[Retros] Fwd: Are the King and the Rook pieces or what?

[Rol, Guus]

Well, may be you are right, may be I should sober up my prose. I do hope
it is just my prose that you don't understand. 
 
I want to make the point that my approach to the FIDE rules is quite
different from that of most contributors to this list. I am resigned to
the fact that these rules are incomplete, imperfect and sometimes
ridiculous. Having established any such situation I always make an
attempt to improve the rule in a practical manner. Rules only seem
arbitrary in the eyes of those who are subject to them in playing a
game, but they are mostly based on some higher logical or creative
concept. To improve a rule one must therefore first identify the
underlying concept. So this is how I discuss the whole rule-field - 50%
content and 50% context.
 
By the way, I did address Roberto's indeed excellent point about article
4.4 in my first two responses. Concluding, I rate article 4.4 as
"ridiculous" since its citerium "showing intent to castle when such is
impossible" cannot be met in any reasonable way. The "bridge" metaphor
made that point convincingly. Concluding further, touching King and Rook
simultaneously should be treated no differently from touching a Queen
and Bishop simultaneously. That treats the issue, does it?
 
Guus Rol.

 


________________________________

Van: retros-bounces at janko.at [mailto:retros-bounces at janko.at] Namens
pastmaker at aol.com
Verzonden: dinsdag 29 januari 2008 1:28
Aan: retros at janko.at
Onderwerp: Re: [Retros] Fwd: Are the King and the Rook pieces or what?


 
I'm never sure that I fullly understand Guus's rich prose (which is not,
as he once modestly suggested, a matter of writing in a language other
than Dutch), but I venture a short reply.

I was not asking about what happens in a composition (such drama being a
little out of my compositional comfort zone), but only about the result
in a game under the FIDE rules.  I agree with Guus that the player who
declares his resignation simultaneously (and we simply must assume
simultaneity for this purpose - - that's not the issue here) with making
a checkmating move should lose the game under the FIDE rules.

My guess is that of those who care enough to answer the question, 50%
would say that the player lost by resignation, 50% that he won by
checkmate, and 50% that it should be a draw.

And none of this addresses Roberto's excellent point about the Rook.

Regards,
Tom


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.pairlist.net/pipermail/retros/attachments/20080129/dac5ee0b/attachment.htm>