Български (България)English (United Kingdom)
A new fairy condition - Circe X!

diyan k(31.05.2013) I am glad to introduce you the new fairy condition Circe X! Here you can see the definition, schemes, example and the opinion of some composers.


Circe X


     Definition:  as a normal Circe - captured units (not Ks) reappear on their game-array squares, of the same colour (pieces), on the file of capture (pawns), or on the capture file’s promotion square (fairy pieces), but if the rebirth square is already occupied by another piece (A) it must immediately move (without capturing) vacating the square for landing of the captured piece (B). The capturing side decides where the piece A should move. If  there is not possible legal movement, the capture is not allowed (or possible variation – the captured piece disappearing).








Proca retractor: white retracts n moves to reach a position for a normal problem (usually a #1). White must retract a legal move, Black defends by retiring any move he wishes. If a capture is retracted, the capturer decides if and which piece was captured.



a) 1.c1Q+! Kxc1(wBf6, bQd8) 2.Qxa5(wPa2) e6#

[3.Kxa2(bK~?, wPa2)?? Selfcheck]


b) 1.c1S! Kxc1(wBa7, bSb8) 2.Sxa6(wPa2) Bd4#

[3.Kxa2(bK~?, wPa2)?? Selfcheck] 


P.S. This type of condition may be applied also to other types of Circe:

Anti Circe X, Super Circe X, Anti Super Circe X, Circe Cage X etc.


Vlaicu Crisan:Circe X - seems an interesting and original idea at the first glance. Pongracz Circe was the first fairy condition where the piece on the rebirth square was also reborn - which could lead to a rebirth chain. Circe X is different, as it mixes the rebirth of captured piece with an Anti Take&Make move of the piece occupying the rebirth square.

Hope to be able to investigate more this fairy condition in due course.

Krassimir Gandev: “Circe X looks interesting. I hope that it can be included in some Chess problem solving program.”


Chris Feather: “My initial reaction is that Circe X is a brilliant, dynamic idea, all the better for being relatively simple. When one sees an idea like this, one immediately wonders why it has not been thought of before! Of course only practice and experience can show us exactly what possibilities it offers, but your examples give a good first impression and the idea certainly looks very promising. In addition to your h#2 example I especially like the effect in scheme 3; the promotion in scheme 4 also shows an intriguing possibility.

The thought of applying this condition to SuperCirce leaves me dizzy – it will surely be necessary to have some way to computer-test Circe-X problems!” 

I will be happy if you also share your opinion or Circe X problems!



+1 #1 Diyan Kostadinov 2013-06-02 01:56
I received more reactions and opinions from other composers via email. Thank to all! Some of them were about the name. Well, I really was not sure which name is the best. Here are two suggestions:
"As Vlaicu already remarked, this genre is a combination between Circe & Anti Take&Make. So, first of all, could you give another name to the genre, Anti take&make-Circe, for example. (Similarly, should be proposed a new condition Take&make-Circe)" Paul Raican.
Here is another one: "As for the name, it might perhaps be best simply to keep "Circe-X" (or "CirceX": the hyphen is not essential); in English the X suggests "extra", and there is indeed an extra effect. If you want something more descriptive, then perhaps "MakeWayCirce" (because the occupying piece must move to make way for the rebirth), but this is less neat" Chris Feather.
Other opinions?
+2 #2 seetharaman 2013-06-02 17:50
How about "CirceTwo" "CirceDouble", because one capture moves two pieces !
+2 #3 Diyan Kostadinov 2013-06-02 22:26
Actually Circe X is not completely independent condition, but it is a TYPE of Circe where is included different option for capturing when the reborn square is already occupied. So probably the completely independent name is unneccessary and Circe type X, Anti Circe type X, Circe Cage type X (or just Circe X, Anti Circe X etc. for short) etc. is clear enough. That was my reason to did not change the initial working name before to publish the article. The Feather's opinion in the comment above looks reasonable to me.
+5 #4 R. Ganapathi 2013-06-03 07:11
Since the circe rebirth vacates the square by SHIFTING the occupier away thr' its legal move or if not possible, to the box, CIRCE-S to mean Circe-shift may be considered.
Can also be used for the other types of Circe like AntiCirce-S etc.
+4 #5 Diyan Kostadinov 2013-06-03 15:54
Oh, I like the idea for Circe-Shift (or Circe S for short) where the letter "S" will be also a little gift to my wife Snejina, because she do not understanding why I spend so much time in front of the computer or with chess set or book in hands... Often our loved ones are the most disadvantaged because of our hobby. The family composers understand what I mean for sure... ;)
+3 #6 Diyan Kostadinov 2013-06-05 03:58
You can see one very nice suggestion from Nikola Predrag in matplus.net forum! In the next post (n.4) there I gave some examples representing his idea. Looks that this type "X" can enrich a lot probably all Circe family conditions! Really hope that some of these variations (presented there) can be programmed.
+5 #7 R.Ganapathi 2013-06-05 04:19
Sounds much like my life story. Even after more than 50 years of married life, my wife does not understand why I am wedded to the chess board so much!
+4 #8 Diyan Kostadinov 2013-06-05 04:44
Petko Petkov told me years ago: "Do not forget that the most important Queen in your life is not the chess Queen on the board, but your wife!"
So we should sharing enough time with our beloved!
0 #9 Diyan Kostadinov 2013-06-08 17:29
I received a message from S.K. Balasubramanian that scheme n.2 is cooked by 1...bxa8Q(wQc6/c8, bRa8). With the wK on c8 it's looks correct. Thank you Bala!
+2 #10 Nikola Predrag 2013-06-08 20:28
Quoting Diyan Kostadinov:
I received a message from S.K. Balasubramanian that scheme n.2 is cooked by 1...bxa8Q(wQc6/c8, bRa8). With the wK on c8 it's looks correct. Thank you Bala!

I don't understand, scheme 2 looks correct just as it is and the proposed 'correction' looks incorrect. What in these rules says that
1... bxa8Q??(wQc6,bRa8) is not a selfcheck?
+1 #11 Diyan Kostadinov 2013-06-09 01:01
Oh, yes Nikola... You are right of course. After receiving the message from Bala I quickly published the post without look on it enough... The initial sheme is correct, because 1...bxa8Q(wQc6, bRa8) is not possible because of selfcheck! Good eye, thank you ;)
+1 #12 Diyan Kostadinov 2013-06-11 09:04
The article is updated with one more example above - Circe X in Proca Retractor problem - thank you Paul! It is interesting and looks promising!

Add comment

Security code



site for chess composition

 General editor:

Diyan Kostadinov


Seetharaman Kalyan

Recent comments