[Retros] linguistic hole

[Steve Dowd]

Clearly in direct mates it is more elegant for the original unit to be saced
before the promotee reappears.


Not always, and there is of course the German term "Vorausphenix", an idea I
have used in several h# and s#. Rolf Wiehagen also taught me the term
"Scottische Phenix" in relation to the Vorausphenix. I think that must be a
dig at the Scots proclivity to thriftiness, not sacking the piece until
after you already have one in pocket.

Guy Sobrecases once also noted to me that the theme "Ceriani-Frolkin" was
not well accepted outside of retros. But if a piece is promoted, only to be
sacrificed later, isn't that the theme?

By Vorausphenix and Ceriani-Frolkin in a non-retro, I'll use one of my own
examples:

SBD
Schach 2009

s#8


8/2P5/2pR1p2/5k2/4p3/2K3Q1/1RB5/8 w - - 0 1

1.Rb7 c5 2.Rd6-b6 c4 3.Rb2 Ke6 4.c7-c8Q+ Kd5 5.Qd7+ Kc5 6.Qe5+ fxe5 7.Rb6 e3
8.Qd4+ e5xd4#

Excuse me for any incorrect in my use of terms..........

Is there really value though, in having terms that differ? Shouldn't retros
and other forms of problem chess share the same terms?

SBD





On Sun, Jan 17, 2010 at 10:41 AM, Joost de Heer <joost at sanguis.xs4all.nl>wrote:


> (d) invent a new term

>>

>

> - Xineohp-promotion

> - Apprentice-promotion (will replace his master in the future)

> - Ashless phoenix-promotion

> - Doublette-promotion

>

> Joost

>

> _______________________________________________

> Retros mailing list

> Retros at janko.at

> http://www.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/retros

>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.pairlist.net/pipermail/retros/attachments/20100117/a7147f70/attachment.htm>