Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 07:46:51 03/07/02
Go up one level in this thread
On March 07, 2002 at 00:27:53, Terry McCracken wrote: >On March 06, 2002 at 23:48:43, Robert Hyatt wrote: > >>On March 06, 2002 at 21:29:05, Terry McCracken wrote: >> >>>On March 06, 2002 at 20:53:25, Jason Williamson wrote: >>> >>>>Just a little point...this is the Computer Chess Club, not a general chess >>>>forum...hence if you don't put the correct fen string in, then its difficult to >>>>use the position with computers. >>>> >>>>JW >>> >>>Sounds lazy to me:o) >>> >>>I've been told the FEN was wrong and ok. So that doesn't help much! >>> >>>If the FEN is not ok repost my diagram with the correct FEN! >>> >>>Anyways the "Beauty" of this problem has been lost in all this quibbling:( >>> >>>Terry >> >> >>The problem is there is _no_ "correct FEN" for a position with a partially- >>completed move. FEN does not allow nor consider such a thing, for good >>reason. How would you indicate what piece is "off the board and 'en route'"?? > >That's not the point! But to you that is all there is to it, and that's that. >It's a brilliant problem, that's the point! > >Terry It's a "brilliant problem" to give someone a position that is _wrong_ and then expect them to solve it? As a diagram in a chess book, it makes sense because such diagrams never tell whether white/black can castle or not. But when you post a FEN position description, it _does_ give that information. In fact, it _must_ according to the FEN specification. That was _my_ point...
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.