Author: Tony Werten
Date: 03:29:44 06/18/03
Go up one level in this thread
On June 17, 2003 at 20:34:46, Robert Hyatt wrote:
>On June 17, 2003 at 14:41:02, Ricardo Gibert wrote:
>
>>On June 17, 2003 at 13:06:20, Robert Hyatt wrote:
>>
>>>On June 17, 2003 at 12:45:03, Thomas Mayer wrote:
>>>
>>>>Hi Martin,
>>>>
>>>>[Event "Test game for Andreas"]
>>>>[Site "Virtually in my head"]
>>>>[Date "2003.06.17"]
>>>>[White "Left part of my head v31"]
>>>>[Black "Right part of my head v31"]
>>>>[Result "1/2-1/2"]
>>>>[TimeControl "endless"]
>>>>1. h3 h6 2. Rh2 Rh7 3. Rh1 Rh8 {in fact this is the first repetition, because
>>>>of changed castling rights, Quark would think that it is NO repetition}
>>>>
>>>>> This is definitely NO repetition because same position means same moving
>>>>> rights.
>>>>
>>>>just a note from the FIDE Chess laws book:
>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>9.2 The game is drawn, upon a correct claim by the player having the move, when
>>>>the same position, for at least the third time (not necessarily by sequential
>>>>repetition of moves)
>>>>
>>>>a) is about to appear, if he first writes his move on his scoresheet and
>>>>declares to the arbiter his intention to make this move, or
>>>>
>>>>b) has just appeared, and the player claiming the draw has the move.
>>>>
>>>>Positions as in (a) and (b) are considered the same, if the same player has the
>>>>move, pieces of the same kind and colour occupy the same squares, and the
>>>>possible moves of all the pieces of both players are the same.
>>>><<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
>>>>
>>>>so far it would mean that I am right...
>>>
>>>How. Re-read (b). Possible moves are the same. But castling is not possible
>>>in one. So how can that mean you are "right"???
>>
>>Good grief! Why didn't you read the rest of his post before responding? The key
>>words he used above that you seem to be ignoring are "so far", then he continues
>>to quote after the ">>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>" below.
>
>Why don't you read what I wrote?
>
>His "so far it would mean that I am right" was not correct.
>
>I have no idea why you don't follow that...
>
>It doesn't matter about the "so far". Because the statement to the "so far"
>is already wrong...
>
>
>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>Positions are not the same if a pawn that could have been captured en passant
>>>>can no longer be captured or if the right to castle has been changed temporarily
>>>>or permanently
>>>><<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
>>
>>from which he concludes 4 lines further down from here:
>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>but the next one declares that I am wrong... so all fine with me, because Quark
>>>>is doing it correctly... :)
>>
>>Where he includes what you have redundantly pointed out. Yes?
>
>Nope. At the point of his "so far" he is already wrong, which was all I was
>pointing out. The requirement "same moves" is enough. Castling status is
>not even a point in light of that since losing the right to castle changes the
>possible moves in a position...
Not so clear to me.
It would mean the positions are not the same since, in 5 moves I could play a4
(with your pawn on b4) wich gives you an ep right. OTOH I could play a3, wich
doesn't give you that right.
I dont see how this is different from " If I move the knight and bishop, I can
castle but after Rh1 I can't"
Tony
>
>
>>
>>>>
>>>>Greets, Thomas
This page took 0.01 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.