2007.