09 Mar '08 06:03>
Black
White
It's White's move. Can White castle?
White
It's White's move. Can White castle?
Originally posted by JirakonSince castling is assumed legal unless otherwise provable, it's not necessary to stipulate whether the position is alive or dead. And I'm not sure why Rd1 is needed even with that stip.
Black
[fen]8/8/2Q1N3/3B4/2PP4/3Nk2P/2P5/B2RK2R[/fen]
White
It's White's move. Can White castle?
Originally posted by JirakonYou do, however, need to stipulate that the FIDE law about "dead" positions will be employed. This is usually indicated by the condition "Dead Reckoning".
castling is assumed legal unless otherwise provable
Not in this problem. Either prove that it's legal, or prove that it's not. No assuming.
In fact, I don't even have to tell you that the position is not dead. You should be able to deduce that from the position itself.
Originally posted by DejectionIt is, given that the problem is "Dead Reckoning". This indicates the use of a FIDE rule that states that a position with zero possibility of checkmate is immediately drawn.
The question is: is it provable?
Originally posted by JirakonIt is possible to construct games arriving at this position both with white having lost his castling rights and not having lost them. Since that means we can't prove that castling is illegal, the conclusion is that it is legal: YES white can castle.
castling is assumed legal unless otherwise provable
Not in this problem. Either prove that it's legal, or prove that it's not. No assuming.
In fact, I don't even have to tell you that the position is not dead. You should be able to deduce that from the position itself.
Originally posted by JirakonIt cannot be applied to chess problems by default, because it would ruin certain genres of problems, like self-stalemates. The current consensus is that the rule only applies if it is expressly stated by the composer.
And isn't dead reckoning necessarily applied? It is a rule of chess, after all.
Originally posted by JirakonLook through these games
It is possible to construct games arriving at this position both with white having lost his castling rights and not having lost them.
That's not true. The fact is that the position would be illegal if White had lost his castling rights. And the d1 rook is needed for the reason stated above.