Circe: Captured units (not Ks) reappear on their game-array squares, of the same colour in the case of pieces, on the file of capture in the case of pawns, and on the promotion square of the file of capture in the case of fairy pieces. If the rebirth square is occupied the capture is normal.
Neutral piece: Belongs to whichever side chooses to use it. It can therefore be moved or captured by White or Black, and in Circe it is reborn according to capture. A King may not be moved onto a square controlled by a neutral piece, because of self-check.
No.1181Ralf Krätschmer &
Franz Pachl Germany original – 12.01.2017
Principles Economy of the material in the HS are not unanimous. How to evaluate the fact that the black officers Bc8/Ra8 are not involved in checkmate?
Our remarkable Wcct-9 entry (HS#4) was placed lower due to the fact that a white piece in each phase was idle. All black men were necessary. The general view seems to be that both black and white economy is desirable.
Georgy Evseev
January 13, 2017 08:36
It is more or less OK, as this piece makes mating move. I much more dislike WSd8 in first solution.
I had not intended to write that the problem of superfluous officers. I just wanted to open a debate on economics HS, to which there are at least three basic positions: as in selfmates as in helpmates and something in between …
Nikola Predrag
January 14, 2017 19:48
A simplified reasoning might be that there’s help-play where Black mates White in his n-th move but after being forced, since White has “almost (stale)mated” Black in White’s n-th move.
So, white pieces should contribute to White’s n-th move and black pieces should contribute to Black’s n-th move, respecting the same principles as for the white pieces in a helpmate.
Of course, a deeper reasoning will consider various specifics of the genre but I’m afraid, even more rigorousness might be required for the general principles of hs#.
However, many composers gladly misuse hs# for violating the principles of classical stipulations.
Georgy Evseev
January 15, 2017 11:14
The experience of 9th WCCT and later tourneys generally shows that _all pieces must be necessary in all phase in the course of two last half-moves_, but such use may be of any kind – not necessarily participating in mating position itself.
Ladislav Packa
January 15, 2017 11:33
To Nikola and Georgy:
Of course both of you are right – if it considers this a general statement. But the devil is in the details. I will give three examples, which I have my own opinion, but they are assessed differently.
1. Black officer blocking the square next to the black king does not participate in mate.
2. White officer in a position zz before checkmate blocks the black pawn.
3. Black officer does not play in mate but in zz position makes (dual avoidance) tempo move.
1. Generally, considered OK.
2. OK, if the block is active. And the pin of black piece is OK even if passive.
3. Depends on specific problem.
Generally, I think there are some beautiful ideas that cannot be shown without extraneous material. And there are some “normal” things which I consider anti-esthetic. For example, I generally dislike hs# problems when white king is already incarcerated and there is only a need to force a check.
Nikola Predrag
January 16, 2017 21:20
Well Laco, as a very general principle, your 3 examples are not desirable in any genre.
However, the completeness of a problem might show the weaknesses as being of minor significance or even as being deeply thematic.
In No.1181, the idle bB/bR (in the respective mates) start in the rank of one and the same bP which promotes and makes all black moves.
The types of promotions are well justified, as being needed for both blocking and capturing the neutral piece.
Idleness in the very end is certainly not justified, but we must remember that actually, the single black Pawn makes the complete black play.
In every genre “there are some beautiful ideas that cannot be shown without extraneous material”.
So, in principle, these ideas are simply not suitable for the certain genre (or vice versa).
The principles of a system come out of the nature of that system. Corrupting a whole system to suit some idea is a step towards nonsense.
The various genres should apply various, but mutually well balanced criteria, if they coexist under the same roof of chess composition.
Principles Economy of the material in the HS are not unanimous. How to evaluate the fact that the black officers Bc8/Ra8 are not involved in checkmate?
Our remarkable Wcct-9 entry (HS#4) was placed lower due to the fact that a white piece in each phase was idle. All black men were necessary. The general view seems to be that both black and white economy is desirable.
It is more or less OK, as this piece makes mating move. I much more dislike WSd8 in first solution.
I had not intended to write that the problem of superfluous officers. I just wanted to open a debate on economics HS, to which there are at least three basic positions: as in selfmates as in helpmates and something in between …
A simplified reasoning might be that there’s help-play where Black mates White in his n-th move but after being forced, since White has “almost (stale)mated” Black in White’s n-th move.
So, white pieces should contribute to White’s n-th move and black pieces should contribute to Black’s n-th move, respecting the same principles as for the white pieces in a helpmate.
Of course, a deeper reasoning will consider various specifics of the genre but I’m afraid, even more rigorousness might be required for the general principles of hs#.
However, many composers gladly misuse hs# for violating the principles of classical stipulations.
The experience of 9th WCCT and later tourneys generally shows that _all pieces must be necessary in all phase in the course of two last half-moves_, but such use may be of any kind – not necessarily participating in mating position itself.
To Nikola and Georgy:
Of course both of you are right – if it considers this a general statement. But the devil is in the details. I will give three examples, which I have my own opinion, but they are assessed differently.
1. Black officer blocking the square next to the black king does not participate in mate.
2. White officer in a position zz before checkmate blocks the black pawn.
3. Black officer does not play in mate but in zz position makes (dual avoidance) tempo move.
1. Generally, considered OK.
2. OK, if the block is active. And the pin of black piece is OK even if passive.
3. Depends on specific problem.
Generally, I think there are some beautiful ideas that cannot be shown without extraneous material. And there are some “normal” things which I consider anti-esthetic. For example, I generally dislike hs# problems when white king is already incarcerated and there is only a need to force a check.
Well Laco, as a very general principle, your 3 examples are not desirable in any genre.
However, the completeness of a problem might show the weaknesses as being of minor significance or even as being deeply thematic.
In No.1181, the idle bB/bR (in the respective mates) start in the rank of one and the same bP which promotes and makes all black moves.
The types of promotions are well justified, as being needed for both blocking and capturing the neutral piece.
Idleness in the very end is certainly not justified, but we must remember that actually, the single black Pawn makes the complete black play.
In every genre “there are some beautiful ideas that cannot be shown without extraneous material”.
So, in principle, these ideas are simply not suitable for the certain genre (or vice versa).
The principles of a system come out of the nature of that system. Corrupting a whole system to suit some idea is a step towards nonsense.
The various genres should apply various, but mutually well balanced criteria, if they coexist under the same roof of chess composition.