Author: Miguel A. Ballicora
Date: 11:46:13 03/06/02
Go up one level in this thread
On March 06, 2002 at 13:14:11, Dann Corbit wrote: >On March 06, 2002 at 13:04:29, Miguel A. Ballicora wrote: > >>On March 06, 2002 at 11:56:02, Terry McCracken wrote: >> >>>On March 06, 2002 at 11:30:38, Heiner Marxen wrote: >>> >>>>On March 06, 2002 at 11:20:17, Terry McCracken wrote: >>>> >>>>>[D]8/8/8/8/8/6P1/6k1/4KR1R w >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>Mate in 3 >>>>> >>>>>Terry >>>> >>>>Yes, clever indeed, but only if you add the king side castling right for white. >>>>Then: >>>> >>>> Rf4 Kxg3 O-O Kh3 R1f3# >>>> Kxh1 Kf2 Kh2 Rh4# >>>> >>>>I like it :-) >>>> >>>>Cheers, >>>>Heiner >>> >>>Yes, clever indeed, but only if you add the king side castling right for white. >>> >>>That's the point, you _must_ assume when given a problem when the King is on >>>it's initial square along with it's Rook or Rooks that 0-0 or 0-0-0 is >>>permissible. >> >>You do not have to assume anything, the information is already in the statement >>of the problem. You give the position without telling anything about castling, >>it is not said that it is possible, it is not said that is impossible. >>The fact that is informed that THERE IS a mate in 3 already determines that >>castling on the king side _MUST_ be possible. This is not a trick, the >>information is there. > >It is an error in the FEN/EPD string then. If they want to do something like >that, they should specify it in the problem, or perhaps do something like this: > >8/8/8/8/8/6P1/6k1/4KR1R w ? ? Sure, but In this case the poster gave (it is in the top of this message) 8/8/8/8/8/6P1/6k1/4KR1R w That is quite similar to what you suggest. This forum allows to post incomplete EPDs (or FENs), which is ok for this kind of problem. Miguel
This page took 0 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.