HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: hyatt@cis.uab.edu (Robert Hyatt)
Subject: Re: Chess Problem Question
Organization: University of Alabama at Birmingham
Date: Wed, 16 Dec 1992 01:51:07 GMT

In article <1992Dec16.003844.27606@leland.Stanford.EDU> 928s4@leland.Stanford.EDU (Benjamin Sloss) writes:
>douglasy@oakhill.sps.mot.com (Douglas W. Yee) writes:
>>
>>
>>A month ago, I spotted one of Ed Maillet's "To Play and Win" problems 
>>in _Chess Bits_.  Since I was not able to solve the problem, I 
>>eagerly awaited the answer which was posted a couple days ago.  The
>>original problem was as follows:
>>
>>>  White: Ra1 Rf1 Kg1 Pa2 Pb2 Pc2
>>>         Pf2 Pg2 Ph2 Qb3 Bc3 Pg7
>>>
>>>  Black: Bc6 Qe6 Pf6 Pa7 Pb7 Pc7
>>>         Ph7 Kb8 Re8 Rg8
>>>
>>>       Black to play. Mate in 6
>>My question is what is the continuation for:
>>
>>   1. Qe6-h3    Pf2-f3
>>   2. Rg8xg7    Pg2-g3
>
> after 	1. .. Qh3
>	2. f3 Rxg7
>	3. g3 Re2
>
>White's fate is sealed:
>	4. Rf2  Rxg3+
>	5. hxg3 Qxg3+
>	6. Kh1  Bxf3+
>	7. Rxf3 Qg2++

Hopefully there is something shorter or the original "mate in 6"
classification was off by one?
-- 
!Robert Hyatt                    Computer and Information Sciences   !
!hyatt@cis.uab.edu               University of Alabama at Birmingham !
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess,news.answers
From: J.Theodore.Schuerzinger@dartmouth.edu (J. Theodore Schuerzinger)
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
Subject: Nigel Short
Date: 14 Dec 92 14:42:46 GMT
Organization: Dartmouth College, Hanover, NH
X-Posted-From: InterNews1.0b1@newshost.dartmouth.edu

If Nigel Short should beat Timman, and then go on to beat Garry
Kasparov (admittedly very unlikely), it is my opinion that he would
lose the title back to Kasparov in 1996.  Would this make him a
champion for the "Short-term"?  :-)

--Ted Schuerzinger
email: .zed@Dartmouth.EDU
"I should have known it would be bad vodka when all the label said was
'Russian Vodka'."
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
From: gsandova@condor.dpi.udec.cl (Gustavo Sandoval T)
Subject: THANK'S FOR BULLETINS!
Date: Sat, 12 Dec 92 11:08:06 GMT
Organization: Universidad de Concepcion, Concepcion - Chile
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL7]

I'm: gsandova@condor.dpi.udec.cl
From: corleyj@helium.gas.uug.arizona.edu (Jason D Corley )
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
Subject: Re: Pardon Fischer?
Date: 17 Dec 92 18:44:40 GMT
Organization: University of Arizona, Tucson

In article <1992Dec16.232754.528@uoft02.utoledo.edu> dcrosgr@uoft02.utoledo.edu writes:
>
>Why pardon a man who has broken no law?

Just for the heck of it.  Come on, you know how much fun pardons are!
Throw a pardon party!
Declare it National Chess Pardon Day!
Invite Nixon over!  Reminisce!
Have a pardon parade down Central Av. in New York! Bob Newhart could host
with special guest Judit Polgar (Bob Newhart nude in sound booth...)!
And there's so much more you can do with a pardon!  Hang it up and
tell everyone you're a mass murderer!  Fold it into a special paper
airplane for Clinton's inauguration!  Use it for a scoresheet-- record
new theoretical brilliancies on the back of it!  Yes, a pardon has
a million and one uses.  The American Pardon Council reminds you that
Pardons are our friends.  Pardon someone today!

	Jason
	Worst Chessplayer in Western Spiral Arm
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
From: mzabel@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (Mark A Zabel)
Subject: Re: Pardon Fischer?
Organization: The Ohio State University
Date: Thu, 17 Dec 1992 21:38:50 GMT

In article <1992Dec17.195011.9474@colorado.edu> perlman@qso.Colorado.EDU (Eric
S. Perlman) writes:
>
>By pardoning Richard Nixon, Gerald Ford didn't let the system work in
>that case, either.  I think that decision was also wrong.

I think that this whole subject is rather silly, but why
would anybody bother pardoning someone who isn't guilty
of some crime?  It seems to be only an outlet for avoiding
the problems that incarceration (or worse) of a certain
person would cause.

It also exists to provide an outlet for the administration
to save face when bad policy is challenged, and as time
passes it becomes increasingly obvious that the other
point of view is correct (more popular, or whatever).

Fischer disobeyed a direct order from the State Dept.
that was (IMHO) a ridiculous order.  Now he faces the
consequences of his recalcitrance.  It all depends
upon your point of view on the orders from the State Dept.

It doesn't matter anyway, as he won't be pardoned.

-Mark
From: Bruce_Harper@mindlink.bc.ca (Bruce Harper)
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
Subject: Re: Worthless GMs
Date: 21 Dec 92 01:14:49 GMT
Organization: MIND LINK! - British Columbia, Canada

I just want IM Ginsburg to know I would have been a worthless GM
rather than a worthless non-GM had I gotten the title.

But I don't think such distinctions are all that important.
From: steven@Chemeng.Ed.Ac.Uk (Steven Rix)
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
Subject: Re: FISCHER-SPASSKY II BOOKS
Date: 14 Dec 92 18:21:25 GMT
Reply-To: steven@Chemeng.Ed.Ac.Uk
Organization: Edinburgh University Chemical Engineering Department.
Originator: steven@gour

There's also the usual offering from probably the world's most prolific chess
author, Raymond Dennis Keene, O.B.E.. His book is called "Fischer-Spassky II",
I think, and is published by Batsfords.

How objective is the Inside Chess book on the match? Seirawan is rather 
pro-Fischer, I believe.

Steve
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
From: mzabel@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (Mark A Zabel)
Subject: Re: US Championship Round 11 GAMES
Organization: The Ohio State University
Date: Wed, 16 Dec 1992 19:19:15 GMT

>Round 11
>
>Ivanov,A-Dzindzichashvili,R
>US ch Durango(11) 1992
>1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 d6 4.d4 Bd7 5.Nc3 exd4 6.Nxd4 g6 7.Be3 Bg7 8.Qd2
>Nf6 9.Bxc6 bxc6 10.Bh6 O-O 1/2
>

Wow!!  Dzindzi really fights to the death in his games!
I always look forward to seeing him play great chess (e.g.
his game against Ben Finegold last year at the New York(?)
Open), and then I get to see no chess at all from him.
How many games has he drawn in this tourney?  Maybe he just
hasn't been sleeping.

Of course, Kamran Zerazi is another story entirely.

-Squidfeet

p.s.  Go Boris! (Men that is)
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
From: hwr@intercal.com (Hanon W. Russell)
Subject: This Week In Chess History
Organization: Chessnews list (chessnews-request@tssi.com)
Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1992 21:41:05 GMT


                       THIS WEEK IN CHESS HISTORY
                          December 17-23, 1992

December 17
1953 - Alexander Belyavsky born

December 19
1907 - Vasja Pirc born
1918 - Max Blau born
1975 - Gyorgy Paros died

December 20
Hannukah
1843 - Staunton defeats St. Amant at Paris 13-8

December 21
1930 - Wolfgang Pietzch born
1945 - Duncan Suttles born

December 22
1908 - Vitaly Chekhover born

Copyright 1992 Hanon W. Russell
All Rights Reserved
From: dcrosgr@uoft02.utoledo.edu
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
Subject: Re: Pardon Fischer?
Date: 17 Dec 92 18:52:21 EST
Organization: University of Toledo, Computer Services

In article <92352.110051AER107@psuvm.psu.edu>, <AER107@psuvm.psu.edu> writes:
> Mr. Harrington wrote that Fischer should not be sent to prison because he
> would be taking the place of someone who is actually a threat to society.  Mr.
> Cosgrove wrote that Fischer has broken no laws.
> 
> Firstly, does anyone seriously believe that if Fischer goes to prison (read: if
> Fischer returns to the U.S.), that he would go to anything other than a mini-
> mum security prison.  In other words, he would not be placed in a prison which
> houses any violent offenders. 

If it so nice there, let's send you instead. 

				He would not even be in a prison where crowding
> is even an issue.  

I can see your are blidly ignorant on the facts of prison overcrowding. Please,
don't broadcast that fact to everyone.

			Secondly, as far as breaking no laws, Fischer has broken the
> American law.  If he returns to the U.S., he tacitly accepts the jurisdiction
> of the U.S. government.  He willfully broke American law.  

Sure, he violated a statute which is unjust in itself. That is as insane as
Khomeni saying Reshdee violated islamic law by writing his book while in
England and placing a bounty on Rishdee's head. When Iran does it, the world
laughs because the arabs are too uncivilized to see that their laws do nto
extend beyond their borders. When the US does it, you back them 100 percent.




								Therefore, he
> deserves to be punished if he maintains any of the benefits of American citi-
> zenry.  From this it can be seen that neither Mr. Harrington's nor Mr.
> Cosgrove's arguments are valid reasons why Fischer should remain out of prison.

Because there is no valid reason to put him in.
From: moynihan@rtsg.mot.com (Kieran D. Moynihan)
Subject: How can I look at the chess FAQ ( Question ) ?
Keywords: FAQ Question
Organization: Motorola Inc., Cellular Infrastructure Group
Date: Fri, 11 Dec 1992 15:58:02 GMT

Hi,
	I'm new to nn and I was wondering if anyone could tell me how to access the Chess FAQ and any other useful details about the chess group.

					Thanks,
						Regards,
							 Kieran Moynihan
							 Cork,
							 Ireland
From: kurtovic@gold.cchem.berkeley.edu (Zoran Kurtovic)
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
Subject: Re: Fischer Indicted
Date: 20 Dec 1992 00:06:33 GMT
Organization: Dept of Chemistry, University of California at Berkeley
NNTP-Posting-Host: gold.cchem.berkeley.edu

In article <1992Dec16.175926.23636@dartvax.dartmouth.edu> J.Theodore.Schuerzinger@dartmouth.edu (J. Theodore Schuerzinger) writes:
>
>If we buy new 'Informants' does that mean we're breaking the law too? 
>The Informants are published in Belgrade, you know.
>

I don't think we are breaking the law, but I think whoever imports them
to the United States might be.
By the way, does anybody know more about this?  It seems to me that the
chess 'Informants' should be subject to the economic embargo.
Of course somebody out there will probably say that we have the right
to read books and it isn't any of the governments bussiness.

Well?

Zoran


>
>--Ted Schuerzinger
>email: .zed@Dartmouth.EDU
>"I should have known it would be bad vodka when all the label said was
>'Russian Vodka'."
From: dcrosgr@uoft02.utoledo.edu
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
Subject: Re: TO THE GM'S AT CHESS CHOW/CHESS LI
Date: 12 Dec 92 19:34:55 EST
Organization: University of Toledo, Computer Services

In article <1992Dec12.055515.4606@organpipe.uug.arizona.edu>, corleyj@helium.gas.uug.arizona.edu (Jason D Corley ) writes:
> In article <1992Dec11.165710.448@uoft02.utoledo.edu> dcrosgr@uoft02.utoledo.edu writes:
>>>>[attribution line stupidly deleted :(]
>>>>But, one player may be better than all the rest.
>>>>
>>>>A fact both of you have forgotten.
>>>>
>>>>DMC
>>> 
>>> Well no they didn't.  It's just not true.  I quote GM Andy Soltis in
>>> [post about how there isn't a best chess player because every game
>>>  is different deleted]
>>Then I suppose ther is no Heavyweight Champion boxer either, and no World
>>Series Winner either?
>>
> No permanent winner, no.  There's a set of rules for determining the
> Heavyweight champion, a challenge system of some kind, probably very
> much like today's World Champion system, with candidate matches and
> such.

What does your qualifier "permanent" have to do with the discussion at hand? We
are not talking about any games to happen in a future match.

> 
> And the World Series has rules too.  Not everyone can play the world
> series.  There are pennants to be won...the equivelant of candidate
> matches, in a very loose sense.
> 
> In either case, there is a set of rules determining who plays.  And
> those rules must be abided by to legitimately claim the title of
> World Champion.  Fischer did not abide by those rules, therefore he
> can't claim the title.

But he HAS the title. Go recheck your logic and compare it with reality.
Unless, of course, you wish to decalre him not your 'second-rate-players-
association-non-champion', which of course you are entitled to do.

> 
> And you missed the point of my original post--which was that there is
> NO accurate way to determine who the best chessplayer "really" is
> (the "real" best chessplayer being able to beat "all the rest"),
> because different people play better against different kinds of
> opponents.  You never disputed this at all.

Hmmm....I would have thought the person who beats his opponents would qualify
somehow, perhaps you would prefer we use "most-dramamtic-move" to qualify
someone as world champion?

And, I DID dispute it. Please read AND think before responding.

> 
>>Besides, what do any of these opinions have to do with the GMs defending their
>>claims against Fischer?
>>
> The original point was, I think, that you claimed Fischer was better than
> everyone else and therefore more qualified to speak out.  I will admit,
> he is better than I am, and therefore more qualified.  But I am leery,
> after watching his performance in F-S II, and watching the comments,
> not only by GMs, but by people on this group and in other publications,
> about saying that he is better qualified than all the Grandmasters on
> the face of the earth.  As a matter of fact, I'm pretty sure he's not.
> Just a feeling I have, though.

Nope, go re-read.

> 
> 	Jason
> 	Worst Chessplayer in Central Tucson

DMC
From: dcrosgr@uoft02.utoledo.edu
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
Subject: Re: Pardon Fischer?
Date: 16 Dec 92 23:27:54 EST
Organization: University of Toledo, Computer Services

In article <1992Dec16.013844.517@uoft02.utoledo.edu>, dweddin@uoft02.utoledo.edu writes:
> In article <1992Dec16.011130.26210@penet.fi>, an1595@anon.penet.fi writes:
>> GM Fischer indicted!
>> Arrest warrant issued!!
>> 
>> Should U.S. chessplayers
>> lobby outgoing President Bush
>> for an executive pardon???
>> 
>> Please post responses (or flames) to this newsgroup
>> so that public reaction can be properly guaged.  THANX.
>> 
> 
> don wedding here weighing in with a suprising answer.....
> 
> NO!  Bobby should not be pardoned. 
> 
> WHY???  because he is more likely to play chess again if the U.S.
> says that he isn't allowed.  and that's what i want.
> 

Why pardon a man who has broken no law?

Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
From: gsandova@condor.dpi.udec.cl (Gustavo Sandoval T)
Subject: thanks for bulletins
Date: Sat, 12 Dec 92 12:16:06 GMT
Organization: Universidad de Concepcion, Concepcion - Chile
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL7]

I'm: gsandova@condor.dpi.udec.cl
From: linb@ucs.orst.edu (Benjamin Lin)
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
Subject: Re: US Championship Round 3 GAME
Date: 13 Dec 92 00:22:16 GMT
Article-I.D.: gaia.1gdvnoINN4i6
Distribution: world
Organization: University Computing Services - OSU
NNTP-Posting-Host: ucs.orst.edu

I have a question about the Dzindzi-Fed game in Round 3.
Why was it drawn? After the last move Ne5!!? White seems to
be winning in the center.  The most interesting continuation
seems to be ...de; d6+ Kh7; fe Ra7; e6 intendiing e7
If Black does not start off with ...de then how can Ng6 or Nc6
be stopped?  If instead ...Nxe5 then fxe5 looks good for White.
Any comments?

-benoni
From: 824-5054%wwiv@tweekco.uucp (Jay Whitley #824 @5054)
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
Subject: FISCHER-SPASSKY II BOOKS
Date: Sat, 12 Dec 92 00:10:48 GMT

Can anyone add to this list of Fischer-Spassky II books available?
 
 - BOBBY FISCHER'S $5,000,000 COMEBACK MATCH by IM Nigel Davies

 - WORLD CHAMPIONSHIP REMATCH by Shamkovich & Carier

 - Booklet of Annotated FSII Games by IM Jack Peters sold by LA Times
 
 Others?
From: BRYAN@wvnvm.wvnet.edu (Jerry Bryan)
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
Subject: Re: Chess Problem Question
Date: 16 Dec 92 15:28:33 GMT
Article-I.D.: wvnvm.92351.102833BRYAN

In article <1992Dec15.213406.5812@oakhill.sps.mot.com>,
douglasy@oakhill.sps.mot.com (Douglas W. Yee) says:
>
>A month ago, I spotted one of Ed Maillet's "To Play and Win" problems
>in _Chess Bits_.  Since I was not able to solve the problem, I
>eagerly awaited the answer which was posted a couple days ago.  The
>original problem was as follows:
>
>>  White: Ra1 Rf1 Kg1 Pa2 Pb2 Pc2
>>         Pf2 Pg2 Ph2 Qb3 Bc3 Pg7
>>
>>  Black: Bc6 Qe6 Pf6 Pa7 Pb7 Pc7
>>         Ph7 Kb8 Re8 Rg8
>>
>>       Black to play. Mate in 6
>>
>>    +---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+
>>  8 |   |.K.|   |...| R |...| R |...|
>>    +---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+  On a scale of 1-10, this problem
>>  7 |.P.| P |.P.|   |...|   |*P*| P |  rates at about a 3.5 at best. The
>>    +---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+  solution will be in the next issue.
>>  6 |   |...| B |...| Q |.P.|   |...|
>>    +---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+  If you have a chess problem(s) that
>>  5 |...|   |...|   |...|   |...|   |  you would like to have included
>>    +---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+  send it to me and I'll take a look
>>  4 |   |...|   |...|   |...|   |...|  a it. If it's a good one, I'll put
>>    +---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+  it in with credit given, of course.
>>  3 |...|*Q*|*B*|   |...|   |...|   |
>>    +---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+  Enjoy!
>>  2 |*P*|*P*|*P*|...|   |*P*|*P*|*P*|
>>    +---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+  ----- Ed Maillet (White)
>>  1 |*R*|   |...|   |...|*R*|*K*|   |  ip05872@portland.maine.edu
>>    +---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+
>>      a   b   c   d   e   f   g   h
>
>And the posted solution was:
>
>> A Solution to Last Months:
>>    1. Qe6-h3    Pf2-f3
>>    2. Rg8xg7    Rf1-f2
>>    3. Bc6xf3    Kg1-f1
>>    4. Bf3xg2    Kf1-g1
>>    5. Bg2-f3    Rf2-g2
>>    6. Qh3xg2++
>
>
>My question is what is the continuation for:
>
>   1. Qe6-h3    Pf2-f3
>   2. Rg8xg7    Pg2-g3
>
>
>Am I just overlooking something obvious?

The order of moves could vary a little, but how about

    3. Rg7xg3+   Ph2xg3
    4. Qh3xg3+   Kh2-h1
    5. Re8-e2    whatever
    6. Qg3-g2++

There are several silly, time wasting moves that white can make, such
as Qb3-b7+, and Rf1-f2, but the mate cannot be avoided.  The queen
check is met easily by KxQ, and the rook move is met easily by RxR.
From: sstrazdu@vulcan.intel.com (Stephen Strazdus)
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
Subject: Re: USCF Rating
Date: 16 Dec 1992 21:45:26 GMT
Organization: Intel Corporation
NNTP-Posting-Host: vulcan.intel.com

From the FAQ:

>> How Ratings are Calculated: USCF Rating, Simplified
>> ---------------------------------------------------
>> 
>> **For first 20 games, (provisional rating) use the following system:**
>> 
>> Take the rating of the opponent +400 if the player wins.
>> Take the rating of the opponent -400 if the player loses.
>> Take the rating of the opponent if the game is a draw.

I see that Kenneth Sloan has already answered the original questions, so I'll ask
one more.  I played in my first tournament last weekend, and it was a 4-round
1/4K tournament.  How is my provisional rating calculated?  Is it the same as
above, or is the difference between winner and loser taken to be 100 instead of
400?  Or is it something else?
--
Steve Strazdus    sstrazdu@sedona.intel.com
80960 Design      (602) 554-3867
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
From: 928s4@leland.Stanford.EDU (Benjamin Sloss)
Subject: Re: Chess Problem Question
Organization: DSG, Stanford University, CA 94305, USA
Date: Thu, 17 Dec 92 17:46:32 GMT

fsmgs@camelot.acf-lab.alaska.edu (Michael Schmahl [Black-Robe Mage]) writes:
>Benjamin Sloss writes
>> douglasy@oakhill.sps.mot.com (Douglas W. Yee) writes:
>> >
>> >
>> >A month ago, I spotted one of Ed Maillet's "To Play and Win" problems 
>> >in _Chess Bits_.  Since I was not able to solve the problem, I 
>> >eagerly awaited the answer which was posted a couple days ago.  The
>> >original problem was as follows:
>> >
>> >>  White: Ra1 Rf1 Kg1 Pa2 Pb2 Pc2
>> >>         Pf2 Pg2 Ph2 Qb3 Bc3 Pg7
>> >>
>> >>  Black: Bc6 Qe6 Pf6 Pa7 Pb7 Pc7
>> >>         Ph7 Kb8 Re8 Rg8
>> >>
>> >>       Black to play. Mate in 6
>> >My question is what is the continuation for:
>> >
>> >   1. Qe6-h3    Pf2-f3
>> >   2. Rg8xg7    Pg2-g3
>> 
>>  after 	1. .. Qh3
>> 	2. f3 Rxg7
>> 	3. g3 Re2
>> 
>> White's fate is sealed:
>> 	4. Rf2  Rxg3+
>> 	5. hxg3 Qxg3+
>> 	6. Kh1  Bxf3+
>> 	7. Rxf3 Qg2++
>
>But that's mate in 7!

And not to compound the problem, I omitted white's spite check 4. Qxb7+ Kxb7.
If there really is a mate in 6, I'd very much like to see it.
MChess Pro just told me that after 1. .. Qh3 2. f3 Rxg7 3. g3 there is
*no* mate-in-4 available to black.  I'll try mate-in-5 after 2. f3, but I
now suspect this problem is cooked...

Maybe DT2 can help us out on this one?  Exhaustive 11-ply searches are a bit
out of my league :-)


-- 
Ben Sloss        Email: ben@osc.versant.com   Work: (415) 329-7500 x172
Quote:          "It's all fun and games until someone gets paid."
Transportation: '83 CB650SC (straight roads) '93 CBR 900RR   (twisty roads)
		'91 XR 250L (dirty    roads) '87 Mustang 5.0 (wet    roads)
From: dcrosgr@uoft02.utoledo.edu
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
Subject: Re: Pardon Fischer?
Date: 20 Dec 92 01:57:18 EST
Organization: University of Toledo, Computer Services

In article <1992Dec20.003448.17797@ucsu.Colorado.EDU>, cuffell@spot.Colorado.EDU (CUFFELL TIMOTHY MICH) writes:
> In article <1992Dec18.132520.549@uoft02.utoledo.edu> dcrosgr@uoft02.utoledo.edu writes:
>>
>>How is the US claim, that it can enact laws which attempt to exercise control
>>over people outside of its territories, any different than the Iranian claim
>>that it can pass judgment on Salman Rushdie for writing a book while he was in
>>Great Britain?
>>
>>I eagerly await a mature response which addresses these questions...
>>
>>DMC
>>  
> 
> How about this:
> 
> 	I, a high level military official, hop on a plane to say, China, an

STOP! Military officials are on-duty 24 hours a day, seven days a week,
for the duration of their time in the military. They are never off-duty.
It is by the leave of the government they are given free time. They are, by law
AND their agreement when they entered, subject to Military law 24 hours a
day for however many years they are in. Now, let's continue with your hypo 
and see where it takes us...


> 	tell them all about secret US millitary installations.  Would the US
> 	have the right to try me for treason, in effect, exercising control
> 	over people outside of its territories?

Yes, because of the above facts, which, you must admit do not apply to Fischer.

> 
> Granted, Fischers acts are not neatly as odious.  But this is not the part
> of the argument I am addressing.  My scenerio is an attempt to provide an
> example wha country may have the right to try on of its cite  

Your example fails becuase you are comparing someone who has agreed to
be held to stricter rules to someone who told the Gov't where to go when
they tried to impose stricter rules.

								And
> make no mistake, Fischer is an American citizen who has had thnifits of
> a country whose standard of living is high enough to allow for professional
> chess players.  Nomany Somolians (or Bosnians) in the Candidates cycle
> this time 'round, were there?

Yes, so once you set foot in America, and benefited from from being here,
you are bound by the political winds no matter where you go until the end of
time?

To be interested in chess means you have some grasp of logic, and yet this
makes sense to you???