From: Nick Bardsley ICC CO UK> Date: 17 nov 1999 Subject: Re: Capturing a Chu Lion OK. My earlier post (dated 16/11/99) should be ignored, or regarded as = uninformed stream of consciousness. I have looked at the MSM rules = regarding the Lion and I disagree profoundly with Colin Adams' stated = view (sent 15/11/99, 10:45) that the cases he described in his first = post (reproduced below) are not legal. I now believe that both are = perfectly legal moves and that their legality is only mildly = controversial (compared with other Lion moves I also believe to be = legal). Case One: 'If a Lion is on a (1) square, can the Lion capture it and = stay where it is? (I have always assumed yes, but in fact the rules only mention moving on (or back) after capturing).' Yes. I actually believe MSM to have a minor inaccuracy here. (This is no = criticism of George Hodges, author of MSM - I'm an editor and only too = aware of the perils of producing books accurately...) Rule 4c is the key passage and I reproduce it exactly as in MSM: '[4c] If your Lion is on an adjacent square to the enemy Lion, you may = capture is (whether protected or not): in the normal way by "igui" = (capturing without moving!), or by capturing it and moving on to another = square (normal double move).' I really believe that the words 'in the normal way' should be followed = by a comma. This would make clear that a single step-move capture, with = the move ending on the square occupied by the displaced enemy Lion, is = perfectly legitimate. I can think of no good reason why such a move = should be illegal; it is neither here nor there with regards to Lion = exchanges (the main point of the special Lion capture rules). Case two: 'If a Lion is on a (1) square, can the Lion move to another = (adjacent) (1) square, and then capture it? (This seems silly, but I am a writing a computer program, so this case also must be covered).' Legal. Bizarre, but legal. Has the same effect of case one above if the = first (1) square is empty. However, it raises the following question: can a Lion capture an enemy = piece on a (1) square and then capture an enemy Lion on an adjacent (1) = square [not a (2) square] without restriction? I believe the answer is yes. The rules on capture refer to (1) and (2) = squares relative to the Lion on its initial square. I do not believe = they change status from (1) to (2) midway through the Lion's move. They = actually reflect where the opponent has positioned his Lion relative to = yours. If the opponent has placed his Lion on a (1) square it is, = essentially, fair game. Thus a Lion can also capture a Lion on a (1) square and go on to capture = any enemy on any adjacent square [(1) or (2)] if desired. This, I = believe, is uncontroversial. What changes is where your Lion finishes = its move... Last night I conducted a personal analysis that is pretty exhaustive. If = anyone wants a copy (this sounds arrogant but it was simply an exercise = in understanding this complex piece and I'm just happy to share it with = anyone), I'll be happy to mail it them. Nick Bardsley ---------- From: Colin Paul Adams[SMTP:colin COLINA DEMON CO UK] Sent: 15 November 1999 08:52 To: SHOGI-L TECHUNIX TECHNION AC IL Subject: Capturing a Chu Lion I thought I really knew the rules for Lion capturing Lion at Chu Shogi. But I have just now looked carefully at the wording in MSM, and it appears it doesn't actually cover all the cases: If a Lion is on a (1) square, can the Lion capture it and stay where it is? (I have always assumed yes, but in fact the rules only mention moving on (or back) after capturing). If a Lion is on a (1) square, can the Lion move to another (adjacent) (1) square, and then capture it? (This seems silly, but I am a writing a computer program, so this case also must be covered). The rule 4(c) only mentions capture by igui, or capture and move on. I have always assumed that the two cases above were also covered by rule 4(c), but actually they are not mentioned at all. -- Colin Paul Adams Preston Lancashire