From: Colin Paul Adams COLINA DEMON CO UK> Date: 10 jun 1998 Subject: Re: Chu Shogi bare king rule >>>>> "Edward" == Edward A Strickland pen k12 va us> writes: Edward> Dear Mr. Adams: I have enjoyed your *Book of Tenjiku* that Edward> you sent me last year. Your work was insightful, and this Then why haven't you spotted all the gross errors in it (or at least, some of them)? Edward> makes me all the more appreciative for your having made it Edward> freely available. I'm still working on the next edition. I think I've finished all the research, but now I have to clean it up (various chapters contradict each other, due to being at different ages), and add graphics. Edward> Although this may well seem a stupid question, would Edward> not the baring of the king by one side in Chu (and Edward> therefore also Tenjiku shogi) result in a loss for the Edward> first king bared? Yes. Although it is usual to interpret this as only if the other side cannot also reduce the opponent to a bare king. Indeed, I codified this for the rules we used in the European Championship at Muenster last October. Edward> I infer this from the rule reported by Mr. Hodges in Edward> his *Middle Shogi Manual* (MSM, 8). I recall that you Edward> have departed from his opinion in other instances, and so Edward> assume that you are relying on sources different from his Edward> in naming this a problem according to the traditional Edward> rules for these games. No. See above. But even if you were to say that a bare king situation causes IMMEDIATE loss, the position is basically the same for king and Gold versus King and Gold - essentially a drawn position, one side will actually win according to the rules. I am looking for a way of automatically triggering a suspension of the no repetition rule, so that such positions can be declared a draw (for tournament use). To produce a good trigger rule, it helps to thoroughly understand the position. It seems likely that the player who makes the last capture prior to the position arising must lose. But I lack a formal proof of this. If the situation is as systematic as this, then there is no reason not to continue to use the repetition rule right to the end - since the result is not arbitrary one can in principle calculate ahead that adopting a certain line will result in a win or a loss. But if the factors are much more complicated, then one player is being arbitrarily given a win in a position that really ought to be claimable as a draw. -- Colin Paul Adams Preston Lancashire