[Retros] Eric's off-topic idea

[Nicolas Dupont]

Noam said:


> I had assumed that [...] pawns

> aren't quite royal because an attack on the pawn can be defended by

> giving check or pinning the attacker



> So a pawn is a royal piece that loses its royalhood upon promotion?


That's why Yefim is right, a set of conventions has to be precisely stated!

Btw, Jonathan's pj is not exact, as eg 3.Nf3 and 4.c4 can be  
interverted. If we adopt the conventions that kings and pawns (and  
only pawns, not promoted units) are royal, here is a new try:


1.d3 e6
2.Bg5 Be7
3.Bf6+ gxf6
4.h4 f5+
5.h5 Nf6+
6.h6 Nh5
7.Nh3 Ng7
8.hxg7 h5
9.g8=N Kf8 (g8=B would give check to Pf7)
10.d4 Kxg8