[Retros] rights & ocassions /answering Andrew

Guus Rol grol33 at gmail.com
Mon May 19 07:08:40 EDT 2014

Hi Joost,

An answer to the serious part of your message :-)

This weekend, I found our national chess magazine in my mailbox. In it were
the upcoming changes in the FIDE rules. To my surprise (probably not yours,
I am backlogging)  I found more dramatic changes to the rules there,
including automatic draws. As of the 1st of july we will have 4
administrative draws: 3RC (repetitions claimed), 5RA (repetitions
automatic), 50MC (no-progress claimed) and 75MA (no-progress automatic).
The automations emphasize the need for FIDE to resolve this issue. It can
no longer just happen to the ministry of silly retro-composers, it can now
happen to them!

Assumig that FIDE did intend the dynamic future interpretation of castling
rights, I can see 4 ways to go:

1. Submit to the interpretation that castling rights do change by the
interference of e.g. 75MA or 5RA. This can lead to more repetitions whcih
most of us will feel is unjustified.

2. Change dynamic future rights evaluation back to static rights.

3. Declare that future castling rights are only evaluated on the first
occurence of a postion. They are considered the same on the second and
third occurrence, unless castling was lost by moving rook or king. This
amounts to a 2/3 retraction of the dynamic interpretation. The two
repetitions statically inherit the first evaluation..

4. As I suggested in a previous post, postulate that all instances of
administrative rules are transparent to one another. This is practically
the same as option 2 but also resolves other issues on interpreting
clashing administrative rules.

Guus Rol.

On Thu, May 15, 2014 at 8:11 PM, Joost de Heer <joost at sanguis.xs4all.nl>wrote:
> This still doesn't answer one of the questions: If all the paths towards
> the actual castling will result in a triggering of either the 50-move rule
> or the 3-fold repetition rule (which should be automatic in chess
> composition, since there is no one to claim), does the castling right exist
> or not?
>  Joost
> _______________________________________________
> Retros mailing list
> Retros at janko.at
> http://www.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/retros
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://one.pairlist.net/pipermail/retros/attachments/20140519/0c0e6e19/attachment.html>

More information about the Retros mailing list