[Retros] DR vs forced ep: what rule predominates?

[Rol, Guus]

This one is OK. Standard "AP after Keym" but no dead reckoning involved.
The stalemate/mate however play the same role that I described for the
"dead positions". As game terminators, they prevent the castling move
from manifesting and thereby prevent the justification of the e.p. move.

Guus Rol.


-----Oorspronkelijk bericht-----
Van: retros-bounces at janko.at [mailto:retros-bounces at janko.at] Namens
Joost de Heer
Verzonden: woensdag 29 augustus 2007 21:44
Aan: The Retrograde Analysis Mailing List
Onderwerp: Re: [Retros] DR vs forced ep: what rule predominates?

I just remembered that something like this already exists:

8068 - Alexander Kukush
Feenschach 135
4kb1r/4ppp1/4Q3/6P1/4PK2/8/6P1/8
5+6. Mate in 1 (AP, PRA)

Black tries to castle, thus proving it's possible that he didn't move 
last. But: 1. .. fe6 2. g6 e5 3. Kg5 e6 4. g4!! and now is 4. .. Be7 
mate, and other bishop moves result in stalemate. So black can't prove 
he didn't move last. So mate in 1 with 1. Qc8#.

Joost
_______________________________________________
Retros mailing list
Retros at janko.at
http://www.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/retros