[Retros] rights & ocassions /answering Andrew
Joost de Heer
joost at sanguis.xs4all.nl
Wed May 14 06:40:37 EDT 2014
This is similar to a few Plaksin compositions. He has several
draw-compositions in which white castles, thereby proving that more than
50 moves without capture, pawn move or castling have occurred. Because the
retraction takes more than 50 moves, castling was illegal in the first
place, if you interpret the 50-move rule as an 'applies immediately' rule
in chess composition.
On Wed, May 14, 2014 12:25, Valery Liskovets wrote:
> Hi Roberto,
> Well, let me clarify my intention (without technical details).
> Of course I mean the 50-m. rule. In a), castling is still achievable in
> possible is 9(50).Bxh2! K~ and 10.0-0. Thus, the first switchback
> Ke1-~-e1 does
> change the position. In b), castling has been lost ultimately: 9(50).Bf4
> Thus, one might declare that already the first switchback Ke1-~-e1
> changes nothing!
> Practical possibility vs technical ("bureaucratic" in your terms) one!?
> Roberto Osorio wrote on May 11:
> Your idea sound interesting but I'm not getting it totally. It seems to
> be connected with the
> 50 moves rule (I understand 41 complete moves, not single moves), but it
> seems that the
> answer is just "complete the 50 moves", since the bK.
> Moreover, I'm ashamed but I'm not getting the difference with wBc1->a1.
> Could you explain a bit please?
> Guus Rol wrote:
>> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
>> From: <liskov at im.bas-net.by <mailto:liskov at im.bas-net.by>>
>> Date: Thu, May 8, 2014 at 3:49 PM
>> Subject: To FORWARD: Re: [Retros] rights & occasions
>> To: Guus Rol grol33 at gmail.com <mailto:grol33 at gmail.com>
>> Hi retrofriends, Guus,
>> Generally I share Guus' attitude to the future impact...
>> To illustrate, returning to Roberto's starting challenge,
>> let's consider a more sophisticated, and more doubtful, example:
>> W to move, the same question for wK (how many sequential two move
>> could be legally performed by him) under the following precondition:
>> the last pawn's move was made 42 moves ago (or, instead:
>> last 41 moves were made by pieces, not pawns).
>> b) wBc1->a1. Should the Rules ensure distinct answers?
>> Valery Liskovets
> Retros mailing list
> Retros at janko.at
More information about the Retros