[Retros] Natch 3.0 beta is out

Paulo Peccin ppeccin at gmail.com
Fri Jul 29 17:21:14 EDT 2016


Oh, found it... Nevermind!

I agree that it uses the same "trick" as my problem: blacks can't castle
anymore.

But the conclusion about "why" is much simpler than my problem.

Paulo


On Fri, Jul 29, 2016 at 6:16 PM, Paulo Peccin <ppeccin at gmail.com> wrote:

> Wow... About the first problem, can you explain to me why blacks cannot
> castle?
> (if its not too complicated, of course)
>
> Thanks,
> Paulo
>
>
> On Fri, Jul 29, 2016 at 5:01 PM, Paulo Peccin <ppeccin at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Oh, ok!
>>
>> Thanks
>>
>> On Fri, Jul 29, 2016 at 4:38 PM, Pascal Wassong <pascal.wassong at free.fr>
>> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> The links are correct, I tested them.  You should maybe copy/paste the
>>> whole link, instead of just clicking on it.  When I try to click on it,
>>> the last part, containing the problem number, is ignored.
>>>
>>> If it still doesn't work, go to the home page of the site
>>> http://pdb.dieschwalbe.de and enter the search expression, for example
>>> PROBID='P0002056'
>>>
>>> >>>>> "Paulo" == Paulo Peccin <ppeccin at gmail.com> writes:
>>>
>>>   Paulo> The links don't work!  Paulo
>>>
>>>   Paulo> On Fri, Jul 29, 2016 at 4:25 PM, Pascal Wassong
>>>   Paulo> <pascal.wassong at free.fr>
>>>   Paulo> wrote:
>>>
>>>   >> Paulo,
>>>   >>
>>>   >> I made a quick search in the online retrograde database.  I found a
>>>   >> mate in 2, where black cannot castle dating back to 1859.  By Sam
>>>   >> Loyd of course:
>>>   >> http://pdb.dieschwalbe.de/search.jsp?expression=PROBID='P0002056'
>>>   >>
>>>   >> Another problem, from year 1915, more in the spirit of your
>>>   >> problem, by another great composer of the retrograde analysis
>>>   >> earlier times, Thomas R. Dawson:
>>>   >> http://pdb.dieschwalbe.de/search.jsp?expression=PROBID='P0001326'
>>>   >>
>>>   >> I made the search from the page http://pdb.dieschwalbe.de/ and
>>>   >> entered the following expression : STIP='#2' and G='retro' and
>>>   >> K='Cant Castler'
>>>   >>
>>>   >> To learn how to write expressions, you should use the examples
>>>   >> page.  This database is the most accurate online base for
>>>   >> retrograde problems.
>>>   >>
>>>   >> Have fun exploring the database.  Pascal
>>>   >>
>>>   >>
>>>   >> >>>>> "Paulo" == Paulo Peccin <ppeccin at gmail.com> writes:
>>>   >>
>>>   Paulo> Ok, I see...  :-) I'm very newbie to all this retro analysis,
>>>   Paulo> and not very literate to chess in general.
>>>   >>
>>>   Paulo> That is a problem a friend of mine and I have invented, without
>>>   Paulo> even knowing there was an established "retro" type of problems.
>>>   >>
>>>   Paulo> I have written a solution with proof in english for the
>>>   Paulo> problem, but I am just trying to find a means to "prove the
>>>   Paulo> proof", with some kind of computer help...
>>>   >>
>>>   Paulo> Thanks anyway!  Paulo
>>>   >>
>>>   >>
>>>   >>
>>>   >>
>>>   Paulo> On Fri, Jul 29, 2016 at 3:45 PM, Pascal Wassong
>>>   Paulo> <pascal.wassong at free.fr>
>>>   Paulo> wrote:
>>>   >>
>>>   >> >> Hi again :)
>>>   >> >>
>>>   >> >> no, Natch cannot help.  This is a classical retro, not a
>>>   >> shortest >> proof game.  Natch is absolutely not done to answer
>>>   >> your question.
>>>   >> >>
>>>   >> >> The number of games to reach your position with the shortest
>>>   >> number >> of moves are by millions.  Even if Natch would give all
>>>   >> these games >> (which would take years), you still would have to
>>>   >> check that in all >> games, the bK has moved.
>>>   >> >>
>>>   >> >> It is easy (at least for me !) to see that in your position, the
>>>   >> bK >> must have moved, so the black castling is illegal in this
>>>   >> position.  >> The proof is not very complicated to write down in
>>>   >> plain english.  >> You should do it, as this is generally printed
>>>   >> with the solution.
>>>   >> >>
>>>   >> >> There are many problems of this kind already existing.  This is
>>>   >> a >> very old trick, maybe 100 years old.
>>>   >> >>
>>>   >> >> Pascal
>>>   >> >>
>>>   >> >>
>>>   >> >>
>>>   >> >> >>>>> "Paulo" == Paulo Peccin <ppeccin at gmail.com> writes:
>>>   >> >>
>>>   Paulo> That is my initial position:
>>>   Paulo> 4k2r/pp2p1p1/P7/4Np2/1B4Q1/P2NP1n1/1PbP3q/K2R3R
>>>   >> >>
>>>   Paulo> The idea is to prove that the Black King has moved and cannot
>>>   Paulo> castle anymore.  Can Natch help in any means?
>>>   >> >>
>>>   Paulo> Thanks,
>>>   >> >>
>>>   >> >>
>>>   Paulo> On Fri, Jul 29, 2016 at 3:25 PM, Pascal Wassong
>>>   Paulo> <pascal.wassong at free.fr>
>>>   Paulo> wrote:
>>>   >> >>
>>>   >> >> >> Hi Paulo,
>>>   >> >> >>
>>>   >> >> >> Natch is absolutely not done to solve this kind of problems.
>>>   >> It >> >> will take way too much time, and spit out way too much >>
>>>   >> solutions.
>>>   >> >> >>
>>>   >> >> >> Checking if your initial position is legal is easy for
>>>   >> anybody >> used >> to solve retrograde problems.  Finding the
>>>   >> shortest proof >> game to >> your position is probably not
>>>   >> interesting at all.  About >> 80 or 100 >> years ago, this was
>>>   >> sometimes done to show that a >> position is >> legal.  Nowadays,
>>>   >> nobody does it anymore.
>>>   >> >> >>
>>>   >> >> >> If you intend to publish your problem, the section editor
>>>   >> where >> you >> will send it will be able to tell you if your
>>>   >> position is >> legal or >> not.
>>>   >> >> >>
>>>   >> >> >> Pascal
>>>   >> >> >>
>>>   >> >> >>
>>>   >> >> >> >>>>> "Paulo" == Paulo Peccin <ppeccin at gmail.com> writes:
>>>   >> >> >>
>>>   Paulo> Its for a problem I invented. Its a "mate in 2" problem that
>>>   Paulo> requires retro analysis, and I want to check if the starting
>>>   Paulo> position is really reachable in a normal valid game. So I don't
>>>   Paulo> really know how many moves it would require to get there. I
>>>   Paulo> want to find the minimum number of moves possible.
>>>   >> >> >>
>>>   Paulo> Thanks, Paulo
>>>   >> >> >>
>>>   >> >> >>
>>>   Paulo> On Fri, Jul 29, 2016 at 3:03 PM, Pascal Wassong
>>>   Paulo> <pascal.wassong at free.fr>
>>>   Paulo> wrote:
>>>   >> >> >>
>>>   >> >> >> >> Hello,
>>>   >> >> >> >>
>>>   >> >> >> >> thank you for using iNatch and Natch !
>>>   >> >> >> >>
>>>   >> >> >> >> For iNatch, the version 0.7 has been created for 32 bits
>>>   >> >> >> machines, >> this is a bit outdated.  I suggest using the
>>>   >> previous >> >> version >> 0.6.2, which is a full java version,
>>>   >> independant from >> 32 >> bits or 64 >> bits.  Many users (me
>>>   >> included) prefer the >> 0.6.2 >> version.
>>>   >> >> >> >>
>>>   >> >> >> >> For Natch, you must provide the number of moves.  It is >>
>>>   >> strange >> to >> want to try Natch on a position without knowing >>
>>>   >> the minimum >> number >> of moves needed to reach it.  You could >>
>>>   >> test the position >> while >> increasing the number of moves at >>
>>>   >> each try.
>>>   >> >> >> >>
>>>   >> >> >> >> Best wishes, Pascal
>>>   >> >> >> >>
>>>   >> >> >> >>
>>>   >> >> >> >>
>>>   >> >> >> >> >>>>> "Paulo" == Paulo Peccin <ppeccin at gmail.com> writes:
>>>   >> >> >> >>
>>>   Paulo> Tried to run iNatch, but it does not start in my machine. Java8
>>>   Paulo> installed.  The logs say:
>>>   >> >> >> >>
>>>   Paulo> !ENTRY org.eclipse.osgi 4 0 2016-07-29 14:45:04.760 !MESSAGE
>>>   Paulo> Application error !STACK 1 java.lang.UnsatisfiedLinkError: no
>>>   Paulo> swt-win32-3320 or swt-win32 in swt.library.path,
>>>   Paulo> java.libary.path or the jar file
>>>   >> >> >> >>
>>>   Paulo> Also, can I use Natch to find a solution to a position, but I
>>>   Paulo> don't know how many moves it would take to get to that
>>>   Paulo> position?
>>>   >> >> >> >>
>>>   Paulo> Thanks, Paulo
>>>   >> >> >> >>
>>>   Paulo> On Fri, Jul 29, 2016 at 1:46 PM, Pascal Wassong
>>>   Paulo> <pascal.wassong at free.fr>
>>>   Paulo> wrote:
>>>   >> >> >> >>
>>>   >> >> >> >> >> Hello all,
>>>   >> >> >> >> >>
>>>   >> >> >> >> >> 19 years after the first version, 7 years after the
>>>   >> latest >> >> >> version, >> a new version of Natch is out.  It is
>>>   >> version 3.0 >> beta.  >> >> You can >> download it from
>>>   >> http://Natch.free.fr .
>>>   >> >> >> >> >>
>>>   >> >> >> >> >> Previous version already computed the order of some
>>>   >> moves.  >> >> This >> >> was used to eliminate position having
>>>   >> cycles in it.  >> For >> example >> >> Pa2-a8=N-b6*Pa7 and Pa7xb6.
>>>   >> These move orders >> found >> for a >> position >> are now used
>>>   >> when searching for the >> moves.  >> For >> example, if black >>
>>>   >> must play Rh8-e8-e3-c3 and >> white >> Pe2-e4, the >> wPe2 won't be
>>>   >> allowed >> to move before the >> black >> rook arrived at >> c3.
>>>   >> This improvement >> increase the >> speed of >> resolution of many
>>>   >> >> problems, and makes the >> >> --watch (-k for >> short) preaty
>>>   >> useless.
>>>   >> >> >> >> >>
>>>   >> >> >> >> >> Many more move orders are also found.
>>>   >> >> >> >> >>
>>>   >> >> >> >> >> A bug has been corrected, where some solutions where
>>>   >> not >> >> found.
>>>   >> >> >> >> >>
>>>   >> >> >> >> >> A bug has been corrected on Mac, which made the program
>>>   >> >> crash >> >> when >> the hash-tables where full.  I was surprised
>>>   >> to >> learn >> about >> this >> problem so late.
>>>   >> >> >> >> >>
>>>   >> >> >> >> >> There are also minor changes in the output file and
>>>   >> when >> >> using >> the >> visual option.
>>>   >> >> >> >> >>
>>>   >> >> >> >> >> More details about this new version are available in
>>>   >> the >> NEWS >> >> file >> available when you download the beta
>>>   >> version.
>>>   >> >> >> >> >>
>>>   >> >> >> >> >> There were many bugs in the numerous alpha version
>>>   >> while >> >> >> developing >> this 3.0 version, which have been
>>>   >> found by the >> >> >> testers, mainly >> Michel Caillaud and
>>>   >> Thierry Le Gleuher.  >> Thanks >> >> to them and to the >> other
>>>   >> testers.
>>>   >> >> >> >> >>
>>>   >> >> >> >> >> There may still be bugs in this version.  If you find
>>>   >> one, >> >> don't >> >> hesitate to send it to me.  The informations
>>>   >> needed >> >> are: - the >> >> proof game, being as short as
>>>   >> possible, that >> >> reproduces the bug; >> - >> the expected
>>>   >> solution; - the number of >> >> the position where the >> bug >>
>>>   >> occurs, if needed; - a clear >> >> description of what is going >>
>>>   >> wrong.
>>>   >> >> >> >> >>
>>>   >> >> >> >> >> The precompiled version for windows is a 64 bits
>>>   >> version.  >> I >> >> could >> also prepare a 32 bits windows
>>>   >> version, if enough >> >> people >> are >> interested.
>>>   >> >> >> >> >>
>>>   >> >> >> >> >> Happy composing, Pascal >> >> >> >>
>>>   >> _______________________________________________ Retros mailing list
>>>   >> >> >> >> >> Retros at janko.at >> >> >>
>>>   >> https://pairlist1.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/retros
>>>   >> >> >> >> >>
>>>   >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ Retros >>
>>>   >> mailing >> list >> Retros at janko.at >> >>
>>>   >> https://pairlist1.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/retros
>>>   >> >> >> >>
>>>   >> >> >> _______________________________________________ Retros
>>>   >> mailing >> list >> Retros at janko.at >>
>>>   >> https://pairlist1.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/retros
>>>   >> >> >>
>>>   >> >> _______________________________________________ Retros mailing
>>>   >> list >> Retros at janko.at
>>>   >> https://pairlist1.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/retros
>>>   >> >>
>>>   >> _______________________________________________ Retros mailing list
>>>   >> Retros at janko.at https://pairlist1.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/retros
>>>   >>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Retros mailing list
>>> Retros at janko.at
>>> https://pairlist1.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/retros
>>>
>>
>>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://pairlist1.pair.net/pipermail/retros/attachments/20160729/2a84533f/attachment-0001.html>


More information about the Retros mailing list