The Global eBook Middlegame Collaborative
The Global eBook Middlegame Collaborative, today announces its inception.
Phaedrus, and Transformation, have organized themselves as a cooperative effort, to create an eBook generated from the lesser known--but perhaps the most comprehensively useful--of Lazlo Polgar's three books often referred to as Bricks. To do so alone would exhaust most mortals, so we purport to accomplish this by combined and shared efforts upon Polgar's comprehensive book: 'Chess Middlegame, 77 Types in 4,158 Positions'.
Ardent students of systematic chess improvement are invited to join. We only ask for your time, and necessarily of course, confidentiality as to our communications such as email and identities.
We do not require that you have any chess pedigree as to knowledge or rating or skill, but only readiness to begin in the next month in your weekly contribution of hours and effort. What you will get in the end is the same 4,000+ chessBase cbv file that we all will share and the interpersonal discoveries realized in collaboration in it's best sense.
In the first phase, ten of us will collaborate in creating a powerful chess middlegame study and teaching tool, in each rendering some 320 positions into pgn files, from Polgar's book. Sir Pino has generously offered to join our efforts, which means that we still have room for seven more persons.
The reward will be your possession of a powerful tool suitable for almost a lifetime of chess study. You will be able to do advanced thematic training with all the advantages which eBooks provide such as 'Annotations and Variations', 'Search', and 'Evaluation and testing lines' by chess engines. The printed book offers several disadvantages such as its being out of print and thus extremely costly to furnish; it is also not very easy to handle in being very thick and heavy. Moreover, our eBook will be an improvement upon the original, as it is already well known that the book can either be incomplete or have faulty solutions.
Of course, more needs to be discussed about phase two and phase three, and specifics about what is involved concerning agreements as to confidentiality and use since this is not a commercial venture and is for private use. For more information you can email us at globalmiddlegame@gmail.com.
posted by transformation at 12:00 AM
30 Comments:
Digitizing Polgar's book sounds like a very educational undertaking. I wish all of you the best of luck in realizing your goal! I'm not up-to-date with respect to copyright issues, but the folks who digitized Polgar's 5334 took some steps to limit its distribution only to folks who could prove they had supported the Polgars by buying a copy of their book--such steps might be wise legally & ethically. But you two say you have been exchanging thousands of messages so probably you've already covered these bases and more. :)
copied from
@temposchlucker at phaedrus blog, with some further clarifications and additions:
--------------------------
'It's not quite clear what you and Phaedrus have done the past two months?
22 mei 2008 23:49
'Temposchlucker zei...
I thought that I was commenting on DK's blog.
22 mei 2008 23:55
@me: well, its hard to know how serious you are here, for if you are joking, i dont honestly have time for it right now, literally.
if you are serious, well:
---------------------
a. first we got very personally acquainted on my levels, and
b. i wrote a long project document. we cannot have ten persons running all over, every which way, and so i set up the project foundations. this is a private matter. if you really want to see it, if my partner Phaedrus allows it, i can send a copy to you. latter, as we expand our group, this definitely won't be available for preview. right now, it is as yet Phaedrus, me, and Sir Pino.
there are tasks, sequences, agreements, things about ownership and use, descriptions. it might be very simple or clear to you, but, believe me, it is not. no more than those so called 'simple positions' of yours or, for example, Rubinstein are!
you dont tie ten persons together all over the world and turn everyone loose. no. control is needed as to what we are doing, when and how we do it, who owns it, who can see it, who can use it and for how long, etc. its like law and policy.
this is first put in place 'not as catch can' but to start out. it gets harder and harder latter.
just today i had to structure two or three introductory letters, a spreadsheet to note contact with candidates, and then a second sheet attached with benchmarks for scheduled tasks.
my project management experience is extensive, so i will leave it at that.
c. and finally he and i delivered a long and detailed application for me as an applicant to teach at your Saxion University, and that was 65% of the effort, maybe 70% but a lot of hard effort went into our 'Doc' referenced above.
d. somehow the two projects are subtley connected. the project is how he got to know me to the degree that 'we' could expand our field, in established trust and confidence, which is the main thing in long distance collaboration.
warmest, dk
23 mei 2008 1:18
@likeForests: first, we already own copies of the book.
second, this is no different than the hundreds of cbv files found at Ossimitz for years, or gambitbooks.com.
i do know of cases where Murray Chandler of Gambit Chess Publications Inc (not to be confused with gambitbooks above) came down hard, and didn't allow any of their books WHICH HAD BEEN RENDERED TO PGN and MADE AVAILABLE for public used there, especially at Ossimitz, but that was even seven or more years ago.
no one can prevent us from making a private copy, as many do of The Art of Attack or other classics. the issue is not the copy, but public domain.
the issue is not electron files, but how they are distributed, if at all. this is a private copy.
i cannot share personal details about our members, but one of them has a legal background.
speaking of long term plans, if we are a big success, we already have a plan to contact Polgar himself and ask him, 'do you want to go further with this? we have already done much word on top of yours'.
this issue is already writen into our 'Doc' as indicated.
like i said, a lot of planning and review is already in place. dk
Thanks for the explanation. The question wasn't a joke. Nor was it critisism. It was just a question because, well, I want to know.
You said you invested 2000 e-mails. So I counted 2000 e-mails = 2000 problems + 1000 problems already done by a third party = 3/4 of the work is already done + announcement = ready = surprise that the first problem has to be done yet = a question that can be interpreted as critisism = not.
thank you. but, again, you need to be put back into line despite your not intending to disparage.
presumption! most of the emails were unrelated to this project. we have had many, but not on this project.
this includes family photos, google earth photos of our houses from outter space (i am serious) or of my massive store (a very large white rhombus from the sky), emails to and from my best friend robert, some *cough* special images such as womens hair, chessbase files, now emails with a GM friend of mine whom i have introduced to him to, very detailed things about advise to and from the usual difficulties of life, in great detail... but of course very personal things.
most men can go to a bar to talk. but we had the internet instead. we even spoke one night on the phone for an hour.
and, why, yes this correspondence, does include our project. but we have, instead, passed a document back and forth, reviewed by Phaedrus, and then i wrote some more, then review, then more writing.
but the funny thing is, kind of like chess, the more you write, and plan, and structure, the more holes do you find. it is a process not of finding truth but rather in surfacting unresolved issues.
its a design process, again, something i truly know a lot about.
my partner Phaedrus wont mind, so once he gives me the ok, as soon as we are done, as a close friend, i will send it to you. i actually thought that i sent it to you along the way before, but its the past now.
and, last but not least, again, you cannot judge what you cannot see. we must check the first 1,000 problems, and rather than assume they are correct, i assume they are ALL wrong and seek to find errors.
if you download the Euwe-Kramer Middlegame file from Ossimitz (i would sent it to you, but again, you refuse chessbase or chessBase lite, still?), you will see highly articulated game headers.
so to simply drag and drop a 'few thousand problems' is not the half of it. there is classifying, annotating, checking, kind of like occurs at such as at Chess Publishing Ltd, or such as you must have seen in the large Dvoretsky Endgame Manual chessBase file that i know that SOMEBODY already SENT to you... please!
you know better. this is a large, not a quickie project, and i ask for you to assume that there is A. a lot more for you to see you have not seen, and B. not to assume a napkin calculation puts a black box unknown to you into reSolution.
take care, dk
I don't judge, I just ask questions.
I don't presume, I just ask questions.
Of course I knew there was a chance that you would go ballistic. To ask questions courage is needed. If I had made presumptions beforehand, there was no need to ask a question.
My question reveals a blind spot. You know what you have done. Phaedrus knows. But you haven't communicated that. Maybe you both should be honoured for your efforts. But how can the public know? My question was intended to start that communication and bring your efforts into the spotlight.
I am not a tame beast either. Not ballistic, but you know I am not happenstance about planning, and Phaedrus is not exactly a rank amateur or ‘chess tourist’, so you just cannot imagine what we have thought of so far… You helped a lot, and I thank you.
Yes, yes, you are right, there is an energy spot, which is my turning fifty in October, with much ‘wasted time’ in intellectual constructs not since I met Marino but in the last 37 years…
I have nothing to show for it except a touchy personality filled with self righteousness when questioned on matters that I have labored greatly. Smiles.
I have wondered many, many times if my effort here was a stupidity, but phaedrus seems to think the work is valuable, and he is the one l like to please. I don’t have a wife or children, so all I have are my friends. thank you.
I think this is a wonderful undertaking. As much as I'm tempted to jump on board, knowing my propensity for starting things, but not following through, I probably should take a pass.
Hi im here visiting your site..Its a great site..
I have my blog at http://kaguvkov.blogspot.com/
very nice blog. a lot of effort.
question, what is your goal or what are your goals? what is your aim?
this cannot just be a simple thing, no? life does not fit under simple subject-predicate, platonic-aristotilian logic, but more like a fractal, a mandala, a mystic filament connecting mind, body, and nature.
as the buddha said in the heart sutra: 'there is no essence, no mind, no taste, no sound, no essence of mind, no shape, no form, no emptyness, no body, no meaning...'
thanks for stopping by. dk
Sounds like a good idea to convert the problems in the book to electronic form. This sounds much like the project people undertook with his other brick as discussed over at Phaedrus' blog a while back. It seems to have worked well. Good luck.
just one question: why use a proprietary format for a big project like this?
it would be cool if someone was kind enough to write a web server for this thing...
@gambitti: there are many ways to discuss this or as to why this is not appropriate. But if you sit in
your home and render a set of positions into chessBase or pgn, this is not copyright violation.
We are a small private group. No one will be allowed to forward this work to others. In fact, once we are formed as a group, you probably wont hear about this again or if you do, in very modest form.
secondly, have you used chessbase much? you can rank sort by highly articulated tags, with game information according to type where otherwise is only the name of the second player, or tournement, or tag games.
thirdly, we do all this work, and make it available to the world? no. not without permission of author. its his work. we are using it when we already own the book, with his implicit reward for his work in payment for kind. copywrite laws exist and must not be respect it spirit.
i am not a lawyer, but not appropriating his work is very important.
dk
David could you please e-mail me the info? I would like to join you. I can only commit a few hours a week, so you let me know if that will be sufficient or not.
Dear Wang, I know you as a constructive and always respectably positive member of our blogesphere, so you deserve every single sincere courtesy. I know your comments are always thoughful and of good quality. But you honestly perplex me:
we wish to have open arms and to encourage all sorts of participants, honestly--and this is not meant to be rude but simply direct without varnish or pretense--we really need to have you follow a procedure. Easy enough.
To explain: you are asking us to email you. You say you want to join us, good. But we must talk first, no? A bit of offline dialogue, no? We must know you better before sending the information, no??
we give you an email to contact us at. Where do we do that? Not Phaedrus, not me, but to write us as indicated.
We have given pages of description, the gmail account has worked for everyone, and you cannot imagine the hours it takes to correspond with two dozen persons. Life is kind of like a test, just like chess is. "By there fruits you will know them", I think is the saying.
Each person takes follow up, discussion between Phaedrus and I, database entry by category, and we haven’t even started. So, simply how you approach us will say a lot about how you could potentially fit in a large, dynamic, global, cooperative effort. To be constructive is the watchword. To be clear, no?
Grandmaster Seirawan has emailed me (I just counted them to be precise) twenty times since Wednesday afternoon, not counting Wed morning, so you dont want for me to have to research how to contact you, do you? smiles.
Despite some opacity, you already know a lot more about us, and we nothing of you. To be helpful, no?
So we need to ask you: if you are interested, could you tell us more about you and start by emailing the correct place, please?
Lastly, your blog is closed and this doesnt help any.
Again, I know you as a good man, and maybe it is cultural, but meet me half way please.
respectfully, dk
David,
I'll be straightfoward with you because I consider you an associative friend of the blog, and as we met in person, feel I have established somewhat of a rapport with you.
It's hard to ask of us to engage in something that we know not the level of particiaption required. If you raise the bar too high it will be only a small few doing the enourmous work rather than the lighter work of many.
The project sounds interesting. I have my own goals and aspirations that challenge my level of play with game analysis etc. The committment you seek is too steep for me from what little I know...but in only reading between the lines of the comments here.
In order for us to know more, the requirement is for people to "interview" in essence of thier desires,capabilities and time.
I'm sure this is yet another stellar project you are about to embark on and I am happy for you as well as pleased to see you have some focus for your energy. I'm sure you will excell and benefit greatly from this.
I want to improve my chess game, play in the World open, blog about my ongoing struggle over the 64 squares and not get divorced as I walk a fine line between a hobby and an obsession.
My best approach is going through my games like I have been and creating training positions to review while going over my selection master games. The time I spend on that is well worth it for me as it is customized to my ability and where I need to focus my training.
If you have problems getting others involved in your project, perhaps you can best "package" this as to the kind of benefit that they will get out of such a committment. I know if I seek a "job" it's always good to knwo hte perks associated with it.
Otherwise it comes across a little elitist... sorry ... I had to say it...I felt someone needed to raise that flag. I am a friend, It was best said by soemone like me?
thank you blunderprone for you comment:
there is much merit in what you say, and we have had lots of feedback well beyond the view in comments, sometimes very robustly.
i just seems to me that if you want to participate you need to at least use some thought and demonstrate the lowest bench marke of communication!
you dont simply say 'email me the information' instead of emailing us?
have your tried going to Wangs blog? i see no way to reach him. in fact, both blogs are totally blank. now, think about that. as i said, all of Wangs comments are very, very good, and he acts like a fine person, but i was and still am baffled.
Hello Blunderprone,
First of all thank you for this honest comment. It is comments like these that make it possible for me to get a good view on how our initiative is and can be received in the blogosphere.
You perceive this project as a commitment that is too steep. While this may be true (you know best) I do want to make clear that it is not in terms of workload, if we get together a group of 10 truly committed people. Rendering 316 positions and solutions is a workload that can be done in a month without any hazard to my marriage or an acceptable family life, even if you have a full time job--at least this is the conclusion I have reached making a cost-benefit analysis for myself.
And speaking of benefit. When will the opportunity occur again to get such a fantastic set of positions in a digital format. Not only much easier to handle than this really thick and heavy book, but also improved as the book has more than a few mistakes in it solutions. I know that for advanced players this is THE BOOK. It is the greatest contribution Lazlo Polgar made to the chess world besides teaching his daughters our royal game. As a comprehensive manual on the middlegame it is unparalleled. So not giving this our best shot and seeking collaboration with others to finish this project and share the results would almost be a sin--especially as the book is almost impossible to buy, as it is out of print, out of stock and extremely expensive when in the rarest cases is available. .
If we ask for commitment and request potential candidates to reveal a bit of it and themselves (again, off line), it is not because we think that the project is to much for sheer mortal souls, but because we feel that commitment is necessary to strive for the perfection that is needed to prevent others from constant rechecking and correcting.
Believe me, I did not write this comment to persuade you, but only to add some nuance to image of a colossal job that will take enormous effort without significant gain.
Wow. Whoever participates will receive a nice resource.
As for my participation, I am someone who plays maybe once a week and does not study, so this is probably not what you are looking for.
In other words, I am lazy...
Hmmm...Was not aware that my blog was not active. I will check it out. I will have a bit more time to blog and correspond after this week and I will do so then. I don't know what to do about my blog though, everything seems ok.
@Wang: This is your response to my long note to you?? Sorry, but we won't be able to have you in our group, and we wish you the best of success in your other efforts to communicate.
DK--You are writing as if this is going to be a hellish slave labor camp in Russia.
Wang is being perfectly reasonable, and reciprocity cannot be measured by word count. This isn't a diamond mine or anything--a bunch of positions from a book entered into a computer. Chill dude. You'll catch more slaves with honey than with chains.
That said, I would like to send in my left testicle, the secret membership requirement in the second internet chess cult (first being the Knights Errant).
BDK, its hard to know what to do or say, and I honestly appreciate your criticism. And it is criticism, is it not? You obviously don't know our project, but feel the need to bite at my heels again, no?
Honestly, we are talking with dozens of persons with great affect. We have security issues and legality issues, and confidentiality issues, so this is not nearly as simple as you might suggest? You feel this need to attack which keeps resurfacing but we have still agree to truce, have we not? Lets hope that constructive conversations is not all lost again, please.
I know you want to defend Wang, but the guy never provided his email, and somehow he is a viable candidate? Then wants to write latter, when, in a week or two? Just send us an email. His blogs are empty.
To me, his way of showing interest and responses are bizarre. All I say now is not only forget it, but what does he expect now? For me to want to give him a cyber hug? No. I just say he can forget any -possibility of working with us, as is just honest.
No. He is indeed a nice guy, but he would never satisfy us. And this to you smacks of elitism but is not. Just a basic standard of communication.
There is so much going on behind the scenes, such as now someone connected with GM Ram author Rashid Zayatdinov’s wanting to join us, so ...
... believe you me, we have attracted great persons, but of these, remain a private matter, and while this can be attempted to turn this into a public spectacle or carnival, it is not!
This is not meant to be a Global Middlegame Forum, but only a filter place. And not everyone is wanted or needed or capable, is that so bad? It is not. If you wish to ridicule this after saying you thought that our project was a good idea, then I can only be sorry.
Take care, and I know you are honest, and I appreciate that. Your voice is strong, and this cannot ever be discounted.
David
PS despite my inclination not to publish your comment, after consulting with Phaedrus, who says publish it, I have. Smiles.
I think there might have been a little misunderstanding regarding Wang's blog being empty. When you click on his name here it only refers you to his blogspot blogs which ARE empty and inactive. However his actual working blog is at:
http://wangschesshouse.wordpress.com/
Which is indeed very active and very good.
I hope this helps.
Have a great day,
Tommyg
Thank Tommy. This is a very, very good blog, and doesnt surprise me.
But, it seems to me, in a busy world, being present is the most valuable commodity when everyone is in a hurry, or on their way to somewhere else. I still see no place to email him, and when you say 'Could you please email the information', you need to be a little thoughtful about that.
and when someone comments that they couldnt reach you, in turn, you engage the subject by acting concretely.
Why he couldnt just simplify in helping us to communicate with him is beyond me. my patience for this approaches zero.
but again, thank you. its done now, and we have many who both know how to communicate AND are willing. How hard can it be??
DK--From what you've said about the project, it sounded interesting, and I still think so. But the elitist response to Wang was a bit surprising. Looking at his posts, he's only been respectful and inquisitive.
David,
You have been kind to post the counterpoints that my response and BDK's bring up. Just reading through your responses I can't help but feel like this is an exclusive and elitist "club" similar to Harvard's "skulls" where you have to be pledged to even be thought of to enter.
If security of copy writed material is at issue than inviting the world ( blog) is asking for frustrations that you don't need. Perhaps this should be an invite only list. Based on the activity of the list of bloggers on your sidebar and those you follow regularly, should give you an indication of who might be candidates for this extremely cautious and highly committed project.
I agree with BDK. Wnag was reasonable. Perhaps the benfit of the doubt might be needed? There are varied styles here on the web. Styles of chess blogging covers a broad spectrum from "The Dude" of the Big labowski to the a full blown Consumer report perspective. The trick is understanding the values that these contrasting and varied styles do bring.
Honestly, you scared me off. I know I can't commit to that as interesting and rewarding such an effort might be. I choose not to get invovled. I will continue with my own mission. I can't even keep the quality of my own blog up to par with yours because I have problems posting pictures. But like the "Dude" in the movie " the big labowski" walking into the supermart at midnight dressed in a bathrobe and jellie sandles to get half and half because he can't have a white russian without it, he really didn't care what other people thought of him. That wasn't the issue. His purpose was more direct and personal. That's kind of what my blog is and my personal goals for chess improvement.
"blunderprone" is only a small facit of my being. I exist for much more in life.
Dear Blunderprone, I am sorry that you not only feel as you do, but have this reaction. Of course, there is an entirely different side to this, but this is for our members...
It is not that complicated:
A. Wang needed to write us directly.
B. Then when reminded of it, he diverted again.
C. Much reaction by BDK and you as to whether we were setting the bar too high or making this into an elete thing.
D. Its really simple. You (that is to say, those interested) write us privately and you talk to us, and we talk to you. Much more information is available, and a personal discussion ensues.
Please dont impute things that are not there. It seems that making trouble is the new sport.
What was needed is simply called performance at the most basic standard of cooperation, to demonstrate interest.
If this bothers you or others, its just unfortunate but probably now for the best. Those who need to come, will come.
Nowhere do you mention, for example, such things as an associate of GM-Ram author Ziatdinov's having written us, and now in a correspondence.
Is that too elitist? no, it's evidence of the good things available in synergy. I am tired of Wang-gate and let this be the last of it. get over it everybody.
again, we are not a gmC (Global Middlegame Collaborative) chat room, but a place for those who want to join us to learn a bit about us while sharing casually about themselves, preliminary to introductory correspondence, and then for those so inclined, to begin open and honest private question and answer or dialogue.
That is not elitist, its called getting to know people.
thanks, dk
OK, let me clear up some things here. I came here by way of Liquid Egg Product's blog. I didn't read through the entire post before leaving a message, i was drive by blogging at the time.
I was unaware of the personal factor in this undertaking. You are looking for some kind of "connection" or at least to understand the people you are working with.
I was merely looking at the grunt work to be done. That I was more than willing and able to do. I would actually sacrifice my own studying to get involved in this project. I feel it is worthwile and would benefit my fellow bloggers. And that was my only reason for wanting to be involved, I saw it as a way to do something truly beneficial for my fellow suffering chess bloggers.
As far as a personal commitment to get to know the folks I'll be working with then no, I'm not too interested in that. Not that I don't want to get to know folks, I'm not some underbridge dwelling troll who dislikes people, time is simply too short for me to correspond with several people at once.
Quite simply this is just a bad time of the year for me. From Memorial Day until Labor Day time is not a commodity I have much of. That is also the reason for my delayed responses here, nothing more and you should not read into it that I took you or the project lightly.
I was unaware of some of the issues you posted about recently; of course with security, legality, and confidentiality issues I understand the need for a "getting to know you time".
As for your note to me I thought it was a bit much but it can be near impossible to detect the tone of a written message, especially in this medium. Bottom line is, my feelings weren't hurt.
For what it's worth I definitely had no intention of getting anyone riled up. I appreciate folks who spoke up or defended me.
I would like to say though that I think you made some snap decisions based on the responses I left here. I understand how you may have gotten those ideas now that I know how special this project is to you, but really at the time I was unaware. No offense was intended.
Later
Dear Wang, thank you for such a thoughtful note.
If you wish to join us, and help in rendering the positions, we would be glad to have you. Lets say we forget this, both learn, and move on. Ok?
The initial project will go fast once started. We have a great team being formed, and no need to be other than yourself, even if this means no personal notes.
You will need to email us at the given address. I am leaving in twelve days to see my Father back east for Fathers day, and he actually now has recently been diagnosed with cancer of the tongue, and was discovered after the travel plans were made.
So I will be away for thirteeen days (12 to 24 June). We are assembling our team and the conditions now, so if you wish to write latter, as might have been best for you all along, sure Phaedrus and I can accomodate you. Of course, if you can write before I go, this is best but I respectfully leave this to you.
Your blog bespeaks of a great chess and blogging sensibility, so an frustration I might have caused you could only be our loss, but we are past that now! You are always a man of solid character, which even I saw from way before.
Warmest, David K
Seattle
Post a Comment
<< Home