[Retros] linguistic hole

[andrew buchanan]

Hi Andrey,

Thanks for reminding me of Roberto's classification. (and Hi Roberto!) I definitely like the idea of a rigorous basis for naming. Apart from this helping composers, it means that problem databases can automatically keep track of certain features of problems. I will read through Roberto's work later.

But in the mean time, I need to ask if you agree precisely with my suggested definition of Phoenx (& "Horcrux" or whatever). To recap:
   > When a promotion occurs, it is into one of 5 types (there are 2 "flavours of bishop"). 
   > If that type results in the number of pieces of that type still being within the limit (2 for R,N; 1 for Q,B,B'), then the promotion is a Phoenix. 
   > If the number of pieces of that type would exceed the limit, then the promotion is a "Horcrux". 

If not, please propose a definition which you prefer.

Assuming that you do agree, then are you implying that in order for a promotion to be a post-Phoenix, it must also be a Phoenix in its own right?

- If not, then all you are saying is that can one have X promotions to the same piece, and by the way the first one was a Phoenix.
This seems not much different from the challenge of just having X promotions to the same piece, to be honest.

- If you do agree, then it's definitely a very interesting challenge, because one has to eliminate pieces prior to each promotion in order to keep the Phoenix criterion going.
But in this case, we don't need the term "post-Phoenix". The challenge can just be "X Phoenixes - maximize X.", which is sweet and terse.

(By the way, I have replaced "N" by "X" in your arguments, because N can be knight. Of course, the idea that S means knight to some people in English problem notation is just a weird affectation - I couldn't believe it when I heard that this is because N is reserved for Nightrider.) The analogy that comes to mind is:

Q: Why don't you keep you coat on the hook by the front door?
A: Because I need the hook once a year for my Father Christmas costume.

All the best,
Andy.



________________________________
From: afretro <afretro at yandex.ru>
To: andrew buchanan <andrew at anselan.com>; The Retrograde Analysis Mailing List <retros at janko.at>
Sent: Thu, January 21, 2010 11:43:54 AM
Subject: Re: [Retros] linguistic hole


Dear Andy,
 

> Niklorf and Niknorp would also be nice to have at some time

 
Thanks for reminding me of the “reverse family names” game played by “kids on the block” some 40 years ago; I haven’t been referred to as “Niklorf” ever since.
 
Dear all,
 
I feel we also need a special term for (multiple) “post-Phenixes. For example it can be quite a challenge for SPG-specialists to present a record for the following concept:
a) an original piece X is captured;
b) N pawns of the same color are promoted to X; the first one is a Phenix; all the others are “post-Phenixes.”
 
What is the maximum for N?
 
A SPG answering that question could be a FIDE Album level problem.
 
Yours,
Andrey Frolkin
 
P.S. I would also like to remind the retro community of Roberto Osorio’s classification presented in his 2008 message:
 
Hi,
 
I think this would be a proper time to unify and agree some terminology.
Many of the disussed terms are related to homesquares and promotion squares.
 
This recalls me my first year in the Chemical Engineering faculty (70s!). It was the time when the terminology for organic chemistry (a nightmare) started to be "rational", i.e., names that describe its subject in a logical way destinated to replace the old empirical names.
 
The propossal that Andrey Frolkin and I presented in our article "There is no place like home" (using homesquares in SPGs), Strategems oct 2007, shows a clear analogy with this; the difference is that we did not pretended to replace the existing names (for instance, Pronkin) but to stablish a theorical base that contain all this tricks logically connected to few basic concepts.
 
* Homebase (hb): a piece standing on a square that corresponds to this piece TYPE in the initial array.
 
* Homecircuit (hc): a piece standing on its TRUE homesquare
 
So, what's a hb-non-hc piece?: An impostor. A piece pretending to be the true square's owner (Pronkin, sibling).
 
And what's a hc-non-hb piece?: A "Pawn/officer Rundlauf", from homesquare to promotion and back to homesquare. In this case the homesquare generates a "meta-homesquare" for any piece of the same type as the promoted one (say, if the f2 pawn promotes to a knight and the b1 knight is standing on f2, then it's a sort of "meta-impostor"; we named it as e-metasibling.
 
Complementary, the promotion squares are meta-homesquares.
 
* Meta-homebase (meta-hb): a piece standing on  the promotion square of a piece of the same type and color.
 
* Meta-homecircuit (meta-hc): a piece standing on its promotion square.
 
So, what's a meta-(hb-non-hc)?: an Antipronkin
 
In addition, there is the Stationary condition (stationary is a piece that did not move; meta-stationary is a piece that did not move after promotion) and the "phantom" condition (a piece captured on its thematic square).
 
What's a meta-stationary phantom?: a Schnoebelen What's a meta-(hc-non stationary) piece? a Gianni Donatti 50th JT trick.
 
And so on. 
(Roberto Osorio)

20.01.10, 17:16, "andrew buchanan" <andrew at anselan.com>:


Glad some people are finding it an interesting topic.

>

>Surely Otto if Phoenixes appear in HP, then there *must* be more people who know what a Phoenix is than a Horcrux?

>

>But I guess for me the telling argument is that J.K.Rowling wrote about the best fantasy chess game since "Alice through the Looking Glass". Tolkein did not write about chess. And "Alice chess" certainly exists. Surely Rowling deserves to be immortalized for her action, through the only immortal canon that really counts - namely chess problem terminology :D.

>

>Xineohp is certainly nice (it wasn't me that suggested it, as someone asserted earlier), and it is even nearly pronouncible. Niklorf and Niknorp would also be nice to have at some time... but reversal of an existing word is a bit of a passive option, when something metaphorically much more apt has been identified.

>

>Will Rowling still be known in 50 years? Will the human race still exist at that point? Does it matter? Do many people read Longfellow these days, and does that stop us from enjoying the term Excelsior. (The poem reminds me of Otzi the Iceman.)

>

>So here's how it would work. When a promotion occurs, it is into one of 5 types (there are 2 "flavours of bishop"). If that type results in the number of pieces of that type still being within the limit (2 for R,N; 1 for Q,B,B'), then the promotion is a Phoenix. If the number of pieces of that type would exceed the limit, then the promotion is what to a "Horcrux". Note that a Horcrux is a darker concept than a Phoenix, because a Horcrux brings us, at least at that stage in the game, in a state of violation of the promoted material convention. Blood must usually be spilled, mark my words, before the game is out! A Phoenix has no such baggage.

>

>And this concept is completely independent of the notion of Ceriani-Frolkin-ness. Phoenix/"Horcrux" is determined at the moment of promotion. Ceriani-Frolkin-ness is obviously assigned at elimination. A promoted piece is determined "parvenu" only at the end of the game, if it has failed achieve C-F status. (Though I am now less sure than I was that we actually need this term.) It's also at the end of the game that we determine the violation of otherwise of the (non-thematics) promoted material convention.

>

>If someone wants to organize a vote then let's go for these, but in the mean time I have certainly been shown terms that I could live with.

>

>A related term which troubles me is Pronkin. According to wikipedia, "a piece apparently standing on its initial square may turn out to actually be a promoted pawn (Pronkin theme)". Alternatively on Peter Wong's excellent pages http://www.chessville.com/Wong/SPG1.htm: "the substitution of a captured piece on its initial square by a promoted counterpart". So does the ousted piece have to be captured? Does it have to be captured at the time when the promoted piece occupies that square? Surely the Pronkin trespass can be displayed in the middle of the proof game - it's not just at the end when it matters. The capturing can be applauded through other mechanisms. If WNb1 is captured, and WNg1 goes to b1, and a parvenu occupies WNg1, then does this show the Pronkin theme or not? I think it should.

>

>Bottom line: I think the fundamental thing about Pronkin is the trespass. This can be shown multiple times during the course of a game. The question of capturing in some definitions is a distraction, and can be applauded through other metrics that we have. Comments?

>

>Cheers,

>Andy.

>

>

>

>----- Original Message ----

>From: Noam Elkies 

>To: otto at janko.at; retros at janko.at

>Sent: Wed, January 20, 2010 4:05:01 PM

>Subject: Re: [Retros] linguistic hole

>

>"Otto Janko" writes:

>

>> Some comments to Horcrux and HP:

>

>> Alain: "and we can't expect it [Horcrux] to be as widely known as greek

>> mythology [Phoenix]" -- I am pretty sure that there are more people in the

>> world who know what a Horcrux is than people who know what a Phoenix is.

>

>May be true now, but in 50 years?...

>

>> Kevin: "recent children's book" -- IMHO Harry Potter has the same status as

>> "The Lord of the Rings". [...] HP becomes a fantasy epos for any age.

>

>It's clearly aiming for that status, but it's too early to tell whether

>HP will attain it. Anyway it might not be a comparison you want to make:

>I don't think fairy chess has a Shadowfax or Ringwraith, despite several

>decades' head start for LOTR.

>

>On the third hand, the name Circe has impeccable Classical credentials,

>but the original Circe seems to have nothing to do with its fairy-chess

>usage; shouldn't _that_ have been called Phoenix?

>

>NDE

>_______________________________________________

>Retros mailing list

>Retros at janko.at

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

>

>_______________________________________________

>Retros mailing list

>Retros at janko.at

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

>

>


-- 
Здесь спама нет http://mail.yandex.ru/nospam/sign
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.pairlist.net/pipermail/retros/attachments/20100121/7a7fa8e3/attachment.htm>