Dr Ian Shanahan

57 Yates Avenue
Dundas Valley NSW 2117
AUSTRALIA

Sydney, 6 April 2008.

Dr Cedric Lytton
16 Lime Grove
Sheringham
Norfolk NR26 8NX
ENGLAND

Dear Cedric,

Im writing to you (a little belatedly and therefore hurriedly) for a number of reasons:
Firstly, concerning our friend Marks Single Combat original miniature 2 (R391) in your column from the
November 2007 issue of The Problemist I claim No Solution. If we try 1.Gf1?, then Black simply
responds with 1...Bh5! and White is flummoxed. I presume that Marks intention was 1.0-0!, the logic
being that ipso facto neither K nor Gh1 has ever moved (and if Gg7 had moved previously then it would
have played the key-move), so whatever man White did move last has just been captured by Black; self-
evidently, only the L could have made this capture, so Black is compelled by the rules of Single Combat
to respond to 1.0-0 with 1...Ld8 (the Ls only available move), potentially allowing a mate by 2.Gf8.
However and this is why I assert No Solution in R391, 2.Gf8 is not even potential but illegal: the
FIDE Laws of Chess, 3.8a.ii, state that castling is a move of the king and either rook of the same
colour on the same rank, counting as a single move of the king [my italics]; hence under Single
Combat, White is obliged to play 2.K~, and so there is no mate. Ive spoken to Mark already about this,
and have concocted what we have agreed ought to be published as a joint effort in order to rescue
Marks elegant retroanalytic idea although the elegance (and try) of Marks original setting has been
well and truly lost, alas. But these loses are counterbalanced somewhat by the added length and extra
line of play:

Mark Ridley & Ian Shanahan: The Problemist, November 2007 {R391v}
________
[wdwiwdwd]
[$wdw0pdp]
[wdwdwdpd]
[dwdwdwdw]
[wdwdwdwd]
[dPdwdwdw]
[p)P)wdwd]
[$wdwIwdw]
--------
4 Single Combat (7+6)

1.0-0-0!. Logic as above; but now the K cannot move again, so White is free to play something else...
1...Lc8 2.Ge1 L~ 3.Ge7 Lc8 4.Ge8.
1...Le8 2.Gg1 L~ 3.Gg6 L~ 4.Gg8.

On a more pleasant note, I was really happy to see that your own Illegal Cluster original from The
Problemist 2007 proved to be sound after all. Indeed, a very lovely find which inspired me to compose
my very first Illegal Cluster problem, which I hereby proffer for your column, a mere apritif in one of my
~1~
pet fairy stipulations that has exercised me much of late Protean Men.

The rules of Protean Men are:

Protean Men: Upon capturing, a unit (including KLs) takes on the powers of the unit
captured, but without changing colour; in the case where a AB is captured, its direction of
movement is retained. KLs maintain their royalty, transforming into royal (R) men with other
powers.

Now to the problem itself:

Ian Shanahan: ORIGINAL for The Problemist

________
[wdwdwdwd]
[dwdwdwdw]
[wdwdwdwd]
[dwdwdwdw]
[wdwdwdwd]
[Iwdwdwdw]
[w0wdwdwd]
[dwdwdwdk]
--------
Protean Men: add EEA for an Illegal Cluster

The solution is:

________
[Bdwdwdwd]
[dPdwdwdw]
[wdwdwdwd]
[dwdwdwdw]
[wdwdwdwd]
[Iwdwdwdw]
[w0wdwdwd]
[Gwdwdwdk]
--------
Notice firstly that Bb2 and Ab7 stem from (Ab2) and (Bb7) respectively; they have never moved, but
Bb2 would move upwards and Ab7 downwards. So K is in check, and Black has just played eAb2B+.
The positions illegality, however, arises instead from the two Es, which are both promotees ultimately
deriving from (Aa2) and (Ba7). But these original a-file ABs could never have crossed over one another
as Protean Men! Removing any of the four non-royal units renders the position legal, but an interesting
scenario ensues when Ab7 disappears: it seems initially that the position must still be illegal since K and
L are both apparently in check yet this is not so, for Bb2 must then stem not from (Ab2) but from
(Bb7), and thus moves down the board!

To conclude, I append a version of an old problem that, thanks to Popeye, is now undeniably sound.

Well, thats all for now. As ever, I do look forward to hearing from you, Cedric. I wish you and Dorothy
all the very best for 2008. Happy composing and editing!

Yours faithfully,

Ian Shanahan.
~2~