HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: gene@midway.ecn.uoknor.edu (Gene E. Johannsen)
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
Subject: Re: Bobby teaches but did he write?
Date: 17 Aug 92 16:55:13 GMT
Organization: Engineering Computer Network, University of Oklahoma, Norman, OK, USA

ron@osf.org (Ron Birnbaum) writes:

>In article <1992Aug15.235349.1@gallua.gallaudet.edu>, rlwilliams@gallua.gallaudet.edu writes:
>|> In previous posts people have often recommended "Bobby Fischer teaches 
>|> chess," as an outstanding book. I'm curious what people know about this 
>|> book. Did Bobby write it himself? Is it an "as told to" book? Or did he 
>|> just give his name to it. I'd like to know his level of involvement in the 
>|> project.

>  I don't see IM Valvo responding to this, but he has previously mentioned
>  on the net that Fischer had a lot to do with the book. IM Valvo was also
>  involved, as was another player, I believe.

>-Ron

   I was just leafing through this book after many years (I was reminded of
it because so many people recommended it) and, on the copyright page there
is a bunch of small print listing who else helped on the book.  Mr
Valvo's name was the only one I recognized right off, but I think there was
some other talent on the board.  I wonder if Mike could clear up who
did what?

gene




>|> 
>|> rlwilliams@gallua
From: U13054@uicvm.uic.edu (Howard Wachtel)
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
Subject: Re: Computers in tournaments: Who cares?
Date: 18 Aug 92 21:44:02 GMT
Article-I.D.: uicvm.92231.164402U13054
Distribution: na
Organization: University of Illinois at Chicago

In article <1992Aug14.184203.20864@noose.ecn.purdue.edu>,
watsonb@alcohol.ecn.purdue.edu (Bradley S Watson) says:
>
>Judging from the flood of posts about this new rule revoking
>human players' right to refuse to play computers in C tournaments,
>many people must be under the misconception that this rule
>will actually have a practical impact on them.  It won't.
>
>There are only 7 computer programs with established USCF ratings
>in the entire country.  That's right, SEVEN!  When you compare this
>number to the thousands of human tournament players, you see that
>the chance of actually getting paired against one is incredibly
>small.  It's not worth worrying about.

   If so, then those 7 programs must get around a lot.  Didn't we
just hear about a tournament which had 4 computers in a field of 20
players?  What are the odds against that happening if there are only
7 computer programs active?
  I myself have played in many tournaments in which there has been
a computer in my section, and until this year I didn't travel for
chess very much.
________________________________________________________________
Howard K. Wachtel              University of Illinois at Chicago
U13054@UICVM.CC.UIC.EDU        Phone (312) 975-7970
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
From: cass8806@elan.glassboro.edu (KYLE CASSIDY)
Subject: Re: Rules of Chess
Organization: Glassboro State College, Glassboro, NJ
Distribution: na
Date: Wed, 19 Aug 1992 16:37:33 GMT

In article <1992Aug18.093635.22667@ists.ists.ca> os9ug@gkcl.ists.ca (OS-9 User Group) writes:


>(1) As soon as checkmate occurs, the game is over.
>(2) If an illegal move is not called by the opponant before the
>       end of the game, then the move must stand.

>So.  I pick my Queen up from wherever it happens to be on the board,
>slam it down somewhere else, completely illegally, creating a checkmate
>situation.  Declare the game is over, and point out that you didn't
>call the illegal move prior to the end of the game.  And win.

what a fascinating possiblity! my 4 1/2 year old plays a very similar game. 
he calls it "the crockhead opening" -- if you make a move that distresses 
his position, he puts your piece back where it was before making his.


kc
Xref: sparky rec.games.chess:6320 rec.games.go:1646 rec.games.board:8083 rec.games.programmer:3566
From: prj91@ecs.soton.ac.uk (Paul James)
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess,rec.games.go,rec.games.board,rec.games.programmer
Subject: Re: rec.games.strategic
Keywords: checkers, shogi, othello, hex, etc.
Date: 21 Aug 92 13:43:45 GMT
Originator: prj91@chapman


Before we consider making a new group rec.games.strategic, can someone
tell me which games discussed in rec.games.board are NOT strategic. It
seems to be that 95% at least are. Creating a new group would just
confuse the issue. The group at present is not too large and forcing
people to read two groups instead of one when one does not take too
much bandwidth is silly.
================================================================================
Paul James                                  ____________________
prj91@ecs.soton.ac.uk                      /  __________________O
kraken@mail.soton.ac.uk                   /  /|________________
                                         /  /_/________________O
"Beware the many tentacled one."        /_____________________
                                       |______________________O
From: ralf@ark.abg.sub.org (Ralf Stephan)
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
Subject: Re: chess psion versions
Date: 19 Aug 92 10:32
Organization: Private Coherent 4.0.1 site Augsburg/Bavaria/Germany

u251014@hnykun11.urc.kun.nl (Hans Schilderman) writes:
> Could anyone inform me about recent versions of the chess game 'chess' form 
> psion lim.?
> I am using the version of 1985 (version 1.01) and am curious to know whether 
> more recent versions are available

The Psion program, written by famous Richard Lang, is actually a PC version
of the Mephisto Amsterdam program. It is also available for Atari computers
and still a good choice.

There were never announcements that Lang would update the program. Sorry.

--ralf
-------------If your nose runs and your feet smell, you're built upside-down.
From: nash@visus.com (Richard V. Nash)
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
Subject: Re: Computer Ratings/Versions
Date: 13 Aug 92 12:06:08 GMT
Reply-To: nash@visus.com
Organization: Visual Understanding Systems, Pgh PA


The problem as I see it is this. As we become forced to accept computers in  
tournaments (like it or not), unless there is a well regulated way of  
determining ratings, all computer should be forced to play in the OPEN section.  
And in order to properly rate programs or computers, there must be a single,  
non-changing entity to rate. As long as programmers are allowed to 'tweek'  
their program and call it the same program, or run on faster hardware, or play  
in multiple tournaments simultaneously, then there is no reliability of the  
rating of that machine and certainly there is no correlation between the  
computer's rating and a human's rating.

I would propose that in order for a computer to have an 'official' rating, an  
therefore compete in anything but the open section, it must be a single machine  
with 'frozen' software. And before you say that humans are allowed to change  
their program, I submit that if the computer wants to change its program  
_itself_ it is welcome to.
--
+---------------------------------------------------------------+
| Richard V. Nash  | Visual Understanding Systems, Inc.         |
| nash@visus.com   | Tel. (412)-488-3600   Fax. (412)-488-3611  |
+---------------------------------------------------------------+
From: jc79+@andrew.cmu.edu (John Anthony Chanak)
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
Subject: Re: ICS server eve.assumption.edu
Date: 15 Aug 92 00:47:18 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: Junior, Electrical and Computer Engineering, Carnegie Mellon, Pittsburgh, PA


	I believe eve.assumption.edu is no longer going to run a chess server--
though I would like some form of confirmation of this.  The only other
server I know of in operation is one at valkyries.andrew.cmu.edu
(128.2.232.4).  (Note they use the same ratings server, so you can use
your same login id/password and you have your same stats) 

Hope this helps.

-John
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess,rec.games.go,rec.games.board,rec.games.programmer
From: ravikane@leland.Stanford.EDU (Ravindra Shantaram Kane)
Subject: Re: rec.games.strategic
Organization: DSG, Stanford University, CA 94305, USA
Date: Sat, 22 Aug 92 00:36:22 GMT

Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
From: jhc@iris.uucp (James H. Coombs)
Subject: Re: Computer ratings & speed
Reply-To: jhc@iris.UUCP (James H. Coombs)
Organization: IRIS - Brown University
Date: Mon, 17 Aug 1992 16:53:08 GMT

In article <2a8d503bwnr070@ark.abg.sub.org> ralf@ark.abg.sub.org (Ralf Stephan) writes:
>jhc@iris.uucp (James H. Coombs) writes:

>BTW, the Fidelity 2265 (= Mach III) is rated in the Svedish rating list
>as about 2000 ELO (non-USCF), and the 2325 (= Mach IV) as 2085 ELO.
>So don't trust the blurb from the ads.

I just posted a longer note on the conversion of Swedish to USCF.  CRA
adds 200 points to get USCF, which would give 2200 and 2285.  Standard
deviation for 48 games is 40 points; so the converted Swedish would be
more than 1 but less than 2 standard deviations from CRA.  CCR gives
2207 and 2307 for the III and IV, which takes Swedish "Ply" into
account and is within 1 standard deviation of the ratings you give.

--Jim
Xref: sparky rec.games.chess:6170 rec.games.go:1578 comp.ai:3124 rec.games.programmer:3471
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess,rec.games.go,comp.ai,rec.games.programmer
Subject: Re: comp.games.research
From: wft@math.canterbury.ac.nz (Bill Taylor)
Date: 18 Aug 92 17:25:25 +1200
Distribution: world
Organization: Department of Mathematics, University of Canterbury
Keywords: chess go othello games abalone

I'd like to see a newsgroup for strategic board games in general,
othello, go-moku, etc, but OTHER THAN commercial board games of the
war-game or role-playing type.

i.e. traditonal-style games of complete information for two players, other
than go and chess.

I'm thinking of a human-interaction-and-comment type newsgroup, rather
than a computer-oriented group. Otherwise much the same as what people
are speaking of in this thread.

I know there is a rec.games.board  but this seems to be full of
commercial board games, which is not really what I'm into.

Does this suggestion ring a bell with anyone else ?

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
            Bill Taylor              wft@math.canterbury.ac.nz 
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Free will - the result of chaotic amplification of quantum events in the brain.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: aflitney@physics.adelaide.edu.au (The Integrator)
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
Subject: Re: Bobby teaches but did he write?
Date: 18 Aug 92 03:48:44 GMT

rlwilliams@gallua.gallaudet.edu writes:

>In previous posts people have often recommended "Bobby Fischer teaches 
>chess," as an outstanding book. I'm curious what people know about this 
>book. Did Bobby write it himself? Is it an "as told to" book? Or did he 
>just give his name to it. I'd like to know his level of involvement in the 
>project.

>rlwilliams@gallua

He co-authored the book (cant remember the name of the other author).
In the past I had a copy of the book. I feel it is a very good book for
beginners or weaker players, and is different from any other books for
beginners I have seen. For example it doesnt require learning chess notation.
There is no learning of opennings or endings. The book is about tactics and
how to recognize common mating themes.
From: bingham@hpnmdla.sr.hp.com (David Bingham)
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
Subject: Fischer folklore?
Date: 17 Aug 92 16:26:43 GMT
Organization: Hewlett-Packard, Santa Rosa, CA


  I'm looking for a reference to a story that my prove to be just folklore
but a friend of mine is looking for documentation of a story he is sure is
true.  Apparrently, when Bobby Ficsher was thirteen or so he was playing a
game in which he gave up his queen at the twelfth move because it guaranteed
a checkmate 20 to 30 moves later (he knew exactly when). Anybody out ther
heard this story or, more importantly, know of a written account? I'd be
forever grateful. 
  Please reply via e-mail.

David Bingham
bingham@sr.hp.com
From: dweddin@uoft02.utoledo.edu
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
Subject: Re: Checkers match
Date: 21 Aug 92 16:18:46 EST
Organization: University of Toledo, Computer Services

In article <1992Aug20.210155.16691@visus.com>, nash@visus.com (Richard V. Nash) writes:
> In article <1992Aug20.172712.24197@watson.ibm.com> msc@watson.ibm.com (Murray  
> Campbell) writes:
>> There is currently a match going on between Marion Tinsley (sp?),
>> who has been world checkers champion for many years, and
>> "Chinook", a checkers program out of the University of Alberta written
>> by a group headed by Jonathan Schaeffer.  The match is taking
>> place in London, England.  I heard that on Wednesday August 19,
>> Chinook managed to beat Tinsley to level the match at one win each
>> with 6 draws.  This is notable because Tinsley has lost only a
>> handful of games in his 40 year career, and has had no losses
>> in the past ten years.  The match is supposed to continue
>> until August 29, with a total of 40 games to be played.


> 
> I thought checkers was solved. Is it not?
> 
> --

NO! that was just a myth. it was BELIEVED to have been solved by a lot
of people in artificial intelligence...this turned out to be only a
rumor that was unfounded (like the guy who played in "leave it to
beaver" was killed in viet nam and the kid from the "life" commercial
named mikey choked to death on pop rocks )

then the guys who wrote Chinook wanted to study the heuristics 
of the "solved" checkers program and found out that it didn't exist...so
they went to work...

rest is history in the making.

don wedding
From: elkies@ramanujan.harvard.edu (Noam Elkies)
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
Subject: correction Re: Correction! (Bishops and Queens)
Date: 22 Aug 92 15:54:02 GMT
Article-I.D.: husc3.1992Aug22.115402.15011
Organization: Harvard Math Department

In article <1992Aug22.113921.15010@husc3.harvard.edu> I wrote:
> White Kh8, Nf8, g7; Black Ka2, Rb8, Qf4.  White to move draws only with g8=B!
                                      ^^^

That should say "Qf7".  Then 1.g8Q? R:f8 2.Q:f8 Q:f8+ and Black wins, but
after 1.g8B! R:f8 (still forced since Qf7 is pinned) White is stalemated.

--Noam D. Elkies (elkies@zariski.harvard.edu)
  Dept. of Mathematics, Harvard University
From: rjh@allegra.att.com (Robert Holt)
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
Subject: Re: *Spoiler* Re: 1.f3, 4.Kh4 puzzle
Date: 18 Aug 92 22:04:35 GMT
Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories, Murray Hill, NJ

In article <1992Aug18.013141.16042@allegra.att.com> rjh@allegra.att.com (Robert Holt) writes:
>In article <1992Aug10.105117.14585@husc3.harvard.edu> elkies@ramanujan.harvard.edu (Noam Elkies) writes:
>>
>>Which reminds me: the standard UNIX chess program (I'm told it's essentially
>>SARGON, but I don't know this for a fact) plays so miserably that I've taken
>>some extreme measures trying to get an interesting game.  Guess what it
>>played as Black after 1.e3!? e5 2.Ke2?! Nc6 3.Kf3? Qf6+ 4.Ke4??  If you
>>have the usual implementation of /usr/games/chesstool you can reproduce
>>this experiment, because it will always play the same moves against this
>>"opening".
>
>All right, I tried a 1988 version of /usr/games/chesstool and it
>found 4. ... Qe5+ ! , leading to a forced mate in 3 after
              ^^^
 Make that    Qf5+
>5. Kxe5 d5+ 6. Kf5 Be7+ 7. Kg5 g6++ or 5. Kd5 e4+ 6. Kc4 Qc5+ 7. Kb3 Qb4++ .
    ^^^^        ^^^         ^^^
    Kxf5        Kg5         Kh5
-- 
+-----------------------+
|  Bob Holt             |
|  rjh@allegra.att.com  |
+-----------------------+
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
From: ronlee@eng.umd.edu (Ronald Doon Lee)
Subject: Re: Chess Chow Review
Date: Fri, 21 Aug 92 21:02:08 GMT
Organization: College of Engineering, University of Maryland, College Park

In article <9208172304@opal9> augsburg@marble.rtsg.mot.com (Leonard Augsburger)
gave a pretty good 'quickie' review of the Dec-Jan 1992 review.  I agree
with his comments, but I'll go ahead and add another perspective.

* The layout of the magazine is quite nice (though I'm not an expert on fonts &
other publishing stuff.)  They seem to use a variety of fonts, boldfacing,
italicizing and spacing to produce a very readable product.  Game movements,
game comments, editorial comments (funny stuff indeed!) and diagrams are
easily distinguishable.  The photos are very clear.

* I did notice that each of the authors has his own preference for 
notation.  While I didn't see any pre-algebraic notation, they do use
either the text or figurine algebraic.

* I like the paper that it is printed on!  I hope they don't change to
a slick paper format.

* Since I have a really poor understanding of the game and haven't had
much time going over the games, I really enjoyed the comical commentaries,
especially the Kasparov "interview".  I wonder who wrote it (hint, hint
to the nature of the article ... I won't say any more and ruin the
'surprise')?


Well, I can't think of anything more to say ... I gotta get back to work!
Enjoy!
Ron
From: mginsbur@option.GBA.NYU.EDU (Mark Ginsburg)
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
Subject: Re: Piket-van Mil
Date: 20 Aug 92 04:19:35 GMT
Organization: NYU Stern School of Business

Some questions.

a)  doesn't current 'theory' regard 5. Nc3 h6 6. Nb5 Qb6 as rather poor for
black?  I've heard about, but not seen, Larry Christiansen analysis.

b)  Suppose black plays as in Piket-van Mil, 6. Nb5 Qc6.  Then,

b1)  what's white's best move... is it 7. dxe4!? as played, or
     7. Qh5+.

b2)  i suspect that this position may be completely solvable by a computer
     which wouldn't be too surprising, right?  It may be pure tactics!

I'm asking computers because I'm ready to be impressed again.  

-mark
From: Bruce_Harper@mindlink.bc.ca (Bruce Harper)
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
Subject: Promoting to a B
Date: 22 Aug 92 05:16:44 GMT
Organization: MIND LINK! - British Columbia, Canada
Distribution: world

Constructing a position where a Bishop motion wins and a Queen stalemates is
fairly easy.  A harder task is a position where a Bishop wins and a Queen
loses.

This type of position exists, but you're not very likely to have it arise in
your next game....
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
From: schiller@tira.uchicago.edu (Eric Schiller)
Subject: Re: rec.games.strategic
Organization: Center for Information and Language Studies / University of
	Chicago
Date: Fri, 21 Aug 1992 22:25:53 GMT

You all might want to know that there will be a mind sports Olympiad
every two years featuring many of these games. The first will be
in London next summer (I'll be handling the press so there will
be plenty of info)and in 1995 negotiations are underway for a site
in the midwest. 

I'll post more info as it becomes available, but if you want to
be on a direct e-mail list, send me a note.

Eric Schiller
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
From: u251014@hnykun11.urc.kun.nl (Hans Schilderman)
Subject: chess psion versions
Keywords: psion, versions
Organization: Department of Theology. Catholic University of Nijmegen, The Netherlands
Date: Tue, 18 Aug 1992 07:44:50 GMT

Could anyone inform me about recent versions of the chess game 'chess' form 
psion lim.?
I am using the version of 1985 (version 1.01) and am curious to know whether 
more recent versions are available

best wishes Hans Schilderman
From: CAPSA <capsa@igc.apc.org>
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
Date: 17 Aug 92 19:56 PDT
Subject: (INTERNET) Chess News and Opinion
Nf-ID: #N:cdp:1451600025:000:544
Nf-From: cdp.UUCP!capsa    Aug 17 19:56:00 1992


I'm a pahtzer at networking, as well as at chess and would appreciate some
help.

I am not a "member" of INTERNET, but log on through PEACENET, principally for
email and "rec.games.chess".  It appears, however that one can get much chess
news through another "conference"?  Since my greatest interest in "rec.games.
chess" is chess news and opinion, will another "networker" please advise me on
how to get more (chess) news and opinion than I get on "rec.games.chess"?  If
he/she does, I will be most appreciative.

Fraternally,

Jerome Bibuld

Xref: sparky rec.games.chess:6241 rec.games.go:1616 rec.games.programmer:3512
From: neilb@scs.leeds.ac.uk (N Bowers)
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess,rec.games.go,rec.games.programmer
Subject: Re: comp.games.research
Date: 19 Aug 92 20:17:29 GMT
Organization: University of Leeds, England

In article <1992Aug19.151750.8200@zooid.guild.org> ross@zooid.guild.org (Ross Ridge) writes:
>neilb@scs.leeds.ac.uk (N Bowers) writes:
>>>that is so because these are the games that people are interested in.
>>>If there is so little traffic on these games, then a new group is even
>>>less necessary.
>>
>>Not a valid conclusion.  [...]
>
>Sorry, but high volume in existing newsgroup or mailing list is the only
>valid reason for creating a new newsgroup on Usenet.

I was questioning the conclusion that the low volume related to strategy games
in *rec.games.board* meant that there wasn't enough interest for
a separate group.  Given the responses I've had via email, there are
quite a few people who are interested in such a group.

The sort of topics which could be covered in this group have appeared in
a number of places: comp.ai, rec.games.{board,go,chess,programmer} and others.


Some other group names which have been suggested:

	rec.games.strategic
	rec.games.mathematical
	rec.games.logical
	rec.games.abstract
	rec.games.geometrical
	rec.games.math
	rec.games.strategy-games
	rec.games.tactical
	rec.games.pure-tactical

Several have suggested: create one such group, and if there is enough
traffic to warrant it, spawn off a separate .programmer group (or similar)
at some later date.

Neil
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess,rec.games.go,rec.games.programmer
From: kring@efes.physik.uni-kl.de (Thomas Kettenring)
Subject: Re: comp.games.research
Organization: FB Physik, Universitaet Kaiserslautern, Germany
Date: Thu, 20 Aug 1992 12:06:47 GMT

In article <1992Aug19.201729.11989@organpipe.uug.arizona.edu>, neilb@scs.leeds.ac.uk (N Bowers) writes:
>Some other group names which have been suggested:
>
>	rec.games.strategic
This one sounds good.
>	rec.games.mathematical
That has a touch of Martin Gardner to it.  Could be misleading.
>	rec.games.logical
Same here.
>	rec.games.abstract
>	rec.games.geometrical
Tetris?
>	rec.games.math
>	rec.games.strategy-games
>	rec.games.tactical
>	rec.games.pure-tactical

-- 
--------------thomas kettenring, 2 dan, kaiserslautern, germany---------------
Definition:  Idiot-proof  -  you are idiot-proof when you NEVER flame anybody.
From: ralf@ark.abg.sub.org (Ralf Stephan)
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
Subject: Re: comp.chess.research
Date: 20 Aug 92 14:04
Organization: Private Coherent 4.0.1 site Augsburg/Bavaria/Germany

rcs@CS.ARIZONA.EDU ("Richard Schroeppel") writes:
> How about a mailing list instead?
> It requires much less organizing effort, and can reach people who
> don't get news, or don't want to read news.
> It can also be moderated if necessary, and it's trivial to archive.

Some people pay a fixed sum for news and have to pay additionally for
sent/received mail on a per KB basis.  I wouldn't subscribe to a mailing
list, though it would be a pity.

--ralf
-------------If your nose runs and your feet smell, you're built upside-down.
From: jph@hardy.u.washington.edu (Jeff Hanson)
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
Subject: Re: Checkers match
Date: 20 Aug 92 23:47:43 GMT
Article-I.D.: u.1992Aug20.234743.25233
Organization: University of Washington, Seattle

In article <1992Aug20.210155.16691@visus.com> nash@visus.com writes:
>
>I thought checkers was solved. Is it not?
>

	Yes, if you have a heck of a memory & you work hard . . . but
then there's draw checkers & 11 man checkers & 11 man draw checkers . . .

	Draw checkers is where the first move by each player is determined
by lot, with a couple of lemons excepted.

	In 11 man checkers one piece is removed from the front row
(I think the one closest to the side of the board).
Xref: sparky rec.games.chess:6324 rec.games.board:8088