[Retros] Fairy Conditions FW: Messigny 2013 results

Kevin Begley kevinjbegley at gmail.com
Fri Jul 5 07:59:24 EDT 2013

Interesting insight.

Perhaps it would help to divide rule-alterations into those which are
merely "constraints" (which merely limit the legality space), and those
which are "conditions" (which may, in some instances, expand the legality

Maybe the priority should default to the condition.

I do agree with the philosophy -- first, seek precise agreements on the
fundamental terms, then much of the mess will resolve itself.

However, you have a more fundamental problem to address, before you can
even seek a precise split between constraint/condition -- that is, we have
yet to agree on a precise definition for "fairy chess."
Nobody has yet managed a comprehensive definition, and I would submit to
you that the separation is purely artificial (it does not actually exist).

If you define fairy to be anything other than FIDE rules of chess, you have
to address the fact that FIDE-rules are not constant.

I've gone around and around with just about everybody on this, for years.
It has proven impossible to make any progress.
The term is deliberately kept artificial, in order to exploit certain
prejudices/advantages (especially vis-a-vis titles).

With no underlying logic to these false divisions -- it is impossible to
achieve a consensus for a sound foundation.
I have concluded that it must be easier to locate (or create) some
alternative means to express the problem form -- something which is founded
upon logical fundamentals, rather than a strict, misguided adherence to a
prejudiced favoritism.

I have likely composed my last chess problem -- despite a recent
publication in feenschach, which I had asked to have redacted (and the
editor agreed, many months ago -- I suppose that was forgotten).
Despite all the beauty that chess problems offer, I have lost all faith in
the endurance of this artform.

I would prefer to imagine that chess never existed, and instead focus on an
axiomatic problem environment, where elegance of statement is the ideal.

I have wandered out of Egypt.

On Fri, Jul 5, 2013 at 2:27 AM, Yoav Ben-Zvi <yoavbz97 at gmail.com> wrote:


> At a more basic level I wonder about the difference in the standard

> interpretation of the Maximummer condition as compared to Monochrome Chess.

> Maximummer is considered a restriction of the solution space, which can be

> attributed to one side or both, while Monochrome Chess is taken to be a

> modification of the rules and is generally applied to both sides. The

> practical difference lies in the answer to the question of whether a King

> can move into check when its capture is prohibited by the condition (in

> mating problems one might also ask if it is mate when the escape from check

> does not meet the condition). It seems to me opportunities could be opened

> by considering making use of the opposite interpretation for each condition

> which might be called "Monochrommer" (including White, Black or Double) and

> "Maximum Chess" (This was suggested many years ago and called

> "Ultra-Maximummer", see Anthony Dickins, A Guide to Fairy Chess, chapter on

> unorthodox stipulations).


> Yoav Ben-Zvi


> -----Original Message-----

> From: retros-bounces at janko.at [mailto:retros-bounces at janko.at] On Behalf

> Of

> Joost de Heer

> Sent: Friday, July 05, 2013 10:30 AM

> To: The Retrograde Analysis Mailing List

> Subject: Re: [Retros] Messigny 2013 results


> (Apologies, I know that the retro list probably isn't the best place to

> discuss fairy mess......)


> > Nicolas Dupont later showed me a Monochrome Chess definition that

> > explicitly mentions queen side castling (most others apparently don't

> > mention it). This definition says that queen side castling is illegal,

> > so I now think that it should be illegal,


> Just because one definition says it's illegal doesn't make it illegal.


> - In (Hyper)volage, the rook will not change colour after queenside

> castling

> - In monochrome, queenside castling is forbidden because the rook changes

> square colour


> So in one case it matters that the square colour changes, in the other it

> doesn't.


> - In Einstein, the rook will become a bishop after castling

> - In Antiandernach, the rook will not change colour after castling.

> - In Haan, castling leaves two holes


> So in some cases aftereffects are applied to the rook, in others they

> aren't.


> I'm starting to agree more and more with Kevin's 'fairy chess == mess'

> attitude....


> Joost

> _______________________________________________

> Retros mailing list

> Retros at janko.at

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


> -----

> No virus found in this message.

> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com

> Version: 2013.0.3345 / Virus Database: 3204/6463 - Release Date: 07/04/13


> _______________________________________________

> Retros mailing list

> Retros at janko.at

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


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.pairlist.net/pipermail/retros/attachments/20130705/832c74e6/attachment-0001.htm>

More information about the Retros mailing list