HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: singh@julius.cs.uiuc.edu (Rajendra Singh)
Subject: Re: Should women's tournaments exist?
Organization: University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign
	<1e85u3INN2nr@gap.caltech.edu>
Date: Thu, 19 Nov 1992 10:09:45 GMT

>>> cxxh@cco.caltech.edu (Chris H. Hall) writes:
> PS  If you have to explain a joke, it's not funny.

My first reaction to this, before seeing the "offensive" joke, was:
  What a stupid statement;  no matter how funny a joke is, some
  people will not get it, perhaps because they're stupid or perhaps
  they missed something or perhaps they just weren't in the right
  frame of mind.  Funny jokes often need explanation to some, and
  unfunny jokes often need no explanation.  Your logic circuits failed.

After seeing the joke that caused offense I can add:
  You missed the point.  It seemed to be pretty obvious yet
  you managed to miss it, and are apparently too stubborn to
  see how.  The joke actually agrees with idea that sexism is
  silly.

peace,
 -raj
--
			  __ \_;
****- OM -****		 (  \
Rajendra Singh		    |
singh@cs.uiuc.edu	   /__/--\
			   \   @_/
			    |
			^.  /
			 `==
From: sadkins@bigbird.cs.ohiou.edu (Scott W. Adkins)
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
Subject: Re: Living Chess
Date: 19 Nov 92 13:17:48 GMT
Organization: Ohio University CS Dept., Athens

In article <27654@oasys.dt.navy.mil> rcheng@oasys.dt.navy.mil (Raymond Cheng) writes:
>I personally would put the best fighter as queen, the second
>best as king, and good fighter as kinghts, king pawn, and
>queen pawn.
>
>As white, I would play 1. e4  followed by 2. Qf3  and then
>use my queen (my best fighter) to race toward the king as
>fast as possible.   I would also consider pushing my
>center pawns and knights as fast as possible to the black king.
>
>Any comment?  How about playing this game, using dices instead
>of real men?

This sounds a little like Stratego in its strategy... except, I 
usually hold back my General (#1) until I know that it can no
longer be defeated by those pesky #x's (I forget the number).
Once that #x was defeated, then the General moves to destroy
anything that moves in its path, until it finds the flag!  Is
this what you have in mind?

Scott
-- 
Don't forget to have a good day!  Some people never remember this.              -------------------------------------------------------------------------------      Scott W. Adkins                   Internet: sadkins@ohiou.edu             
     ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~                             ak323@cleveland.freenet.edu     (Flame me, not the net!)                Bitnet: adkins@ouaccvma.bitnet         -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                           Ohio University of Athens                                                    Home of the Great Hocking River
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
From: bright@my-sun.cs.jhu.edu (Jonathan Bright)
Subject: Re: pawn promotion
Organization: Johns Hopkins Computer Science Department, Baltimore, MD
Date: Sun, 22 Nov 1992 01:47:00 GMT



>In article <1992Nov20.124517.6299@cs.ruu.nl>, xawemmer@cs.ruu.nl
(Xander Wemmers) writes:

>|> By the way, there are chess problems in which white has to promote to
>|> a *black* piece (even to a black king) in order to win.
>|> 

Actually, ICS had a bug for a while which would let you
queenside castle after you kindside castled, hence getting
two kings on the board.  Only by mating the recently created
king could you lose the game.  You could use your original
king for attacking purposes.

I thought about using this trick to score a cheap win or two
vs. deepthought but never got around to it.

Jon Bright
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
From: wang@cs.uiuc.edu (Eric Wang)
Subject: Re: pawn promotion
Reply-To: wang@cs.uiuc.edu
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
Date: Sat, 21 Nov 1992 03:53:24 GMT

>8 k b . . . . . .
>7 . . P . N . . .
>6 K . . . . . . .
>5 . . . . . . . .
>4 . . . . . . . .
>3 . . . . . . . .
>2 . . . . . . . .
>1 . . . . . . . .
>  a b c d e f g h

Here's a tangent to the discussion about underpromotions: do touch-move
rules apply to the selecting of a piece to which to promote a pawn?  For
instance, White plays the obvious c8= and reaches her hand for a White
Bishop from Black's prisoner pile, but accidentally touches the White
Queen first (because Black has nastily packed all of the captured White
pieces very close together).  Is White now required to promote to the
Queen?  Or can White just plow through Black's trophy chest like a
tornado and emerge with a Bishop?

More generally, what rules apply (if any) to the off-board handling of
captured pieces?

Eric Wang
wang@cs.uiuc.edu

Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
From: dczarkow@valhalla.cs.wright.edu (Dariusz Czarkowski)
Subject: Re: pawn promotion
Organization: Wright State University
Date: Fri, 20 Nov 1992 16:21:04 GMT

Lloyd Lim:   
>There are situations where you might want to promote to a knight.
>Are there any reasons why you'd promote to a bishop or rook?
>The obvious answer is no, but I wanted to check to make sure.

White: Kb6, pc6
Black: Ka1, Rd5
White to move and win.

This is a beautiful and simple example of a weak promotion to a rook.
I forgot the name of the composer. I think he was Spanish.
Solution:
1. c7  Rd6+
2.Kb5  Rd5+
3.Kb4  Rd4+
4.Kb3  Rd3+
5.Kc2  Rd4
6. c8R Ra4
7.Kb3 wins

Dariusz Czarkowski
From: brucec@tekgen.bv.tek.com (Bruce Cheney)
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
Subject: Re: Illegal moves during Tournament
Date: 23 Nov 92 21:45:56 GMT
Organization: Tektronix, Inc.

In article <92325.182926RVESTERM@vma.cc.nd.edu> RVESTERM@vma.cc.nd.edu writes:
>what? if your right to protest an illegal move ends when the player
>making the move takes his hand off the piece, then i bet i could mate
>kasparov in two.
>
>soon-to-be-world-champ bob vesterman.

Bob;

I think you've jumped into this thread mid stream and might have
missed something. Your right to protest an illegal move DOES end
when that move is complete (see Ken Sloan's post further elaborating
on the definition of complete), IF the move is A) checkmate (or
otherwise ends the game) AND B) the move itself is legal.

The amendment of B to the rules was done to prevent the type of
situation you are alluding to in your post. Ironically, you may be
correct in your assertion because Ken Sloan has pointed out that
the illegal move 'trapdoor' in the definition of end of game
(checkmate in this case) has been specifically blocked in USCF, but
apparently not in FIDE.

So... if you play kasparov under USCF rules, you wouldn't be successful
winning this way. But under FIDE rules, you could at least make the 
arguement!!

Bruce Cheney

Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
From: tusk@daimi.aau.dk (Martin M|ller Pedersen)
Subject: Re: where can I find ics servers?
Organization: DAIMI: Computer Science Department, Aarhus University, Denmark
Date: Mon, 23 Nov 92 13:10:53 GMT

Kanderso@Reed.Edu (Karl Anderson) Writes:

>Does Anyone Know Where There Is A List Of Ics Servers?  Utah, The Only
>One That I Know Of, Has Been Down For Days.  I Couldn'T Find This In
>The Faq.

>K

I Only Know Of valkyries.andrew.cmu.edu 5000
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
From: fujimoto@carson.u.washington.edu (Bryant Fujimoto)
Subject: Re: pawn promotion (opponent's colour)
Keywords: pawn promotion
Organization: University of Washington
Date: Mon, 23 Nov 1992 14:25:26 GMT

xawemmer@cs.ruu.nl (Xander Wemmers) writes:

>*Of course* pawn promotion to a piece of your opponent is not allowed, but I 
>once read an article in which it was possible by exception. I found the
>showed examples very interesting and I wondered if anyone else had seen
>of these kind of compositions. Obviously noone has ever seen such positions.

>It was just an attempt to start an interesting discussion about these kind 
>of problems.

In 1972, Andy Soltis had an article in Chess Life & Review called 
"The Antiproblem".  Strictly speaking, many of the problems in the
article involved illegal moves like promoting a pawn to a king, etc.
But they were sort of cute, like the following one

. . . . . . . .
P . . . . . . .
B B . . . . . P
. . . . . . . .
. . . . . N N .
. . . K . . . .
p . . . . . . p
k . . . . . . .

White plays 1.Kc2 threatening mate, and Black responds with 1...h1=K!
If white checkmates one king, the other is stalemated.  So white plays
2.a8=Black K!! There follows 2...Kb8, 3 h7 Ka8, 4.h8=Q triple mate!

>By the way: when a pawn on e7 promotes to a (white) rook, and white's king
>has not moved from e1 it is *NOT* allowed to castle very long by playing 
>Ke1-e3/Re8-e2, although both pieces haven't moved an inch.

>There are also (alternative) mate-in-3 positions where it *is* allowed to
>castle with Ke1/promoted Re8.

Soltis had one of these in that article too.  I guess it should be
notated O-O-O-O-O-O (?!?).

>Xander Wemmers

Bryant Fujimoto
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
From: may@Apple.COM (Patrick May)
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
Subject: Equipment and books in the S.F. Bay Area
Date: 22 Nov 92 03:55:21 GMT
Distribution: ba
Organization: Apple Computer Inc., Cupertino, CA


     What is the best (cheapest, largest selection) place to buy chess
equipment and books in the San Francisco Bay Area (south bay preferred)?

Thanks,

Patrick May
may@apple.com
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                              "A contract programmer is always intense."
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
From: mzabel@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (Mark A Zabel)
Subject: Chess Styles of the Rich and Famous
Organization: The Ohio State University
Date: Mon, 23 Nov 1992 20:04:56 GMT

     While browsing through the chess books at Barnes & Noble's
bargain annex in Manhattan this weekend I was shocked to see
none other than Robin Leach (!!!) scanning a chess book.  I
figured he would be looking at some Fred Reinfeld book - but no!
He was studying Martin's Secret Weapons book, specifically
the chapter entitled "A Vigorous Pawn Sacrifice in the  Nimzo-
indian."  Astonished, I groped for anouther book on a lower
shelf when he turned to me and said, "This sack is supposed to
be sound - but I DON'T KNOW WHYYYYYYY!"  All I could do was nod
my assent.

-Mark

p.s.  I really did see him there!
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
From: atten@phil.ruu.nl (Mark van Atten)
Subject: Re: psychology
Organization: Department of Philosophy, University of Utrecht, The Netherlands
Date: Wed, 18 Nov 1992 10:39:12 GMT

Bruce_Harper@mindlink.bc.ca (Bruce Harper) writes:

>I believe chess ability is linked to spacial perception - it is the ability
>to recognize patterns, not the ability to calculate, which is important.  But
>I'm sure that's just one school of thought.

Right. In 1946, the Dutch psychologist Adriaan de Groot published a book
called "Het denken van den schaker" (1965 translation Thought and Choice in
Chess), the upshot of which was that GMs most of the time do not calculate
deeper or more moves, but only 2 or 3 very good moves, based on pattern
recognition.
-- Mark.
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
From: varvel@cs.utexas.edu (Donald A. Varvel)
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
Subject: Re: POLISH OPENING
Date: 20 Nov 1992 03:41:53 -0600
Organization: CS Dept, University of Texas at Austin
NNTP-Posting-Host: coltexo.cs.utexas.edu

In article <1992Nov19.085635.1@pa881a.inland.com> nason@pa881a.inland.com writes:

>The Polish Opening is called by other names that you may wish to look under.

>"The Sokolsky Opening"
>"The Orangutan" - A derogatory name give to it by Tartakower
>"The Polish Attack"

While "Orangutan" is indeed the name given the opening by Tartakower, 
I believe it was intended to honor the ape rather than ridicule the 
opening.

-- Don Varvel (varvel@cs.utexas.edu)
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
From: pjj+@cs.cmu.edu (Peter Jansen)
Subject: Re: THE BEST MOVE
Summary: misprints
Organization: School of Computer Science, Carnegie Mellon
Date: Fri, 20 Nov 1992 17:08:27 GMT

In article <1992Nov19.205927.12141@galois.mit.edu>, tycchow@riesz.mit.edu (Timothy Y. Chow) writes:

>
> Here are two analyses from Hort and Jansa's book _The_Best_Move_ that I
> don't understand.  They're positions 179 and 219.
> 
> . . r . . . k .      The book says that White's best move is 1. h3!  "After
> q . . . . p . p      1 ... Rg3 2. Kh2 decides, and 1 ... Qd4 is not
> . . . . . Q . B      adequate because of 2. Qa6!"
> . p . . . . . .
> . p . . . . r .      What I don't understand is, what does White do if
> . . . p . . . .      Black plays 1 ... Rg6?  Also, after 1 ... Qd4, what
> P P P . . . P P      makes 2. Qa6 superior to 2. Qxf7+ and 3. hxg4?
> . . . . . R . K

In my edition there is a White pawn on f5, covering g6 and blocking the
f-file.

> r . b q r . k .      The book gives 1. Bxe4! as White's best move, with
> . . . . . p p p      the variation 1 ... dxe4 2. Nd2 Bf5 3. Ne2! Bd7
> . . p . . . n .      4. Nb3 h5 5. Nc5 h4 6. Nxd7 Qxd7 7. h3!
> . p . p . . . .
> . P . P n . . .      What I don't understand is, what is wrong with the
> . . N B P N . .      variation 1. Nxe4 dxe4 2. Bxe4?  Doesn't this win
> . . Q . . P P P      two pawns immediately with a superior position?
> . R R . . . K .
> 
> -- 

The Black Queen is on e7, not d8 (so 1. Nxe4? drops a piece).

Irritating, those misprints, aren't they?

> Tim Chow     tycchow@math.mit.edu

-- Peter
-- 

Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
From: hwr@intercal.com (Hanon W. Russell)
Subject: British Chess Magazine, November
Organization: Chessnews list (chessnews-request@tssi.com)
Date: Tue, 17 Nov 1992 00:26:32 GMT


                      BRITISH CHESS MAGAZINE
                          November, 1992
                        Volume 112, No. 11

A good part of this issue of the "British Chess Magazine" deals 
with the coverage of the Fischer-Spassky match. The reporting is 
done by GM Murray Chandler. In the article he is able to share a 
few interesting viewpoints which helps the reader put everything 
into better perspective.

GM Glenn Flear follows with his report on Polanica Zdroj, a 
Category 12 tournament won by Romanishin. This article is nicely 
enhanced by a preface which discusses the current state of chess 
in Poland.

We are pleased to see contributions in this issue by one of our 
favorite authors, British GM John Nunn. He has a fascinating 
review and analysis of rook and pawn endings and how the same 
would be handled by computers. His focus is on reciprocal 
zugzwang; we also learn that he has completed a manuscript soon 
to be published by Batsford and to be entitled "Secrets of Rook 
Endings." It is a book we eagerly await.

-----------------------------------------------------------------
BRITISH CHESS MAGAZINE, 9 Market Street, St. Leonards on Sea, 
    East Sussex, TN38 ODQ, Great Britain
    Editor: Bernard Cafferty
    Deputy Editor: Byron Jacobs
    Frequency of publication: Monthly
    Page size: 5.375"x8.25"
Regular departments:
    Editorial
    Letters
    Test Your Chess by FM John Littlewood
    Correspondence Chess by Reg Gillman & John Hawkes
    Quotes & Queries by Ken Whyld
    Problem World by John Beasley
    Studies by Timothy Whitworth
    Reviews and New Books in Brief
    News from Overseas
Subscription information (U.S. subscriptions):
    1 year, 12 issues, $43 surface mail, $46 air freight
-----------------------------------------------------------------
This review reflects the opinion of and is proprietary to Hanon 
W. Russell. Copyright 1992 Hanon W. Russell, All Rights Reserved
From: sla@mimsy.umd.edu (Steve Armentrout)
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
Subject: Dutch monographs
Date: 18 Nov 92 15:40:35 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: U of Maryland, Dept. of Computer Science, Coll. Pk., MD 20742


I would like to find a good monograph on the Dutch defense.  I'm not
interested in specializing in the Leningrad, so DeVault's new book
doesn't help.  The monographs offered by the USCF are:
	Winning with the Dutch by Bellin
	Dutch Defense by Christiansen and Silman
	The Contemporary Anti-Dutch by Martin
I typically avoid any opening book which begins with the word "Winning",
so my choice at this point would be the book by Christiansen and Silman.
Are there others worth a recommendation?  Can anyone give their 0.02$
on the books I've listed?

Feel free to email me directly at sla@cs.umd.edu

Thanks,
Steve
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
From: edjohn@sequent.com (Ed Johnson)
Subject: Re: Illegal moves during Tournament
Organization: Sequent Computer Systems, Inc.
Date: Mon, 23 Nov 92 17:00:44 GMT

In article <92325.182926RVESTERM@vma.cc.nd.edu> RVESTERM@vma.cc.nd.edu writes:
>what? if your right to protest an illegal move ends when the player
>making the move takes his hand off the piece, then i bet i could mate
>kasparov in two.
>
>soon-to-be-world-champ bob vesterman.

I'm not sure you could mate me in 2. My response to your first move is
b7x(whereever you moved to).

Ed
From: edd@cbnewsj.cb.att.com (ed.knowles)
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
Subject: Re: Exploding "Exploding the Myth"
Summary: More on Fischer ?!
Keywords: Fischer/Kasparov
Date: 23 Nov 92 18:21:50 GMT
Organization: AT&T


I was going to write a long Opus attacking Jason Olson's posting, but
I am employed. Nevertheless, I would like to say:

1) I'm comparing Fischer to everyone. His character emerges as the
most despicable. I'm no fan of Kasparov, but his chauvanism and arrogance
are not even close to being in the same league as Fischer's bold
racism. Alekhine was ostracized in the chess world because of his
cooperation with the Nazis during WWII, but at least one could argue
that he was trying to survive, and there is still some doubt as to
whether the anti-semetic articles he wrote were coeerced or not. Keres
also played in Nazi sponsored tournaments, but for some reason was never
ostracized (some sources say Botvinnik intervened to save him). Fischer
has held a news conference in Yugoslavia (of all places) to air his
racist views and nobody was forcing him to. In any case, I'll give
anyone the benefit of the doubt until I know something for sure. I was
even willing to give Fischer the benefit of the doubt, but now he has
come out of hiding and shown eagerness to expouse his ideas. 

2) Why can't I separate his chess from his "personal" life? Because his
personal life isn't personal. It's public. You're very naive if you think
his behavior affects no one. His perversion is not a closet one. We don't
need to fuel anymore hatred in this world. Chess is not that important.
At least not to me. Anyway, I don't think Fischer is helping chess.

When I first heard that Fischer was really coming out of retirement, I
kinda hoped in the back of my mind that he would turn out to be a nice
guy who was just misunderstood -- this would have impressed me more than
if he had come back at 3000 strength. As it is, he was dissapointing on
both counts. 

                      
I understand what Jason Olson is trying to say. I just don't agree.

                                              -Ed Knowles
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
Subject: Re: chess and Deep Thought III
From: nash+@cs.cmu.edu (Richard Nash)
Date: Tue, 17 Nov 1992 18:45:55 GMT
Organization: School of Computer Science, Carnegie Mellon

>If a grandmaster was able to program a computer game which was
>able to beat somebody like Kasparov, Karpov and Fischer, 
>would it be recognised as a measurement of that persons'
>chess I.Q.?
>And if so, would they be placed into the category of the Worlds' number one
>chess player?
>
>Its' a thought isn't it?

Not really. It is like saying since I since I can build a vehicle that can
travel 50 meters faster than any human that I should be given the world 
record in the sprint.
-- 

Richard V. Nash
nash@vi.ri.cmu.edu
From: J.Theodore.Schuerzinger@dartmouth.edu (J. Theodore Schuerzinger)
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
Subject: Chess = ^Sako
Date: 22 Nov 92 20:48:23 GMT
Organization: Dartmouth College, Hanover, NH
X-Posted-From: InterNews1.0a5@newshost.dartmouth.edu

Do any of you reading r.g.c know Esperanto?  If so, I was wondering if
you could help me with the Esperanto words for chess terms. 
Specifically, I'd like to know the names of the pieces, and other
common terms like check, mate, castling, gambit, etc.

Feel free either to email me the info directly or post it.  Any help
would be greatly appreciated.

--Ted Schuerzinger
email: .zed@Dartmouth.EDU
"I should have realized it would be bad vodka when all the label said
was 'Russian Vodka'."
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
From: "jeff shirton" <jeff.shirton@canrem.com>
Subject: latvian
Reply-To: "jeff shirton" <jeff.shirton@canrem.com>
Organization: Canada Remote Systems
Distribution: rec
Date: 20 Nov 92 14:08:26 EST

Hi Lisa,

LP> Jeff: Are you on CRS?
LP>
LP> Lisa Powell . EchoNet Chess Conference Moderator

Yes, I am...

The echo'd copy of my post should have the "canrem" identifier, but
I guess the local copy doesn't.

Jeff Shirton

 * SLMR 2.1a * Jesus is Messiah's Handel
--
Canada Remote Systems  - Toronto, Ontario
World's Largest PCBOARD System - 416-629-7000/629-7044
From: hau4@ellis.uchicago.edu (sven  hauptfeld)
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
Subject: Re: Fischer - Polgar/Kasparov update
Date: 23 Nov 92 19:38:09 GMT
Reply-To: hau4@midway.uchicago.edu
Organization: University of Chicago Computing Organizations

In article <1992Nov23.170228.19943@cbnewsj.cb.att.com> edd@cbnewsj.cb.att.com (ed.knowles) writes:
>
>1) Few grandmasters in the 1960s to 1970s (Fischer's prime) analyzed the
>opening as thoroughly as Fischer did. Fischer won many games right out of the
>opening precisely because of this.

Actually, Fischer was famous for NOT putting too much emphasis on opening
preparation. What he studied were critical positions,
and reasons for one side's loss or win from those. (I can't remember where
I read this, but it was a reliable source, somebody like Soltis or Evans.)

He won many games right out of the opening because he often played openings
that were not fashionable, catching his opponents on uncharted territory.

>
>3) Adjournments have become especially important -- also, again computers
>and grandmaster teams play an important part. It's doubtful that the profes-
>sional chessplayers of today will embrace Fischer's idea of no adjournments.

Much before Fischer's return, adjournments started disappearing from
tournament chess. I bet there won't be any adjournments in the next WC
cycle matches, either.

>convincingly trounce Larsen and Spassky. Alas, Petrosian, Keres, Geller and
>Tal (the greatest chess genius of all, in my opinion) are dead, Spassky is

Is Geller really dead?


	Sven
From: abbasi@star.enet.dec.com (My name is Nasser Abbasi)
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
Subject: Re: ###ALEKHINE AND BLINDFOLD CHESS###
Date: 15 Nov 92 23:02:22 GMT
Organization: Digital Equipment Corporation


In article <1992Nov15.181820.18223@mnemosyne.cs.du.edu>, ctepedel@nyx.cs.du.edu (cihan tepedelenlioglu) writes...
> 
> 	In Irving Chernev's "Wonders and Curiousities of Chess" Chernev
>gives the blindfold records in historical order. The book mentions Alekhine's
>performance in 1924 where he met a strong team of players, including a number
>of masters and well-known experts. Eventually, Alekhine emerged after 11.5
>hours  with a good score- 16 wins, five losses and five games drawn.
>	When a book mentions about a record are we to assume that the opponents
>are also blindfolded or do they play regular chess?
>Thanks,
>Cihan Tepedelenlioglu
> 

NO, Only Alekhine is the Blinfolded players, every other player had
their eyes opened.

/nasser
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess