Single Comment

Right, that paragraph could be improved, let's see. That was written in late 1996, when copyright mailed in USA, and not revised for the CVP 2000 article. If one King and Falcon stand on own back rank, and other King at its bank rank, with no other pieces on board, no checkmate is possible with good play. So, the situation is like K + 2N. You must be talking about a set-up position after a capture, that I will check later whether it works, and so sometimes(rarely) K+F beats lone K. (Therefore, your 'NOT') If *NOT* belongs because of that, the sentence would be best omitted so not to stretch a comparison. Let us check, thanks, David. All the [additions] after that one are more precise, except maybe *slim*: the other piece could be Rook one supposes. /// Second topic: At the first of two games played with Antoine Fourriere around April 2006, when I was not Commenting here, the official Rule, being in transition, in fact, became promotion to RNBF only. Earlier games with RLavieri et al. we had Queen promotion. Now it stays as no Queen Promotion on 8x10(and 10x10). So, hopefully rule-enforcement can be changed. Likewise, individuals can agree to allow it in a case, and we do not mind. As officially as it can yet be, free castling requires King 2+ and promotion to RNBF and array RNFBQKBFNR. That's it for any ambiguity. The last of the three is the one most likely still to change, if there were a consensus for some alternative, but hopefully we are near the (more or less) final Set of Rules. (If by mutual agreement other array is used now in GCTournament, that's fine, as I read such options being taken for other selections played)