[Retros] Castling temporarily changed and repetition of position

[Rol, Guus]

One might argue that this rule was designed very cleverly to not just
include regular chess but also fairy variants. Notably, in Circe, the
designations 'temporarily' (rook moved) and 'permanently' (king moved)
gain meaningful significance in separating the 2 flavours of "no
castling right". But I am afraid we are bestowing too much honor on the
FIDE lawmakers by attributing them with this degree of 'dimensional
awareness'. My guess would be that the wording refers to an old time
distinction between castling as a statutory right (a potential) and
castling as an executable right (immediate availability). In such a
context 'temporarily' could refer to a temporarily unavailable option to
castle and 'permanently' to an irreversible loss of that option. Even
so, it is still hard to see how this distinction carries any meaning in
the repetition rule.

Guus Rol.


-----Oorspronkelijk bericht-----
Van: retros-bounces at janko.at [mailto:retros-bounces at janko.at] Namens
Alain BROBECKER
Verzonden: woensdag 17 oktober 2007 12:12
Aan: retros at janko.at
Onderwerp: [Retros] Castling temporarily changed and repetition of
position


Dear retro-fans

I attended a formation for referees this WE, and we discussed over the
word "temporarily" in the draw by repetition article:


>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 a 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.

>

>Positions are not the same if a pawn that could have been captured en 

>passant can no longer in this manner be captured or if the right to 

>castle has been changed temporarily or permanently.


My view is that the word temporarily is superfluous since the case where
castling rights will change temporarily will never happen: with all
other pieces on the same positions and with the same move possibility,
if a castling is possible/impossible on one of the position, it will be
exactly the same in the repeated positions.

Or am i wrong?


Best regards, Alain



Alain Brobecker (abrobecker at yahoo.com) |_  _  _ |_
http://abrobecker.free.fr/             |_)(_|(_|| ) of  Arm's Tech

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 
_______________________________________________
Retros mailing list
Retros at janko.at
http://www.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/retros