From joost at sanguis.xs4all.nl Tue Sep 1 08:43:38 2009 From: joost at sanguis.xs4all.nl (Joost de Heer) Date: Tue, 01 Sep 2009 14:43:38 +0200 Subject: [Retros] Die Schwalbe Heft 238 (august 2009) Message-ID: <4A9D16FA.60008@sanguis.xs4all.nl> 14182 - Alexander Jarosch 3SRB1k/1pp1BQRS/p1pppKP1/P3P1p1/5bb1/5sr1/6P1/q7 (12+13) Add two black pieces (at least one knight), one on h6 and the other anywhere, and release. 14183 - Bernd Schwarzkopf 4S3/1p1p1p1p/3p1p2/3PkP2/4P3/2P1K1P1/1Pp1P1pP/8 (10+9) -1 & #1 14184 - Gligor Denkovski, Ivan Denkovski 6s1/ppp1pp1p/3p1r1p/b2B2q1/PP2P1s1/rbB2k2/RRPPSP1P/1S1Q3K (15+16) SPG 25.5 14185 - Peter Harris BQ3R2/3K4/3S2q1/4P3/8/b7/5rbk/8 (6+5) Black -1 & h#2 (Maximum, Ultrapatrol, Kamikaze) 14186 - Gerald Ettl b5k1/6r1/1p4p1/2P1R3/1p1ppp1s/7p/6K1/5B2 (4+11) -10 & #1 (Proca, Anticirce Calvet) 14187c - Bernd Gr?frath rsbq1r1k/ppppppp1/6p1/7s/8/8/PPPPPPP1/RSBQKBSR (15+15) a) Release b) Proofgame in 5.0 (Supercirce) 14188 - Mario Richter rs1qkbsr/p1pppppp/8/8/8/PPS5/3PPPbP/B3KBSR (12+15) SPG 7.5 (Losing chess) 14189 - Bernd Gr?frath 1rS1kbsr/p3pppp/8/2p5/8/7P/1PP1SPP1/R1BQKB1R (13+11) SPG 10.5 (Duellist) 14190 - Roberto Osorio, Jorge Joaquin Lois Inspired by A.C. Jobim and dedicated to Enzo Minerva and the Rio 2009 meeting k5s1/pppp1ppp/bRs5/2bP4/q1B5/1SrP1S1Q/PPPB1PP1/R4r1K (15+15) SPG 19.0 (Circe) 14191 - Stephan Dietrich Place one white bishop and two white knights on an empty board so they have exactly 28 move possibilities. How many solutions? (Original text: Auf einem Schachbrett stehen ein wei?er L?ufer und zwei wei?e Springer (3+0). Wie viele solcher Stellungen gibt es, bei denen Wei? genau 28 Zugm?glichkeiten hat?) 14192 - Stephan Dietrich Place the seven white officers on an empty board. The bishops are on a1 and h1, the rooks and the queen on a square on the first row, and the knights on random squares. White has exactly 64 move possibilities. How many solutions? (Original text: Auf einem Schachbrett stehen die 7 wei?en Offiziere. Die beiden L?ufer stehen auf den Feldern a1 und h1, die Dame und die beide T?rme stehen auf beliebigen Feldern der ersten Reihe, die beiden Springer stehen auf beliebigen Feldern des Schachbrettes (7+0). Wie viele solcher Stellungen gibt es, bei denen Wei? genau 64 Zugm?glichkeiten hat?) Fairy conditions: Maximum: Black must play the geometrically longest legal move. Distance is measured between the centers of the start- and arrivalsquare. Ultrapatrol: A piece has only observation powers, no move possibilities (including capture and giving check) unless it's observed by a piece of the same side. Kamikaze: When a capture occurs, both the captured and the capturing piece disappear Supercirce: A captured piece can be reborn on any empty square. Losing chess: Kings are non-royal, captures are mandatory. Duellist: If legal, a player must make its next move with the same piece with which he made the last move. From joost at sanguis.xs4all.nl Tue Sep 1 08:43:59 2009 From: joost at sanguis.xs4all.nl (Joost de Heer) Date: Tue, 01 Sep 2009 14:43:59 +0200 Subject: [Retros] Probleemblad 2-2009 Message-ID: <4A9D170F.2040408@sanguis.xs4all.nl> Finally arrived, but no retros. From joost at sanguis.xs4all.nl Tue Sep 1 12:06:26 2009 From: joost at sanguis.xs4all.nl (Joost de Heer) Date: Tue, 01 Sep 2009 18:06:26 +0200 Subject: [Retros] Solutions Die Schwalbe Heft 235 Message-ID: <4A9D4682.20509@sanguis.xs4all.nl> 14001 - Osorio, Lois 1. f4 g5 2. f5 g4 3. f6 g3 4. fxe7 f5 5. Nh3 Kf7 6. e8=Q+ Kf6 7. Qe3 Qe8 8. Qxa7 Ke5 9. Qxb8 Ra3 10. Qa7 Rf3 11. Qg1 Bc5 12. Nf2 Kd4 13. Nh3+ Qe3 14. Qf2 Bb6 15. Ng1 gxf2# Double platzwechsel wPf2/wSg1 14002 - Liskovets Of the pieces on c7/d8/e7, a maximum of 2 pieces can be volage: In case Sd8 is volage, it must've come from c7 or e7. So the idea is to force both black pawns to a white square, which proves that Sd8 isn't volage. 1. Kd4 c5 2. Ke5 c4(=w) 3. Qg6 e6(=w) 4. Sf7# 1... e5 2. Kc5 e4(=w) 3. Qg6 c6(=w) 4. Sf7# 14003 - Wenda -1. Qb8-d8 Bd8-f6+ -2. Rf2xBd2[Ra1] Rf8-f2[=w] -3. Ke1xPf2[Ke1] Rh8-h6+ -4. g5xPf6ep[bPf2] and 1. ef5[bPf2] Rh1# 14004 - Gr?frath For a mate, a bP must be added on f7. But how did the black king go to g7? It must've been through OO-f8-g7, which means that the black rook had to leave f8 after castling. So either d8 had to be empty, which can only be achieved by capturing the black queen on d8 or e8 after castling, and then replacing it with a Pronkin queen, or by capturing Rf8, and then replacing it with a Pronkin rook. So the second pawn must be white. It can't have left the g-file, on g5 it would be in the way of the mate, on g2 the white queen/king couldn't have left the first row, so it must be on g3 (this also proofs that the Pronkin-piece was a queen). #1 with 1. Qg5# A possible proofgame:1. Nc3 Nc6 2. Nd5 Na5 3. Nb4 Nb3 4. Nc6 Nxc1 5. Nxd8 Nb3 6. g3 Nxa1 7. Bg2 Nb3 8. Be4 g5 9. Nf3 Bh6 10. O-O Nf6 11. Qa1 O-O 12. Rd1 Rxd8 13. Kf1 Kf8 14. Kg2 Kg7 15. Nd4 Rh8 16. Kf3 Nh5 17. Kg4 Na5 18. Kf5 g4 19. Bg2 Nc4 20. Nf3 gxf3 21. Kg4 fxg2 22. Rf1 gxf1=Q 23. Qd1 Qh1 24. Qa1 Qc6 25. Qh1 Kf6 26. Qe4 Qa6 27. Kf3 Kg5 28. Kg2 Qg6 29. Kf3 Qg8 30. Qe6 Kf6 31. Qa6+ Kg7 32. Kg4 Nf6+ 33. Kf5 Ne5 34. Qa3 Neg4 35. Qc3 Qd8 36. Qe3 Rf8 14005 - Gr?frath 1. f3 Nf6 2. f4 Ne4 3. Nf3 Nxd2 4. Rg1 Nxf1 5. Rxf1 Nc6 6. Rf2 Nd4 7. Kf1 Nxe2 8. Qe1 Ng3+ 9. Kg1 Nf1 10. Rxf1 14006 - Witt 1. c8=Q 2. f8=Q 3. g8=Q 4. Qc3 5. Qf4 6. Qg6 Now white has 25(Qc3)+25(Qf4)+23(Qg6)+14(Rd5)=87 moves, which is Herbert Ahues' age. 14007 - Witt wX(#) means: After the first move X, white has # next moves. Idem bX(#). wKa2(7), wKb2(10), wKb3(9), wKb4(8), wKa4(6), wPa6(7), wPc5(7) bKh3(7), bKg3(10), bKg4(9), bKg5(9), bPe2(8). In total (7+10+9+8+6+7+7)*(7+10+9+9+8)=2322 possible move combinations, which is the birthday of Herbert Ahues (2.3.22) 14008 - Brobecker 1. d4 g5 2. Kd2 Bg7 3. Ke3 Be5 4. Bd2 Bh2 5. f4 Bg1# 14009 - Gottstein Five rooks are needed to guard 45 squares (e.g. Ra1, Rb2, Rb3, Rb4, Rb5). All these positions have the characteristic '4 rooks on the same file/row, and one unguarded rook). The unguarded rook can be placed on 64 squares, which leaves 14 rows/files for the 4-rook-cluster. There are binomial(7,4)=35 possible rook-clusters on a file. So in total there are 64*14*35=31360 positions in which exactly 45 squares are guarded by only white rooks. From joost at sanguis.xs4all.nl Tue Sep 1 13:10:29 2009 From: joost at sanguis.xs4all.nl (Joost de Heer) Date: Tue, 01 Sep 2009 19:10:29 +0200 Subject: [Retros] Die Schwalbe Heft 238 (august 2009) In-Reply-To: <4A9D16FA.60008@sanguis.xs4all.nl> References: <4A9D16FA.60008@sanguis.xs4all.nl> Message-ID: <4A9D5585.4060909@sanguis.xs4all.nl> Slight error in the fairy conditions: > Supercirce: A captured piece can be reborn on any empty square. Or not at all. Joost From per.olin at luukku.com Thu Sep 3 14:38:25 2009 From: per.olin at luukku.com (per olin) Date: Thu, 3 Sep 2009 21:38:25 +0300 (EEST) Subject: [Retros] Fairy retros Message-ID: <1252003105410.per.olin.47041.Y0Aurr7oxzKhBbO2nmJ5WQ@luukku.com> Fairy retros The recent die Schwalbe 238 has some interesting retro problems with stipulations as follows: Black -1 & h#2 (Maximum, Ultrapatrol, Kamikaze) -10 & #1 (Proca, Anticirce Calvet) Proofgame in 5.0 (Supercirce) SPG 7.5 (Losing chess) SPG 10.5 (Duellist) SPG 19.0 (Circe) Have earlier had some correspondence with the Schwalbe editors about the fairy conditions in retros. The question has been and still is: are these problems retros or fairies? The justification for classifying these as retros has been that the main content of the problem is of retro nature. Codex/FIDE Album classification for chess problems is: a)twomovers, b)threemovers, c)moremovers, d)endgame studies, e)selfmates, f)helpmates, g)fairy chess, h)retros + mathematical problems. The wide practice is that anything that is not a)-f) or h) is g)fairy chess nonwithstanding how orthodox the problem might be. Lets now take as an example a direct mate in two moves or a helpmate. They easily find their way into the classification above. Then we take a twomover or a helpmate with circe-condition; these are then in group g)fairies. Question 1) why is a proofgame with circe-condition a retro and not a fairy problem? Having a look at the Codex we note that there is no definition for retros; fairy is mentioned only once in a footnote. There must be many aspects to this, e.g. you are awarded the title of FIDE Judge for retroanalytical problems; the next morning you wake up and notice you have to get familiar with all fairy conditions in the world. Further questions: Question 2) what is the definition for retroanalytical problems? Question 3) what is the definition for fairies? Question 4) should retros (and many of the other groups) have a subdivision g1)orthodox retros and g2)fairy retros? Have here expressed some thoughts that are perhaps outside the scope of Retro Corner. Anyhow, it would be interesting to hear what others think in the matter. Answers to any of questions 1-4, in any order, are welcome. Warning: the more you think about this, the more confused you will be. The end result might be that you are very confused, but on a higher level! Best regards Per Olin .................................................................... Luukku Plus -paketilla p??set eroon tila- ja turvallisuusongelmista. Hanki Luukku Plus ja helpotat el?m??si. http://www.mtv3.fi/luukku From joost at sanguis.xs4all.nl Thu Sep 3 15:46:24 2009 From: joost at sanguis.xs4all.nl (Joost de Heer) Date: Thu, 03 Sep 2009 21:46:24 +0200 Subject: [Retros] Fairy retros In-Reply-To: <1252003105410.per.olin.47041.Y0Aurr7oxzKhBbO2nmJ5WQ@luukku.com> References: <1252003105410.per.olin.47041.Y0Aurr7oxzKhBbO2nmJ5WQ@luukku.com> Message-ID: <4AA01D10.5020204@sanguis.xs4all.nl> [All answers are my personal views] On 09/03/2009 08:38 PM, per olin wrote: > Question 1) why is a proofgame with circe-condition a retro and not a > fairy problem? A problem stipulation has 2 classes: - Type - Constraints E.g. an orthodox #2 has as type 'mate' and as constraint 'orthodox'. A series-stalemate platzwechselcirce has as type 'series-stalemate' and as constraint 'platzwechselcirce'. For a fairy proofgame the type is proofgame, and the constraint is the fairy condition. I.m.o. all problems with type any of the retro types (proofgame, release, retractors, etc). belong to the retro section, and the constraint is irrelevant. There are several 'grey areas'. Do reflexmates belong in the selfmate or in the fairy section? FIDE albums place them in the fairy section, while I think they're closer to selfmates in nature. Should stalemates belong in the same section as direct mates? > Further questions: Question 2) what is the definition for > retroanalytical problems? Its main content is retro-based. E.g. legality questions for Proca retractors, regardless whether it's orthodox or fairy. There have been numerous discussions whether proofgames should belong in the retro-section. For now, lacking a better category, it belongs there. > Question 3) what is the definition for fairies? The type is non-retro and the constraint is not orthodox. > Question 4) should retros (and many of the other groups) have a > subdivision g1)orthodox retros and g2)fairy retros? Perhaps. But then you'd probably end up chopping the category in 315 subclasses. For how can one compare proofgames with retro-rebuses? I think that the fairy composition of Peter Harris belongs in the fairy column, because I have a strong feeling that the rectractions have nothing to do with legality (I haven't solved this composition, nor am I interested in solving it to be honest). Joost From afretro at yandex.ru Fri Sep 4 22:09:12 2009 From: afretro at yandex.ru (afretro) Date: Sat, 05 Sep 2009 06:09:12 +0400 Subject: [Retros] Fairy retros Message-ID: <222881252116552@webmail45.yandex.ru> Dear Per, Thank you for the point you have raised. For about one hundred years there were few SPGs and few fairy retros, so the tradition of including them among orthodox retros appeared to be quite natural. Then followed a boom of non-orthodox retros (SPGs, retros with stipulations affecting retroplay like ?Minimal number of moves by the black king?,? and fairy retros). A debate as to the expediency of including them under one heading would be of purely academic importance, if it were not for the issue of tourney judgment. By now, hundreds of fairy rules and pieces have been proposed and many of them make it relatively easy to break orthodox retro records; moreover, new types can be invented specifically for the sake of achieving new records; these easily achieved records may impress judges much more than outstanding orthodox retros with long and complicated solutions. Kornilov and I wrote a couple of articles touching in particular on this subject (feenschach Heft 154 (2004) and Heft 160 (2005)). In our view, allowing fairy retros to compete side by side with traditional ones is like allowing a motorcyclist to compete with a runner. If chess composition continues to be a ?competition sport,? I hope that someday SPGs and fairy retros will be separated from orthodox retros. By the way, there has been a dramatic reduction in the number of new orthodox retros published throughout the world in the past decade. Yours, Andrey From afretro at yandex.ru Fri Sep 4 22:07:54 2009 From: afretro at yandex.ru (afretro) Date: Sat, 05 Sep 2009 06:07:54 +0400 Subject: [Retros] Probleemblad 2-2009 Message-ID: <276091252116474@webmail64.yandex.ru> > Finally arrived, but no retros. Dear all, Does anyone know whether this means that there will no longer be a section of retros in Probleemblad? Back in April Kornilov and I sent an original to Peter van den Heuvel and there was no response from him; then I sent an inquiry asking Peter to tell me whether the original has been received; still no reply. This was very strange; there had been no communication problems with Peter in the past. Andrey From retromode at web.de Sat Sep 5 02:30:04 2009 From: retromode at web.de (=?iso-8859-15?Q?Bernd_Gr=E4frath?=) Date: Sat, 05 Sep 2009 08:30:04 +0200 Subject: [Retros] Fairy retros Message-ID: <1798486241@web.de> Dear Andrey, I think that it is possible to compare the relative achievements of a runner and a motorcyclist in one competition: Someone who runs 100 meters in 9 seconds has achieved something much better than a motorcyclist who need "only" 8 seconds for this distance. Competent judges take this into consideration. Of course, they can also decide to divide an informal tourney into two or three (or even four: classical retroanalysis, fairy retroanalysis, proof games, fairy proof games) separate sections... It is true that there has been a dramatic reduction in the number of new orthodox retros published throughout the world in the past decade. In your feenschach essay, you offer a plausible explanation (feenschach 160, page 112): "Unfortunately, classical retros offer much smaller scope for development, in comparison with fairy and conditional RA." About the general point which Per raised, I agree with Joost. Best wishes, Bernd P.S. concerning your other e-mail: I have sent my awards for the retros of Probleemblad 2005 and 2006 to Peter van den Heuvel some years ago, and he has never answered. > -----Urspr?ngliche Nachricht----- > Von: "afretro" > Gesendet: 05.09.09 04:13:35 > An: The Retrograde Analysis Mailing List > Betreff: [Retros] Fairy retros > Dear Per, > Thank you for the point you have raised. For about one hundred years there were few SPGs and few fairy retros, so the tradition of including them among orthodox retros appeared to be quite natural. Then followed a boom of non-orthodox retros (SPGs, retros with stipulations affecting retroplay like ???Minimal number of moves by the black king?,??? and fairy retros). A debate as to the expediency of including them under one heading would be of purely academic importance, if it were not for the issue of tourney judgment. By now, hundreds of fairy rules and pieces have been proposed and many of them make it relatively easy to break orthodox retro records; moreover, new types can be invented specifically for the sake of achieving new records; these easily achieved records may impress judges much more than outstanding orthodox retros with long and complicated solutions. Kornilov and I wrote a couple of articles touching in particular on this subject (feenschach Heft 154 (2004) and Heft 160 (2005)). In our view, allowing fairy retros to compete side by side with traditional ones is like allowing a motorcyclist to compete with a runner. If chess composition continues to be a ???competition sport,??? I hope that someday SPGs and fairy retros will be separated from orthodox retros. By the way, there has been a dramatic reduction in the number of new orthodox retros published throughout the world in the past decade. > Yours, > Andrey > _______________________________________________ > Retros mailing list > Retros at janko.at > http://www.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/retros > ______________________________________________________ GRATIS f?r alle WEB.DE-Nutzer: Die maxdome Movie-FLAT! Jetzt freischalten unter http://movieflat.web.de From prentos at the.forthnet.gr Sat Sep 5 04:21:46 2009 From: prentos at the.forthnet.gr (Kostas Prentos) Date: Sat, 5 Sep 2009 11:21:46 +0300 Subject: [Retros] New retro editor in StrateGems Message-ID: <200909050821.n858Lk9M018390@MX-IN-05.forthnet.gr> An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed... Name: not available Url: From joost at sanguis.xs4all.nl Sat Sep 5 05:16:58 2009 From: joost at sanguis.xs4all.nl (Joost de Heer) Date: Sat, 05 Sep 2009 11:16:58 +0200 Subject: [Retros] Probleemblad 2-2009 In-Reply-To: <276091252116474@webmail64.yandex.ru> References: <276091252116474@webmail64.yandex.ru> Message-ID: <4AA22C8A.7080302@sanguis.xs4all.nl> On 09/05/2009 04:07 AM, afretro wrote: >> Finally arrived, but no retros. > Does anyone know whether this means that there will no longer be a > section of retros in Probleemblad? Back in April Kornilov and I sent > an original to Peter van den Heuvel and there was no response from > him; then I sent an inquiry asking Peter to tell me whether the > original has been received; still no reply. This was very strange; > there had been no communication problems with Peter in the past. The text where the retro section should be said 'column not received in time'. I have no idea what this means. Probleemblad has recently suffered a lot from time-related issues of its editors. Peter will be at the WCCC in Rio, according to the list of participants (http://ubp.org.br/wccc2009/participants.htm). Perhaps someone who is going there will be able to get some information on what's happening? Joost From joost at sanguis.xs4all.nl Sat Sep 5 08:21:39 2009 From: joost at sanguis.xs4all.nl (Joost de Heer) Date: Sat, 05 Sep 2009 14:21:39 +0200 Subject: [Retros] Fairy retros In-Reply-To: <222881252116552@webmail45.yandex.ru> References: <222881252116552@webmail45.yandex.ru> Message-ID: <4AA257D3.7060200@sanguis.xs4all.nl> On 09/05/2009 04:09 AM, afretro wrote: > In our view, allowing fairy retros to compete side by side with > traditional ones is like allowing a motorcyclist to compete with a > runner. And comparing a proca retractor with a 'Last n moves?' or with an illegal cluster isn't? Joost From Nicolas.Dupont at math.univ-lille1.fr Sat Sep 5 12:17:06 2009 From: Nicolas.Dupont at math.univ-lille1.fr (Nicolas.Dupont at math.univ-lille1.fr) Date: Sat, 5 Sep 2009 18:17:06 +0200 (CEST) Subject: [Retros] Fairy retros In-Reply-To: <4AA257D3.7060200@sanguis.xs4all.nl> References: <222881252116552@webmail45.yandex.ru> <4AA257D3.7060200@sanguis.xs4all.nl> Message-ID: <52059.81.20.213.169.1252167426.squirrel@mathwebmail.univ-lille1.fr> > On 09/05/2009 04:09 AM, afretro wrote: >> In our view, allowing fairy retros to compete side by side with >> traditional ones is like allowing a motorcyclist to compete with a runner. Hi Andrey ! What do you mean exactly by "side by side" ? Generally speaking, a fairy retro deals with some impossible orthodox achievement, eg a Schnoebelen Queen. That's why, for me, there is no hierarchy between, say, orthodox retros and fairy proof games. This is true that there are more tools in the last setting, but the goals are different. Nicolas. From afretro at yandex.ru Sun Sep 6 08:47:47 2009 From: afretro at yandex.ru (afretro) Date: Sun, 06 Sep 2009 16:47:47 +0400 Subject: [Retros] fairy retros Message-ID: <277331252241267@webmail36.yandex.ru> Dear retro friends, Thank you for sharing your views in connection with my message regarding fairy retros (which was a reply to Per Olin?s initial post). Bernd wrote: > it is possible to compare the relative achievements of > a runner and a motorcyclist in one competition I guess that grounds can be suggested for comparing just about anything with anything else. For example sportspersons can be ranked together with performers based on popularity and/or amount of money earned in a year, etc. I hope we all can agree at least on the following two points: 1. Ranking things of a similar nature is more objective than ranking highly dissimilar things. 2. A clear criterion for comparison is better than a vague criterion. I do not think one can ?prove beyond any reasonable doubt? that some intrinsic property of retros makes it a must to judge fairy retros alongside of orthodox ones; nor can anyone prove the opposite. Joost wrote: > And comparing a proca retractor with a 'Last n moves?' > or with an illegal cluster isn't? The current situation, when all sorts of retros are most often judged ?under one heading,? is historically substantiated and in my view happens to be motivated by convenience considerations, since retrograde analysis does have ?too many? varieties. Therefore, ?incomparable problems? will inevitable have to be judged ?side by side.? On the other hand, sometimes judges do separate SPGs from other retros, etc, just like Circe and/or Madrasi problems are sometimes separated from ?Other fairy types? in the ?general fairy section.? Nowadays, helpmates are typically subdivided into h#2, h#3, and h#n; some kind of ?universally accepted? subdivision of retroanalysis will probably occur at some point in the future. Anyway, in chess composition things go their natural ways. Nicolas wrote: > Generally speaking, a fairy retro deals with some impossible orthodox achievement, eg a Schnoebelen Queen. Fairy conditions are also used to break ?absolute? retro records; for example the record for uncaptured promoted pieces in orthodox retroanalysis is 4, the record for e.p. captures is 3, etc. Suppose someone makes a classical-style retro with 4 e.p. captures, but that problem is placed low in an informal tourney just because the same tourney includes a retro showing 8 e.p. captures with the help of some straightforward fairy means. The way things stand, classical-style retroanalysis seems to be on the verge of collapse. Yet I do not believe that this situation can be attributed to a hopeless exhaustion of orthodox retro ideas. I am sure there are still quite a few nuances to be discovered there and not all of the eventual orthodox retro records have been set. Yours, Andrey From per.olin at luukku.com Mon Sep 7 15:00:16 2009 From: per.olin at luukku.com (per olin) Date: Mon, 7 Sep 2009 22:00:16 +0300 (EEST) Subject: [Retros] Fairy Retros - Codex question Message-ID: <1252350016721.per.olin.109782.snN3RG1Iam75_TkyaaTgnw@luukku.com> Dear Andrey, Referring to your article in Feenschach: have not seen it and therefore might be asking questions that have already been asked and answered. It is interesting, and gives consolation, to notice that we are at least two persons in the universe who are troubled by the present situation. Your views are, as you state, very important from competitional aspets. Have myself written about classification of chess problems in Springaren 2001 and Suomen Teht?v?niekat 2008; no response. Perhaps a magazine is not the best forum to try to sort things out. Perhaps RetroCorner is better! In another message you write that in chess composition things go their natural ways. I fully agree with you here. Below I make my last attempt to indicate what the natural way could be... Dear Joost, A comment to your first reponse. You write: - - - - - - A problem stipulation has 2 classes: - Type - Constraints E.g. an orthodox #2 has as type 'mate' and as constraint 'orthodox'. A series-stalemate platzwechselcirce has as type 'series-stalemate' and as constraint 'platzwechselcirce'. For a fairy proofgame the type is proofgame, and the constraint is the fairy condition. I.m.o. all problems with type any of the retro types (proofgame, release, retractors, etc). belong to the retro section, and the constraint is irrelevant. - - - - - - - - If I understand 'constraint' correctly, then for a direct twomover with circe the constraint says that the problem is fairy chess. When we have a retro with circe-condition, then the constraint is irrelevant. Is this a correct interpretation? Dear all, The Codex is the bible for chess composition; we should be able to find answers to all questions from there. Below is copied Chapter II - Types of Chess Composition and the corresponding footnotes. >From the text one could suspect that the Codex stipulates, that chess problems that do not apply the FIDE-rules of the game of chess are fairy chess. On the other hand, as the classifications are irrespective of each other and not exhaustive, we can not say that e.g. retros should be based on the rules of chess and they can not have fairy chess elements. The weakness of the Codex is that the definitions are overlapping and not exhaustive. I have understood that this is the end result of compromises when the Codex was drawn up. Considering the mess we have, it would, in my opinion, be advisable to review the Codex Chapter II. It should be possible to make such final definitions that they are valid in all foreseeable future. It is not a well managed process we have presently: every other decade things are removed from the dumping area 'fairies'. This has happened to selfmates, helpmates, retros... When redefining the Codex we could start from scrach. We should have no historical conventions nor restrictions, only the target of making a functioning system. Chess is a logical game, classification of chess problems could also be logical. As exchanging views through magazines can be a long process with almost no attendants, we could now here have a quick conference and express our views as shortly as possibly; no explanations needed, only an answer 'yes' or 'no'. Question: is Codex Chapter II in your opinion satisfactory? Please, respond with 'yes' or 'no' (can be done in the headline Re: Fairy Retros - Codex question - YES, Re: Fairy Retros - Codex question - NO). Best regards Per Chapter II - Types of Chess Composition [8] Article 5 - Classification according to Stipulations Chess compositions can be classified into several groups according to their stipulation. Besides the historically developed groups, viz studies, direct mates, selfmates and helpmates [9], further groups [10] have developed [11]. Article 6 - Special Types Additionally, and independent from the classification according to Article 5, there are a number of special types, including: (a) Retroanalytical chess compositions (b) Mathematical chess compositions (c) Constructional chess compositions. Article 7 - Classification according to Rules Furthermore, chess compositions can be classified into those which apply the FIDE-rules of the game of chess [12] and those which apply modified rules [13,14]. Footnotes 8 Articles 5 to 7 are not intended to be exhaustive. Other classifications are possible and also practised, for example according to the material used (miniature, minimal, Meredith etc.) or according to other criteria. 9 According to this classification, examples of frequently used stipulations are: (a1) White to move and force a win, without restriction to a specified number of moves (studies). (a2) White to move and force a draw, without restriction to a specified number of moves (studies). (b) White to move and mate the black king in a specified maximum number of moves (direct mate). (c) White to move and force Black to mate the white king in a specified number of moves (selfmate). (d) Black to move and cooperate with White in order to obtain a mate of the black king in a specified number of moves (helpmate). 10 Further groups are, for example, stalemate or series stipulations etc. 11 Compositions other than studies are usually called problems. 12 Presently, the rules for the game of chess as agreed during the FIDE-congress 1996 in Yerevan are valid. Relevant for compositional chess are Articles 1 to 5. 13 In this context, the terms orthodox, heterodox, fairy and exo are used. 14 Modifications of the FIDE-rules may for example consist in: (a) Rules (conditions) on which the composition is based (for example maximummer, circe, seriesmover). (b) Pieces used in the composition (for example nightrider, grasshopper, chinese pieces). (c) Chess space on which the composition is based (for example chess board with 10x10 squares, cylindrical chess board, multi-dimensional chess boards). .................................................................... Luukku Plus -paketilla p??set eroon tila- ja turvallisuusongelmista. Hanki Luukku Plus ja helpotat el?m??si. http://www.mtv3.fi/luukku From joost at sanguis.xs4all.nl Mon Sep 7 16:07:18 2009 From: joost at sanguis.xs4all.nl (Joost de Heer) Date: Mon, 07 Sep 2009 22:07:18 +0200 Subject: [Retros] Fairy Retros - Codex question In-Reply-To: <1252350016721.per.olin.109782.snN3RG1Iam75_TkyaaTgnw@luukku.com> References: <1252350016721.per.olin.109782.snN3RG1Iam75_TkyaaTgnw@luukku.com> Message-ID: <4AA567F6.2040200@sanguis.xs4all.nl> > Dear Joost, > > A comment to your first reponse. You write: > - - - - - - > A problem stipulation has 2 classes: > - Type > - Constraints > E.g. an orthodox #2 has as type 'mate' and as constraint 'orthodox'. > A series-stalemate platzwechselcirce has as type 'series-stalemate' > and as constraint 'platzwechselcirce'. > For a fairy proofgame the type is proofgame, and the constraint is > the fairy condition. I.m.o. all problems with type any of the retro > types (proofgame, release, retractors, etc). belong to the retro > section, and the constraint is irrelevant. > - - - - - - - - > If I understand 'constraint' correctly, then for a direct twomover > with circe the constraint says that the problem is fairy chess. When > we have a retro with circe-condition, then the constraint is > irrelevant. Is this a correct interpretation? Yes. In fairy proofgames, the defining characteristic for a problem is proofgame, not the fairy condition. For e.g. #2, this is different. All IMO of course. About classification: You will always have hybrid compositions. E.g. 'Position after the 23rd move by black. #2' (Caillaud, Loustau, Rotenberg; Ph?nix 10.1998). Where should this problem be printed? In the retro column or in the direct twomovers section? Another example is helpselfmates: neither help-play, nor selfmate. No matter what classification system you use, you'll always be able to find a composition that will fall outside the classification. A chess composition parallel to G?del? Joost From retromode at web.de Tue Sep 8 03:22:27 2009 From: retromode at web.de (=?iso-8859-15?Q?Bernd_Gr=E4frath?=) Date: Tue, 08 Sep 2009 09:22:27 +0200 Subject: [Retros] Fairy Retros - Codex question Message-ID: <1802486391@web.de> Hi all, in feenschach, there were critical responses to Andrey's position from Thomas Brand/Wolfgang Dittmann and from Hans Peter Rehm. Best wishes, Bernd > -----Urspr?ngliche Nachricht----- > Von: "per olin" > Gesendet: 07.09.09 21:20:32 > An: The Retrograde Analysis Mailing List > Betreff: [Retros] Fairy Retros - Codex question > Dear Andrey, > > Referring to your article in Feenschach: have not seen it and therefore might be asking questions that have already been asked and answered. It is interesting, and gives consolation, to notice that we are at least two persons in the universe who are troubled by the present situation. Your views are, as you state, very important from competitional aspets. > > Have myself written about classification of chess problems in Springaren 2001 and Suomen Teht?v?niekat 2008; no response. Perhaps a magazine is not the best forum to try to sort things out. Perhaps RetroCorner is better! > > In another message you write that in chess composition things go their natural ways. I fully agree with you here. Below I make my last attempt to indicate what the natural way could be... > > > Dear Joost, > > A comment to your first reponse. You write: > - - - - - - > A problem stipulation has 2 classes: > - Type > - Constraints > > E.g. an orthodox #2 has as type 'mate' and as constraint 'orthodox'. A series-stalemate platzwechselcirce has as type 'series-stalemate' and as constraint 'platzwechselcirce'. > > For a fairy proofgame the type is proofgame, and the constraint is the fairy condition. I.m.o. all problems with type any of the retro types > (proofgame, release, retractors, etc). belong to the retro section, and the constraint is irrelevant. > > - - - - - - - - > > If I understand 'constraint' correctly, then for a direct twomover with circe the constraint says that the problem is fairy chess. When we have a retro with circe-condition, then the constraint is irrelevant. Is this a correct interpretation? > > > Dear all, > > The Codex is the bible for chess composition; we should be able to find answers to all questions from there. Below is copied Chapter II - Types of Chess Composition and the corresponding footnotes. > > >From the text one could suspect that the Codex stipulates, that chess problems that do not apply the FIDE-rules of the game of chess are fairy chess. On the other hand, as the classifications are irrespective of each other and not exhaustive, we can not say that e.g. retros should be based on the rules of chess and they can not have fairy chess elements. > > The weakness of the Codex is that the definitions are overlapping and not exhaustive. I have understood that this is the end result of compromises when the Codex was drawn up. Considering the mess we have, it would, in my opinion, be advisable to review the Codex Chapter II. It should be possible to make such final definitions that they are valid in all foreseeable future. It is not a well managed process we have presently: every other decade things are removed from the dumping area 'fairies'. This has happened to selfmates, helpmates, retros... > > When redefining the Codex we could start from scrach. We should have no historical conventions nor restrictions, only the target of making a functioning system. Chess is a logical game, classification of chess problems could also be logical. > > As exchanging views through magazines can be a long process with almost no attendants, we could now here have a quick conference and express our views as shortly as possibly; no explanations needed, only an answer 'yes' or 'no'. > > Question: is Codex Chapter II in your opinion satisfactory? Please, respond with 'yes' or 'no' (can be done in the headline Re: Fairy Retros - Codex question - YES, Re: Fairy Retros - Codex question - NO). > > Best regards > > Per > > > Chapter II - Types of Chess Composition [8] > > Article 5 - Classification according to Stipulations > > Chess compositions can be classified into several groups according to their stipulation. Besides the historically developed groups, viz studies, direct mates, selfmates and helpmates [9], further groups [10] have developed [11]. > > Article 6 - Special Types > > Additionally, and independent from the classification according to Article 5, there are a number of special types, including: > > (a) Retroanalytical chess compositions > (b) Mathematical chess compositions > (c) Constructional chess compositions. > > Article 7 - Classification according to Rules > > Furthermore, chess compositions can be classified into those which apply the FIDE-rules of the game of chess [12] and those which apply modified rules [13,14]. > > Footnotes > > 8 Articles 5 to 7 are not intended to be exhaustive. Other classifications are possible and also practised, for example according to the material used (miniature, minimal, Meredith etc.) or according to other criteria. > > 9 According to this classification, examples of frequently used stipulations are: > > (a1) White to move and force a win, without restriction to a specified number of moves (studies). > (a2) White to move and force a draw, without restriction to a specified number of moves (studies). > (b) White to move and mate the black king in a specified maximum number of moves (direct mate). > (c) White to move and force Black to mate the white king in a specified number of moves (selfmate). > (d) Black to move and cooperate with White in order to obtain a mate of the black king in a specified number of moves (helpmate). > > 10 Further groups are, for example, stalemate or series stipulations etc. > > 11 Compositions other than studies are usually called problems. > > 12 Presently, the rules for the game of chess as agreed during the FIDE-congress 1996 in Yerevan are valid. Relevant for compositional chess are Articles 1 to 5. > > 13 In this context, the terms orthodox, heterodox, fairy and exo are used. > > 14 Modifications of the FIDE-rules may for example consist in: > > (a) Rules (conditions) on which the composition is based (for example maximummer, circe, seriesmover). > (b) Pieces used in the composition (for example nightrider, grasshopper, chinese pieces). > (c) Chess space on which the composition is based (for example chess board with 10x10 squares, cylindrical chess board, multi-dimensional chess boards). > > > .................................................................... > Luukku Plus -paketilla p??set eroon tila- ja turvallisuusongelmista. > Hanki Luukku Plus ja helpotat el?m??si. http://www.mtv3.fi/luukku > > >
> _______________________________________________ > Retros mailing list > Retros at janko.at > http://www.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/retros > > ________________________________________________________________ Neu: WEB.DE Doppel-FLAT mit Internet-Flatrate + Telefon-Flatrate f?r nur 19,99 Euro/mtl.!* http://produkte.web.de/go/02/ From t.brand at gmx.net Tue Sep 8 16:58:50 2009 From: t.brand at gmx.net (Thomas Brand) Date: Tue, 08 Sep 2009 22:58:50 +0200 Subject: [Retros] Fairy Retros In-Reply-To: <1802486391@web.de> References: <1802486391@web.de> Message-ID: <4AA6C58A.9020904@gmx.net> Since in the initial thread "Die Schwalbe" was mentioned, I think I should briefly tell you my view of "fairy retros" and their relationship with orthodox ones. My first point is, that it is not a matter of (my) taste to publish quite a lot of fairy retros in Die Schwalbe: The ratio of orthodox to fairy retros I receive is anywhere between 1:2 and 1:3 in the last months. (Yes, this is an invitation to send good orthodox retros to Die Schwalbe!!) On the other hand I'm very happy to be able to publish six orthodox retros out of nine in the next (October) issue of Die Schwalbe (plus three math problems) - including a series of three related problems by Andrey. I totally agree with Andrey, if he says, that it does not make sense to compare "orthodox" retro tasks or records with fairy ones. For example, in orthodox retros there is a natural limit of 30 uncaptures. With very simple mechanisms in Circe you easily can "break" this limit - and if a judge will rank such a problem quite high just for this reason, this might be not an argument against fairy retros - but an argument against this judge... On the other hand I strongly believe that fairy conditions can be very fruitful in retro - if these conditions are not used as a kind of "doping" just to vaporize orthodox records, but to demonstrate original retro ideas based on this condition. "Schoebelen-Queen" was mentioned before. To give another quite simple example: In Die Schalbe 14065 (April 09) Bernd Gr?frath showed a proof game with black pseudo castling. In orthodox proof games not so original, but here the fairy condition is maximummer. And here it seems quite surprising, paradox, that Black does NOT castle, although castling is such a "quite long" move, but has to do single steps with the King. Obviously the fairy condition is not "simple help" for the composer, but inherently linked with the contents and the "theme" of this quite paradox problem. Just another point: What is "fairy", what is "orthodox"? It's well known, that some 400 years ago Alfils etc were used: fairy pieces!? Or "very orthodox" ones? In the October issue of Die Schwalbe you will find a 960chess retro (Fischer Random Chess). In June 2009 it clearly was a fairy retro, but in July 2009 new FIDE rules appeared - containig an annex dealing with 960chess. So due to these official rules this problem is orthodox now? In this case the October ratio will be 7:2 instead of 6:3... Best regards, Thomas From afretro at yandex.ru Wed Sep 9 03:39:22 2009 From: afretro at yandex.ru (afretro) Date: Wed, 09 Sep 2009 11:39:22 +0400 Subject: [Retros] fairy retros Message-ID: <172121252481962@webmail83.yandex.ru> Dear Thomas, I would like to express my absolute support for your views. In this world, everything including chess rules tends to change in the course of time. The current rules are knows to dozens of millions of people worldwide, while just a few hundred or thousand individuals are aware of fairy chess. That is the reason for the special attitude towards standard chess, shared by many colleagues. If back in the late 1960s I had seen nothing but fairy retros, I would not have taken an interest in retroanalysis. But on the other hand, fairy retros do offer a vast scope of inspiring opportunities. I only hope that orthodox retros will linger on for a few more decades, alongside of fairy retros, and that in the future most of the tourneys will be divided into certain categories, like it is happening in the ?general? fairy section. This will make retro tourney judgment appear to be ?more objective.? Will it truly be more objective? I am not sure, unless strict criteria are used, as was the case with several thematic Schwalbe tourneys. Yours sincerely, Andrey From retromode at web.de Wed Sep 9 06:03:45 2009 From: retromode at web.de (=?iso-8859-15?Q?Bernd_Gr=E4frath?=) Date: Wed, 09 Sep 2009 12:03:45 +0200 Subject: [Retros] fairy retros Message-ID: <1804807573@web.de> Dear Thomas, I also would like to express my absolute support for your views. Thanks for pointing out a common basis! However, I wonder whether your counting of six orthodox retros in the October Schwalbe includes orthodox proof games!? I sometimes have the impression that Andrey regards orthodox proof games as "conditional RA" (and therefore unorthodox), because the diagram position must be reached under the specific condition of a particular number of moves. See for example, feenschach 160, page 111: "The SPG condition made it much easier to set records in different RA themes." Dear Andrey, I would like to clarify that, just like you, I also hope that orthodox retroanalysis will not die! Best wishes, Bernd > -----Urspr?ngliche Nachricht----- > Von: "afretro" > Gesendet: 09.09.09 09:54:58 > An: The Retrograde Analysis Mailing List > Betreff: [Retros] fairy retros > Dear Thomas, > > I would like to express my absolute support for your views. > > In this world, everything including chess rules tends to change in the course of time. The current rules are knows to dozens of millions of people worldwide, while just a few hundred or thousand individuals are aware of fairy chess. That is the reason for the special attitude towards standard chess, shared by many colleagues. If back in the late 1960s I had seen nothing but fairy retros, I would not have taken an interest in retroanalysis. But on the other hand, fairy retros do offer a vast scope of inspiring opportunities. I only hope that orthodox retros will linger on for a few more decades, alongside of fairy retros, and that in the future most of the tourneys will be divided into certain categories, like it is happening in the ???general??? fairy section. This will make retro tourney judgment appear to be ???more objective.??? Will it truly be more objective? I am not sure, unless strict criteria are used, as was the case with several thematic Schwalbe tourneys. > > Yours sincerely, > Andrey > _______________________________________________ > Retros mailing list > Retros at janko.at > http://www.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/retros > ________________________________________________________________ Neu: WEB.DE Doppel-FLAT mit Internet-Flatrate + Telefon-Flatrate f?r nur 19,99 Euro/mtl.!* http://produkte.web.de/go/02/ From afretro at yandex.ru Wed Sep 9 06:36:13 2009 From: afretro at yandex.ru (afretro) Date: Wed, 09 Sep 2009 14:36:13 +0400 Subject: [Retros] [Retros' fairy retros Message-ID: <5391252492573@webmail56.yandex.ru> Dear Bernd, Kornilov and I came to the conclusion that ?ideal classical-style/orthodox retroanalysis? requires positions in which the standard stipulation ?Release the position? is enough. Even the indication of the side which is on the move is in principle a condition affecting retroplay. In most cases, however, we have to deal with retros which are not ?ideal? in that sense. As to SPGs I realized that they are in a certain way closer to helpmates than to classical-style retros back in 1991, when writing a book on SPGs together with Gerd Wilts. There can be several ways to classify retroanalysis, e.g. classical-style & conditional & SPGs & fairy or orthodox (inclusive of SPGs) & conditional & fairy, etc. I don?t insist on any one in particular. It?s a question for discussion and hopefully consensus at some point in the future. Yours, Andrey From retromode at web.de Wed Sep 9 09:56:09 2009 From: retromode at web.de (=?iso-8859-15?Q?Bernd_Gr=E4frath?=) Date: Wed, 09 Sep 2009 15:56:09 +0200 Subject: [Retros] [Retros' fairy retros Message-ID: <1805175220@web.de> Dear Andrey, thank you for the clarification! I think this discussion thread has been very helpful. Dear Per, thanks for starting this thread! Best wishes, Bernd > -----Urspr?ngliche Nachricht----- > Von: "afretro" > Gesendet: 09.09.09 12:37:37 > An: The Retrograde Analysis Mailing List > Betreff: [Retros] [Retros' fairy retros > Dear Bernd, > Kornilov and I came to the conclusion that ???ideal classical-style/orthodox retroanalysis??? requires positions in which the standard stipulation ???Release the position??? is enough. Even the indication of the side which is on the move is in principle a condition affecting retroplay. In most cases, however, we have to deal with retros which are not ???ideal??? in that sense. > As to SPGs I realized that they are in a certain way closer to helpmates than to classical-style retros back in 1991, when writing a book on SPGs together with Gerd Wilts. > There can be several ways to classify retroanalysis, e.g. classical-style & conditional & SPGs & fairy or orthodox (inclusive of SPGs) & conditional & fairy, etc. I don???t insist on any one in particular. It???s a question for discussion and hopefully consensus at some point in the future. > Yours, > Andrey > _______________________________________________ > Retros mailing list > Retros at janko.at > http://www.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/retros > ________________________________________________________________ Neu: WEB.DE Doppel-FLAT mit Internet-Flatrate + Telefon-Flatrate f?r nur 19,99 Euro/mtl.!* http://produkte.web.de/go/02/ From t.brand at gmx.net Wed Sep 9 17:07:31 2009 From: t.brand at gmx.net (Thomas Brand) Date: Wed, 09 Sep 2009 23:07:31 +0200 Subject: [Retros] [Retros' fairy retros In-Reply-To: <5391252492573@webmail56.yandex.ru> References: <5391252492573@webmail56.yandex.ru> Message-ID: <4AA81913.5010006@gmx.net> Dear Andrey, Again I agree! Indeed, SPGs have a strong "help character", but this in fact is true for "release the position" retros, too: there is no fight between White and Black as in direct mate or selfmate problems - or in defencive retractors: Both Black and White work together. The difference between "release" retros and SPGs is just the time pressure (generated by the stipulation, not by the danger of retro stalemate!!), and so you might argue, that SPGs are not ?ideal classical-style/orthodox problems?. By the way I think SPGs are a fine example for changing requirements for judges: In the first time of SPGs, starting with Dawson and Fox with the climax of Fabels famous proof game SPGs were more or less task constructions: the longer the better. In this case comparing two SPGs was simple just counting plys! In the meantime things have changed: Now there are strategic and tactical themes, interesting formal themes etc. -- now judging SPGs is not just purely counting but dealing with true contents. Now judging has to deal with these topics: much more complicated - and much less "objective" as it was possible till say 1970. And now counting thematical moves, promotions etc. is not enough for judging: We have to deal with formal, but also aestetical, thus subjective criteria: the same situation as judging say 2# tournaments. Best regards, Thomas ------------------------------------ afretro schrieb am 09.09.2009 12:36: > Dear Bernd, > Kornilov and I came to the conclusion that ?ideal classical-style/orthodox retroanalysis? requires positions in which the standard stipulation ?Release the position? is enough. Even the indication of the side which is on the move is in principle a condition affecting retroplay. In most cases, however, we have to deal with retros which are not ?ideal? in that sense. > As to SPGs I realized that they are in a certain way closer to helpmates than to classical-style retros back in 1991, when writing a book on SPGs together with Gerd Wilts. > There can be several ways to classify retroanalysis, e.g. classical-style & conditional & SPGs & fairy or orthodox (inclusive of SPGs) & conditional & fairy, etc. I don?t insist on any one in particular. It?s a question for discussion and hopefully consensus at some point in the future. > Yours, > Andrey > _______________________________________________ > Retros mailing list > Retros at janko.at > http://www.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/retros From Eric.Angelini at kntv.be Thu Sep 10 12:19:26 2009 From: Eric.Angelini at kntv.be (Eric Angelini) Date: Thu, 10 Sep 2009 18:19:26 +0200 Subject: [Retros] 1550 vs 1575 Message-ID: ... can't see any retro-content, though: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=43Wcbd0dJpQ Best, ?. From pastmaker at aol.com Fri Sep 11 13:14:55 2009 From: pastmaker at aol.com (pastmaker at aol.com) Date: Fri, 11 Sep 2009 13:14:55 -0400 Subject: [Retros] fairy retros In-Reply-To: <172121252481962@webmail83.yandex.ru> References: <172121252481962@webmail83.yandex.ru> Message-ID: <8CC011A8492EFBC-325C-BF0F@webmail-m047.sysops.aol.com> "I only hope that orthodox retros will linger on for a few more decades," With all due respect to my old friend, Andrey, why would?we put such a short lifespan on the orthodox retro?? My own lack of verstility in this business is?clear (I have never composed an SPG) - - but I worry about extrapolating from the exhaustion of the?creativity?of?a practitioner?to the exhaustion of the discipline's opportunities.? Have some confidence in the next generation!? (Take a look at Fabel's list of masterworks, and think about what has been done since that was published.? After all, that list contains no Frolkin, no Caillaud, no Wassong, no Goldsteen .... and no Baibikov!) A couple of decades ago I recall encountering the idea that orthodox retroanalysis needed to employ more?"influential" stipulations (e.g., that a certain unit took its shortest path) if anything interesting was to be accomplished.? That misguided notion was coupled with the implicit idea that only task problems have any value, the point being that the new kind of stipulation would enable a composer to show an expansion of a task desideratum.??Andrey and I have had this out before at length, but I do not see this activity as a sports event, I don't see anything good about having judgments about the virtues of problems become more objective (a frightening notion).? In fact, I have never really see much value to ranking problems in the first place -?- everyone's list of favorites=2 0not only will be different, and, until we decide to become robots,?absolutely should be different.? Moreover, that notion back in the 1990s that orthodox retroanalysis was exhausted was simply wrong.?Since that time many interesting problems have been composed without the use of influential stipulations. This activity has the pleasant virtue of being amatuer in the true sense.? Who has the right to promulgate a code about what a composer can or cannot (or should or should not) do.? What happens to the composer who ignores the code???If his or her problems are interesting will others ignore them because they are not in accordance with the code?? I still think it should be fun. Regards, Tom Volet -----Original Message----- From: afretro To: The Retrograde Analysis Mailing List Sent: Wed, Sep 9, 2009 3:39 am Subject: [Retros] fairy retros Dear Thomas, I would like to express my absolute support for your views. In this world, everything including chess rules tends to change in the course of ime. The current rules are knows to dozens of millions of people worldwide, hile just a few hundred or thousand individuals are aware of fairy chess. That s the reason for the special attitude towards standard chess, shared by many olleagues. If back in the late 1960s I had seen nothing but fairy retros, I ould not have taken an interest in retroanalysis. But on the other hand, fairy etros do offer a vast scope of inspiring opportunities. I only hope that rthodox retros will linger on for a few more decades, alongside of fairy etros, and that in the future most of the tourneys will be divided into certain ategories, like it is happening in the ?general? fairy section. This will make etro tourney judgment appear to be ?more objective.? Will it truly be more bjective? I am not sure, unless strict criteria are used, as was the case with everal thematic Schwalbe tourneys. Yours sincerely, ndrey ______________________________________________ etros mailing list etros at janko.at ttp://www.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/retros -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From afretro at yandex.ru Fri Sep 11 23:56:57 2009 From: afretro at yandex.ru (afretro) Date: Sat, 12 Sep 2009 07:56:57 +0400 Subject: [Retros] fairy retros Message-ID: <383241252727817@webmail86.yandex.ru> Dear Tom, Thanks for joining the discussion and for supporting orthodox retros. At present, the game of chess is in many ways not what it used to be some 20 years ago. I recall how back in the 1970s Voice of America news report headlines repeatedly began with the result of the latest game between Fischer and Spassky or between Korchnoi and Karpov. At present, headlines of this sort are unthinkable. Man was defeated by computer and chips can be implanted in one?s ear for informing the player of computer?s best move choice, etc; in another 20 years or so the game of chess will probably remain as a marginal amateur sport only? I do hope that composition, including retroanalysis, will last longer. By the way, Plaksin mentioned fellow composers? talk of ?retroanalysis exhaustion? as early as 1973, I think. Many fellow composers do regard chess composition as, above all, a sport type, and secondly, as art. If we consider retroanalysis to be an art type only, then the discussion of judgment of fairy retros alongside of orthodox ones becomes meaningless, because art requires no judgment. More than that, judgment in many cases simply kills art. Yours sincerely, Andrey From pastmaker at aol.com Sat Sep 12 14:31:44 2009 From: pastmaker at aol.com (pastmaker at aol.com) Date: Sat, 12 Sep 2009 14:31:44 -0400 Subject: [Retros] fairy retros In-Reply-To: <383241252727817@webmail86.yandex.ru> References: <383241252727817@webmail86.yandex.ru> Message-ID: <8CC01EE69C0E6F1-3EE4-13336@webmail-m002.sysops.aol.com> -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From pastmaker at aol.com Sun Sep 13 09:59:28 2009 From: pastmaker at aol.com (pastmaker at aol.com) Date: Sun, 13 Sep 2009 09:59:28 -0400 Subject: [Retros] fairy retros In-Reply-To: <383241252727817@webmail86.yandex.ru> References: <383241252727817@webmail86.yandex.ru> Message-ID: <8CC02918B4FC63D-C40-3B725@webmail-m086.sysops.aol.com> I can see?this activity?as a sport?in the?case?of challenges such as "can one present a position in which a bishop must have made 62 moves?" or "what is the smallest number of units one must have on the board?to present?a position in which the last move must have been Ka2xPa3?", and even in the case of competitions such as?"who can solve this problem first?". But there is a lot of very interesting retroanalysis (as well, of course, as chess composition in other genres) that doesn't involve those kinds of challenges or competitions, and I suspect that this latter part of the discipline is the one that will be more resistant to the forces that Andrey sees as trivializing human chess-playing. Best regards, Tom Volet -----Original Message----- From: afretro To: Otto Janko Sent: Fri, Sep 11, 2009 11:56 pm Subject: [Retros] fairy retros Dear Tom, hanks for joining the discussion and for supporting orthodox retros. t present, the game of chess is in many ways not what it used to be some 20 ears ago. I recall how back in the 1970s Voice of America news report headlines epeatedly began with the result of the latest game between Fischer and Spassky r between Korchnoi and Karpov. At present, headlines of this sort are nthinkable. Man was defeated by computer and chips can be implanted in one?s ar for informing the player of computer?s best move choice, etc; in another 20 ears or so the game of chess will probably remain as a marginal amateur sport nly? I do hope that composition, including retroanalysis, will last longer. By he way, Plaksin mentioned fellow composers? talk of ?retroanalysis exhaustion? s early as 1973, I think. any fellow composers do regard chess composition as, above all, a sport type, nd secondly, as art. If we consider retroanalysis to be an art type only, then he discussion of judgment of fairy retros alongside of orthodox ones becomes eaningless, because art requires no judgment. More than that, judgment in many ases simply kills art. ours sincerely, ndrey ______________________________________________ etros mailing list etros at janko.at ttp://www.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/retros -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From Nicolas.Dupont at math.univ-lille1.fr Sun Sep 13 11:05:35 2009 From: Nicolas.Dupont at math.univ-lille1.fr (Nicolas.Dupont at math.univ-lille1.fr) Date: Sun, 13 Sep 2009 17:05:35 +0200 (CEST) Subject: [Retros] fairy retros In-Reply-To: <8CC011A8492EFBC-325C-BF0F@webmail-m047.sysops.aol.com> References: <172121252481962@webmail83.yandex.ru> <8CC011A8492EFBC-325C-BF0F@webmail-m047.sysops.aol.com> Message-ID: <51968.81.20.208.112.1252854335.squirrel@mathwebmail.univ-lille1.fr> Hi everybody, I've had several opportunities to speak with some experts about the actual status of orthodox proof games. In particular, as a relatively new componist, I asked whether the exploration of this field may not be coming to its end. The answers were various. Around half of the interviewed guys claim "yes", thinking that almost every challenging task has already been achieved, and that it only remains to fill some more or less interesting gaps. The second half said "no", arguing that most solved tasks permit to see new deep questions emerge, that new strategies are discovered even today, providing new tools to handle new types of unexpected proof games. I personally belong to this second category. Let's consider the concept of "proof game of the future", developped by our common chess friend Roberto Osorio. A brief look at that classification permits to raise fascinating, extremely deep problems, probably at the frontier (inside or outside) of what can be possibly done. For example the challenging task si(n) vs si(n) is well-known (sibling of the two pairs of knights), but what about si(n) & si(n) (double sibling of the same pair of knights) ? Best, Nicolas. From joost at sanguis.xs4all.nl Tue Sep 15 06:54:27 2009 From: joost at sanguis.xs4all.nl (Joost de Heer) Date: Tue, 15 Sep 2009 12:54:27 +0200 Subject: [Retros] Massacre proofgames In-Reply-To: <49ABB893.5000104@sanguis.xs4all.nl> References: <49ABB893.5000104@sanguis.xs4all.nl> Message-ID: <4AAF7263.3060802@sanguis.xs4all.nl> Some more massacre proofgames, all SPG 16.5 Fairy condition used: VaultingKings X: When in check, a king can move as a king or as an X. N: Nightrider RO: Rose ZR: Zebrarider 16: (1,6)-leaper Kf8/Kc7 (VaultingKings N) 1.d2-d4 e7-e5 2.Bc1-g5 e5*d4 3.Qd1*d4 Qd8*g5 4.Qd4*a7 Qg5*g2 5.Qa7*b8 Qg2*h2 6.Qb8*b7 Qh2*g1 7.Rh1*h7 Ra8*a2 8.Rh7*g7 Ra2*b2 9.Rg7*f7 Rb2*c2 10.Rf7*d7 Rc2*e2 + 11.Ke1*e2 Qg1*f2 + 12.Ke2*h8 Qf2*f1 13.Kh8*g8 Qf1*b1 14.Ra1*b1 Bc8*b7 15.Rb1*b7 Ke8*d7 16.Rb7*c7 + Kd7*c7 17.Kg8*f8 Ke7/Kb1 (VaultingKings RO) 1.e2-e4 a7-a6 2.Bf1*a6 Ra8*a6 3.Qd1-g4 Ra6*a2 4.Qg4*d7 + Ke8*e4 5.Qd7*c7 Ra2*b2 6.Qc7*b7 + Ke4*h1 7.Qb7*b2 Qd8*d2 + 8.Ke1*d2 Kh1*g2 9.Qb2*g7 + Kg2*f2 10.Qg7*h7 Kf2*g1 11.Qh7*g8 + Kg1*a1 12.Qg8*f8 Rh8*h2 + 13.Kd2*f7 Rh2*c2 14.Qf8*c8 Rc2*c1 15.Qc8*b8 Rc1*b1 16.Qb8*b1 + Ka1*b1 17.Kf7*e7 Ke7/Kc1 (VaultingKings RO) 1.e2-e4 a7-a6 2.Bf1*a6 Ra8*a6 3.Qd1-g4 Ra6*a2 4.Qg4*d7 + Ke8*e4 5.Qd7*c8 Ra2*b2 6.Qc8*b7 + Ke4*h1 7.Qb7*b2 Qd8*d2 + 8.Ke1*d2 Kh1*g2 9.Qb2*g7 + Kg2*f2 10.Qg7*h7 Kf2*g1 11.Qh7*g8 + Kg1*a1 12.Qg8*f8 Rh8*h2 + 13.Kd2*f7 Rh2*c2 14.Qf8*b8 Rc2*c1 15.Qb8*c7 Ka1*b1 16.Qc7*c1 + Kb1*c1 17.Kf7*e7 Ke7/Kc2 (VaultingKings RO) 1.e2-e4 a7-a6 2.Bf1*a6 Ra8*a6 3.Qd1-g4 Ra6*a2 4.Qg4*d7 + Ke8*e4 5.Qd7*c8 Ra2*b2 6.Qc8*b7 + Ke4*h1 7.Qb7*b2 Qd8*d2 + 8.Ke1*d2 Kh1*g2 9.Qb2*g7 + Kg2*f2 10.Qg7*h7 Kf2*g1 11.Qh7*g8 + Kg1*a1 12.Qg8*f8 Rh8*h2 + 13.Kd2*f7 Ka1*b1 14.Qf8*b8 + Kb1*c1 15.Qb8*c7 Rh2*c2 16.Qc7*c2 + Kc1*c2 17.Kf7*e7 Kh1/Kb1 (VaultingKings RO) 1.d2-d4 Sb8-c6 2.Bc1-h6 Sc6*d4 3.Bh6*g7 Sd4*e2 4.Bg7*f8 Se2*g1 5.Bf8*e7 Ke8*e7 6.Qd1*d7 + Ke7*c2 7.Qd7*f7 Kc2*b2 8.Qf7*g8 Kb2*a1 9.Qg8*h7 Ka1*a2 10.Qh7*c7 Rh8*h2 11.Qc7*c8 Rh2*g2 12.Qc8*b7 Rg2*f2 13.Qb7*a7 + Ka2*b1 14.Qa7*a8 Rf2*f1 + 15.Ke1*f1 Qd8*a8 16.Kf1*g1 Qa8*h1 + 17.Kg1*h1 Kf7/Kb2 (VaultingKings ZR) 1.e2-e4 Sg8-f6 2.Qd1-h5 Sf6*e4 3.Qh5*h7 Se4*d2 4.Qh7*g7 Sd2*b1 5.Ra1*b1 Rh8*h2 6.Qg7*f8 + Ke8*a2 7.Qf8*d8 Rh2*g2 8.Qd8*c7 Rg2*g1 9.Qc7*b8 Rg1*h1 10.Qb8*a8 Rh1*f1 + 11.Ke1*a7 Rf1*f2 12.Qa8*c8 Rf2*c2 13.Ka7*b7 Rc2*c8 14.Kb7*c8 Ka2*b1 15.Kc8*d7 Kb1*c1 16.Kd7*e7 Kc1*b2 17.Ke7*f7 Kh7/Kb1 (VaultingKings 16) 1.d2-d4 Sb8-c6 2.Bc1-f4 Sc6*d4 3.Bf4*c7 Sd4*e2 4.Bc7*d8 Ke8*d8 5.Qd1*d7 + Kd8*c2 6.Bf1*e2 Kc2*b2 7.Qd7*b7 + Kb2*a1 8.Qb7*a7 Ka1*b1 9.Qa7*e7 Ra8*a2 10.Qe7*f8 Ra2*e2 + 11.Ke1*f7 Re2*f2 + 12.Kf7*g7 Rf2*g2 + 13.Kg7*h8 Rg2*g1 14.Qf8*c8 Rg1*h1 15.Qc8*g8 Rh1*h2 16.Qg8*h7 + Rh2*h7 + 17.Kh8*h7 Kh7/Kf1 (VaultingKings 16) 1.d2-d4 Sb8-c6 2.Bc1-f4 Sc6*d4 3.Bf4*c7 Sd4*e2 4.Bc7*d8 Ke8*d8 5.Qd1*d7 + Kd8*c2 6.Sg1*e2 Kc2*b2 7.Qd7*b7 + Kb2*a1 8.Qb7*a7 Ka1*b1 9.Qa7*e7 Ra8*a2 10.Qe7*f8 Ra2*e2 + 11.Ke1*f7 Re2*f2 + 12.Kf7*g7 Rf2*f1 13.Rh1*f1 + Kb1*h2 14.Qf8*c8 Kh2*g2 15.Qc8*g8 Rh8*g8 + 16.Kg7*g8 Kg2*f1 17.Kg8*h7 From joost at sanguis.xs4all.nl Fri Sep 18 08:36:29 2009 From: joost at sanguis.xs4all.nl (Joost de Heer) Date: Fri, 18 Sep 2009 14:36:29 +0200 Subject: [Retros] The Problemist september 2009 Message-ID: <4AB37ECD.3050800@sanguis.xs4all.nl> R414 - Mark Thornton 70th Birthday present for CCL 1s1qkr2/2ppppp1/6p1/8/4P3/5S2/PPPP1PP1/RSBQKB2 (14+10) +---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+ | |*S | |*Q |*K |*R | | . | +---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+ | . | |*P |*P |*P |*P |*P | | +---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+ | | . | | . | | . |*P | . | +---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+ | . | | . | | . | | . | | +---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+ | | . | | . | P | . | | . | +---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+ | . | | . | | . | S | . | | +---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+ | P | P | P | P | | P | P | . | +---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+ | R | S | B | Q | K | B | . | | +---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+ SPG 11.0 R415 - Bernd Gr?frath Dedicated to Mario Richter r2qk1sr/pppsBppp/3p4/1Q1bp3/2PPPR1R/2P2S2/P4P1P/4K3 (13+15) +---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+ |*R | . | |*Q |*K | . |*S |*R | +---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+ |*P |*P |*P |*S | B |*P |*P |*P | +---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+ | | . | |*P | | . | | . | +---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+ | . | Q | . |*B |*P | | . | | +---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+ | | . | P | P | P | R | | R | +---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+ | . | | P | | . | S | . | | +---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+ | P | . | | . | | P | | P | +---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+ | . | | . | | K | | . | | +---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+ SPG 16.0 F2755 - Charles Frankiss rsbq1bsr/Pp1pp1pp/P7/P7/P7/pk6/p3P1PP/RSBPKBSR (15+15) +---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+ |*R |*S |*B |*Q | |*B |*S |*R | +---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+ | P |*P | . |*P |*P | |*P |*P | +---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+ | P | . | | . | | . | | . | +---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+ | P | | . | | . | | . | | +---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+ | P | . | | . | | . | | . | +---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+ |*P |*K | . | | . | | . | | +---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+ |*P | . | | . | P | . | P | P | +---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+ | R | S | B | P | K | B | S | R | +---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+ SPG 6.0 Annan chess F2728c - Paul Raican rs2k1s1/ppp3p1/3r1p2/3p4/3q1b2/8/PP2PPPP/RSBQKBSR (14+13) +---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+ |*R |*S | | . |*K | . |*S | . | +---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+ |*P |*P |*P | | . | |*P | | +---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+ | | . | |*R | |*P | | . | +---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+ | . | | . |*P | . | | . | | +---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+ | | . | |*Q | |*B | | . | +---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+ | . | | . | | . | | . | | +---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+ | P | P | | . | P | P | P | P | +---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+ | R | S | B | Q | K | B | S | R | +---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+ SPG 8.0 Annan chess Annan chess: Units move normally, unless they stand one square directly in front of another unit of their own side, when they take the powers of movement of that piece. An example game: 1. h2-h5 (moves like a rook) f7-e6 (moves like a bishop) 2. d2*d7+ (moves like a queen, gives check because after the move it regains its pawn-powers) Ke8-f7 3. c2-g6# (moves like a bishop, gives check because it regains its pawn powers. The black king moves like a bishop, so it can't escape, and h7 moves like a rook so it can't capture the pawn on g6. So this is mate). SOLUTIONS MARCH R407 - Shankar Ram -1. Be6-g8 [Black can't add a piece because he'd be retrostalemate] Kg8-h8 [White adds a wS on h8] -2. Sf7-h8 - If black decides that something was uncaptured on h8, then 1. Sh6# - If black decides that nothing was uncaptured on h8, then 1. Se5 Kh8 2. Sg6# R408 - Lytton, Stockford One of the blacksquared bishops is promoted. If white can still castle, then the g-pawn must've captured g3xh2xg1, and all missing white units are accounted for. wPe6 fell on e6, wPf promoted on g8 after capturing the queen, and wPd promoted on d8, after passing d7, so black can't castle. If black castling is allowed, then the g-pawn promoted after capturing both pawns, and the wPd captured the queen and was captured on e6. a) 1.OOO! [2. Rd8#] Sd~/Sd6 2. Qf7/Qe7# b) 1.Rad1! [2. Rd8#] Sd~/Sd6/OO 2. Qf7/Qe7/Sh6# F2712 - Turnbull -1. Kc7-c8[+wPc7]?? retro-stalemate -1. Kd8-c8 Kb8xSa8 -2. Sc7-a8[wPc7] Ka8-b8 -3. Se8-c7 Kb8-a8 -4. e7-e8=S Ka8-b8 -5. Ke7-d8[+wPe7] From olli.heimo at luukku.com Fri Sep 18 09:32:11 2009 From: olli.heimo at luukku.com (Olli Heimo) Date: Fri, 18 Sep 2009 16:32:11 +0300 (EEST) Subject: [Retros] =?iso-8859-1?q?Retros_in_Suomenteht=E4v=E4niekat_Septemb?= =?iso-8859-1?q?er_-09?= Message-ID: <1253280731327.olli.heimo.63801.ltscKD_60jaKydkqaX9Y3Q@luukku.com> The Finnish magazine "Suomen Teht?v?niekat" has also published retros. Due to the changes in editorial staff they have not reached this mailing list for some years. Most of those have been only moderate but in the latest issue there is a problem by GM Unto Heinonen. I liked it very much and I was surprised to see it in our small magazine. Unto Heinonen: r1bqkbn1/qqPqppqq/P6P/R7/B2N1NRB/5PK1/2P1P3/7Q Proof game in 32.0 moves (14+13). In the same issue there is also a circe-retro by Dragan Petrovic 8/8/1p6/PpPP4/RBrk1PP1/rbqPbRP1/ppppppPK/nn3NQB shortest resolution of the position, circe (15+16). Best wishes Olli. From per.olin at luukku.com Sat Sep 26 12:48:27 2009 From: per.olin at luukku.com (per olin) Date: Sat, 26 Sep 2009 19:48:27 +0300 (EEST) Subject: [Retros] Fairy Retros - final comments Message-ID: <1253983707091.per.olin.40933.8qZYZne2WgrOozr-oporlQ@luukku.com> 1) The Codex Asked here on RetroCorner some weeks ago how satisfied we are with Codex Chapter II. Not very much has been expressed for or against. So if everybody else is happy, then I am less unhappy. The Codex has been drawn up by PCCC; this is of course the only body, which can change it. We can only indicate the need for change. 2) Answer from a FIDE Album Fairies director Some years ago I asked the definition for fairy chess from J. L?rinc, director for the fairies section of then ongoing Fide Album competition. The answer starts as follows: Quote Frankly speaking, I do not know, what is the precise definition of "Fairy chess" or "Fairies (for FIDE Album purposes)". However, from the practical point of view, I assume the following definitions: Fairy chess is a chess using unorthodox pieces and/or unorthodox rules and/or unorthodox boards and/or (in problems) unorthodox stipulations. I.e. anything except orthodox chess. Fairies (for FIDE Album purposes) are all problems not assigned to other 7 sections: #2, #3, #n, e.g., h#, s#, retro. Anything. As my previous experience as a judge shows, some authors even send problems with retro elements to fairies, especially when retrograde analysis do not make the core of problem - and previous directors have accepted them. Unquote This sums up the situation: there is no definition for fairy chess in the Codex and for FIDE Album purposes it is something else! 3) Additional thoughts - Chess problems are art and sports. We have taken the competitive element into the art by having composing competitions, there are titles and world championships awarded for successful problemists. We even have world champions for something so undefined as fairy chess. Try to find a world champion in some other genre, who is surrounded by equal happy ignorance. - Directly to me (not via RetroCorner) has been asked the question: is it necessary to have a strict classification of chess problems? The answer is yes and no: no, if we just consider ourselves as artists; yes, if we have competitions and world champions within different genres of our sport. - If our art and sport would need some scientific approach, I know from what part of the world this could come. - There has been concern for the future of 'real' retros and, on the other hand, also assurance that these retros still have a future. How many decades have there been predictions for the death of direct twomovers? There is still hope for traditional retros, much can be done without Circe and its thousand variations. Have the feeling that I have said what I wanted to say. Sincerely yours Per _______________________________________________ > Retros mailing list > Retros at janko.at > http://www.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/retros .................................................................... Luukku Plus -paketilla p??set eroon tila- ja turvallisuusongelmista. Hanki Luukku Plus ja helpotat el?m??si. http://www.mtv3.fi/luukku From joost at sanguis.xs4all.nl Sun Sep 27 05:11:58 2009 From: joost at sanguis.xs4all.nl (Joost de Heer) Date: Sun, 27 Sep 2009 11:11:58 +0200 Subject: [Retros] MatPlus Message-ID: <4ABF2C5E.6030103@sanguis.xs4all.nl> Matplus 35 (Autumn 2009) has been released with several retro's in it. http://www.milanvel.net/pub/MP35.pdf For older issues, see http://www.matplus.net/ on the left side. Joost From mvalg at velucchi.it Mon Sep 28 16:19:35 2009 From: mvalg at velucchi.it (mvalg at velucchi.it) Date: Mon, 28 Sep 2009 22:19:35 +0200 Subject: [Retros] help Message-ID: <29b3a48a0909281319s45d89b80oa1d9988ac6b869eb@mail.gmail.com> help -- best .marioV -- Mario Velucchi via Emlia, 106 I-56121 Pisa ? ITALY mvalg at velucchi.it _ www.velucchi.it _ skype:velucchi phone +39.3487366652 +39.050502400 _ fax +39.06233238786 +39.05061431159 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Software Analyst and Developer _ Computer Mathematician Combinatorics _ Number Theory _ Cryptography _ Theory of Algorithms Coder - Database Coder - Web Coder _ Windows and Linux Environment Maths & Chess Columnist and Author _ Problem Solver Detective of Mysterious or Inexplicable Facts _ Photographer -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- www.velucchi.it/enjoyments www.velucchi.it/eBrain www.velucchi.it/dBlog -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From juha_saukkola at hotmail.com Wed Sep 30 07:35:10 2009 From: juha_saukkola at hotmail.com (Juha Saukkola) Date: Wed, 30 Sep 2009 14:35:10 +0300 Subject: [Retros] help In-Reply-To: <29b3a48a0909281319s45d89b80oa1d9988ac6b869eb@mail.gmail.com> References: <29b3a48a0909281319s45d89b80oa1d9988ac6b869eb@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: Help in what? difficult problems? From: mvalg at velucchi.it Date: Mon, 28 Sep 2009 22:19:35 +0200 To: retros at janko.at Subject: [Retros] help help -- best .marioV -- Mario Velucchi via Emlia, 106 I-56121 Pisa ? ITALY mvalg at velucchi.it _ www.velucchi.it _ skype:velucchi phone +39.3487366652 +39.050502400 _ fax +39.06233238786 +39.05061431159 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Software Analyst and Developer _ Computer Mathematician Combinatorics _ Number Theory _ Cryptography _ Theory of Algorithms Coder - Database Coder - Web Coder _ Windows and Linux Environment Maths & Chess Columnist and Author _ Problem Solver Detective of Mysterious or Inexplicable Facts _ Photographer -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- www.velucchi.it/enjoyments www.velucchi.it/eBrain www.velucchi.it/dBlog -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: