Hm, Be4-f3 is legal because f3 is not occupied by a piece and then the I imitates the move, moving…
Nicolas: You wrote: “Finally, you said that Chris’s definition is ok. Could you please explain why Be4-g2[Ih1] is illegal, although…
Nicolas, standard rules are one thing and Popeye or Winchloe could more or less convincingly obey them but they can…
For sure considering an Imitator as a piece would lead to great theoretical difficulties – for plenty of conditions the…
Your question has already been discussed a bit in my post Nov5 01:59. According to Popeye, your move is illegal…
I would not like to start a similar comprehensive debate as in the case of e.p. However imitator offers similar…
Nikola, your move 1.b7-b5/b6[Ib6/b7] a5*b6 ep.[Ic8] is logic according to your own point of view, which is that b7-b5 has…
A FUNDAMENTAL point is: An Imitator MOVES [in unison with a piece]. If this is born in mind at all…
OK, please open a thread, I'm clumsy with computer stuff. There will be probably many other questions about generalizing the…
Nicolas, the convincing logic is: 1.b7-b5[Ib6] a5*b6 ep.[Ic8] or more precisely: 1.b7-b5/b6[Ib6/b7] a5*b6 ep.[Ic8] since ep.capture determines that bP was…