HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: dcrosgr@uoft02.utoledo.edu
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
Subject: Re: A game of chess with dmc!?
Date: 4 Jan 93 10:13:58 EST
Organization: University of Toledo, Computer Services

In article <palane.726128033@pv7427.vincent.iastate.edu>, palane@iastate.edu (Paul A. Lane) writes:
> In <1992Dec31.170812.762@uoft02.utoledo.edu> dcrosgr@uoft02.utoledo.edu writes:
> 
>>Back it up if you are man enough. Lose pays plane fare.
> 
>>It'll never happen because your fear your lack of ability.
> 
> Or that proving something to you isn't worth risking money.

If he is aware he is risking money, he never should have claimed, a second
time, that I couldn't play.

He OBVIOUSLY knows he is proabbly wrong, and never should have made the claim.

> 
>>Won't either of you grow some testicles?
> 
> Somewhere, you got the notion that putting an excessive amount
> of money on the line proves something. A very good friend of mine likes
> to try to get me to make stupid bets when I make an assertion (usually
> sports-related). [O.K., he occasionally succeeds.] 

If you open your mouth, and make assertions you don't feel you can back up, why
do you make them in the first place?

I mean, how does that make you feel as a person? Do you genuinely feel like a
man of your word???


> 
> Willingness to put money on the line proves nothing about the merits of
> any idea. Just how far you're willing to go to back it. I happen to be
> a graduate student making very little money and so sheer ratio of income
> would mean any such bet is to your advantage.


How so? I am a law student. I am VOLUNTEERING for the prosecutors clinic this
semester which will:

1. Preclude me from doing any work.
2. Take up my time.

Now, how was said bet to my advantage? (Looks like you made the same error
Harper made, you made assumptions about me which simply are not true.)

> 
> In any event, a no cash challenge proves as much as a cash challengs,
> which is to say it means nothing about Fischer's ability or embittered
> GMs. However, chess is certainly a more civilized alternative to you
> flying out and attempting to beat someone senseless.

But the challenge doesn't really have much to do with that. Harper claimed I
could not play as I had never posted any merits. I posted my merits. Harper
then called me a liar by claiming, yet again, that he didn't think I could
play.

He has been unwilling to either apologize or accept the challenge in its
multitude of wagers.


> 
> {By the way, I apologize to all and sundry for wasting bandwidth. 
> dmc doesn't respond to email.}

1. If you ffelt your post was a waste of bandwith, you shouldn't have posted
it.

2. I do respond to e-mail. If it is newsgroup related, I direct it right back
here so I do not have to repeat the same things over and over to people.


> 
> Paul A. Lane
> 
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
From: Bruce_Harper@mindlink.bc.ca (Bruce Harper)
Subject: Re: Scoresheets
Organization: MIND LINK! - British Columbia, Canada
Date: Sun, 10 Jan 1993 04:04:37 GMT

Don't most real tournaments require the scoresheets to be submitted to the
tournament director before a game is official?  In any case, I would think
the question is simply a condition of the tournament - if nothing is said,
the scoresheet belongs to the player (I have all mine!), but if it has to be
submitted, it would belong to the tournament organizers unless otherwsie
specified.

(This seems too logical - it must be wrong...)
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
From: pope@vatican.kpc.com (John Pope)
Subject: Re: Has anyone seen this line before?
Organization: Kubota Pacific Computer, Inc.
Date: Mon, 11 Jan 1993 18:19:57 GMT

(David G. Caraballo) writes:
>   1. e4 e5  2. f4 exf4  3. Nf3 d5  4. exd5 Qxd5  5. Nc3 Qf5  ?
>
>     6. d4             ...     I think this move is strongest.  White
>			       is preparing to play Bd3.
>	...            Nf6     A reasonable move.  6...Bd6 seems good,
>			       too.  Black will try to keep the pawn
>			       for a while.

On 6...Bd6, 7.Bd3 Qe6 (I assume this is the idea), then 8.Kf2 is
quite annoying for black.

>     7. Bd3            Qe6+    The queen attacks even as it retreats. 
>			       White is kept from castling, and Black
>			       does not lose any more momentum
>			       (although White has a lead in development
>			       already).
>
>     8. Qe2            ...     There are alternatives, but this is a
>			       safe line.

As someone pointed out, the 7...Qe6 idea is not too logical if you
admit that 5...Qe6 6.Be2 is better for white, since white can just
transpose with 8.Be2. Also, 8.Ne5 looks strong - the black Q is still
poorly placed and the f-pawn will fall, leaving black behind in
development and weaker in the center (8...c5? 9.0-0 cd 10.Re1).

--
John Pope
pope@kpc.com
Kubota Pacific Computers, Inc.
(408) 987-3362
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
From: mem@world.std.com (Jeff Lesser)
Subject: Re: Chess computers ratings?
Organization: The World Public Access UNIX, Brookline, MA
Date: Wed, 6 Jan 1993 22:21:10 GMT

Tony-Preston@cup.portal.com (ANTHONY FRANCIS PRESTON) writes:

>Does anyone have a list of various chess computers and their estimated 
>ratings?  I have a novag super constellation and wonder how it compares?
>It gives me a good game at the highest(non-infinite) setting.

As I recall, your machine (vintage about 1984) is rated around 1980.  The
best models under, say, $500 today are rated over 2300.  And chess
software running on a fast '486 is well over 2400.
 
Novag went through at least 8 or 10 generations after your machine, but
they failed to stay fully competitive.  However, their machines always
played a nice, active game and did relatively well against humans (as
opposed to their mediocre performance against other programs).

Roy Eassa
From: wayne.mendryk@freddy.ersys.edmonton.ab.ca (Wayne Mendryk) 
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
Subject: Looking for Suttles games
Date: 10 Jan 93 08:23:00 GMT
Reply-To: wayne.mendryk@freddy.ersys.edmonton.ab.ca (Wayne Mendryk) 
Distribution: world
Organization: Freddy's Place BBS - Edmonton, AB - 403-456-4241

BH>From: Bruce_Harper@mindlink.bc.ca (Bruce Harper)
BH>Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
BH>Subject: Looking for Suttles games for book
BH>Message-ID: <19430@mindlink.bc.ca>
BH>Date: Sat, 9 Jan 1993 16:49:11 GMT

BH>I am currently involved in writing a book on GM Duncan Suttles.  If anyone
BH>has any of his games, please contact me.  I have access to the more high
BH>profile events in which he played (Belgrad 1969, San Antonio 1972, the
BH>Olympiads, the Interzonals), so I am more interested in Opens (but I also
BH>have the 1973 US Open games).

Bruce, I found the following games of Suttles in my books. If you want
me to post any of these as a message, please tell me via a response:

White         Black         Tournament         Opening      Result
Fischer       Suttles  1965 US Champ           Pirc       37 moves 1-0
Suttles       Fischer  1970 Palma de Mallorca  Alekhine   52 moves 0-1
Soltis        Suttles  1971 Student Olympiad   Modern     41 moves 1-0
Tal           Suttles  1972 Sukhumi            Pirc       40 moves 1-0
all of Suttles games   1973-74 Hastings
Suttles      Smyslov   1974 Venice            Vienna Game 43 moves 0-1

---
 . SLMR 2.1a . Chess is fine entertainment-Tolstoy
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
From: iwatters@cix.compulink.co.uk (Ian Watters)
Subject: Re: I will accept DMC's challenge!!     
Reply-To: iwatters@cix.compulink.co.uk
Date: Fri, 8 Jan 1993 00:21:00 +0000

Because I have to use a reader without a killfile, my patience had just
cracked and I was *just* about to drop the newsgroup after posting something
on a certain racist's particularly moronic comments, but then...

>However, my seminar paper is due this Friday*, and school starts Monday.
>Thus, I mmust take my leave from this entertaining group.

Trust me, punters, some day this will be used as proof for the existence of
God!  <grin>

>This has been fun, but it has been like playing on a local team during the
>baseball strike--chance to relax and realize just how good you are compared
>to the average Joe.

It's incredible, isn't it punters?  Less insight than some Eliza programs.
If I'm ever in legal trouble in the US, *please* let the other side have him
as their lawyer...  <grin>

  //\/\/

>>>MATRIX version  1.21e
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
From: hyatt@cis.uab.edu (Robert Hyatt)
Subject: Re: Harper vs. DMC
Organization: University of Alabama at Birmingham
Date: Wed, 6 Jan 1993 22:00:51 GMT

In article <1993Jan6.210509.24159@progress.com> disabito@progress.COM (Paul Disabito) writes:
>disabito@progress.COM (Paul Disabito) writes:
>test
>

<DMC tirade deleted>

If you gotta test, how 'bout quoting a more relaxing and informative
message?  we have had enough of these messages without quoting them for
a test.  Also, for you guys flaming on here......  how about not changing
the subject line?  My kill file groweth...




-- 
!Robert Hyatt                    Computer and Information Sciences   !
!hyatt@cis.uab.edu               University of Alabama at Birmingham !
From: muzzle@cs.uq.oz.au (Murray Chapman)
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
Subject: Help!  Chess game in Blade Runner
Date: 6 Jan 93 03:55:34 GMT
Reply-To: muzzle@cs.uq.oz.au

Hi there

I'm writing the FAQ file for the movie "Blade Runner".  In this movie, there
is a chess game, which probably mirrors the actions of the characters in the
story.

I'm turning to this newsgroup for assistance in trying to interpret the game.

(The plot of Blade Runner is very complex, and I won't go into it here.
Basically, the game is played between the CEO of a future corporation (Tyrell)
which manufactures "replicant humans", and one of his genetic designers
(Sebastian).  Sebastian had only beaten Tyrell once.  Roy Batty (a replicant)
saw the chess board, and helped Sebastian defeat Tyrell through an avenue
which Sebastian thought was suicide).

From the FAQ:

Sebastian's chess pieces are animals (he makes animals), Tyrell's are people
(he makes "people").

It is possible that the chess match between Tyrell and Sebastian is similar
to a game played in the 1800s between two masters.  One of the masters
sacrificed virtually all his pieces to get a checkmate.  This game has been
used in a few other literary pieces.  [Interpretation relevant to BR, anyone?]

This theory does have one flaw, in that Sebastian would have planned this
attack long before Batty saw the game.  How could Roy just come in at the end
and recognize how to checkmate without Sebastian already having planned to do
so?

        The moves are:

                Sebastian:      Queen to Bishop 6 check

                Tyrell:         Knight takes Queen

                Sebastian (with Roy's help):
				Bishop to King 7 checkmate

[Proper chess notation, anyone?]


Thanks,
Murray
--
~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^
  Murray Chapman                           muzzle@cs.uq.oz.au
  University of Queensland                 How many lightbulb jokes does it
  Brisbane, Australia                      take to change the subject?
From: pope@vatican.kpc.com (John Pope)
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
Subject: Re: Should r.g.c be split?
Date: 11 Jan 93 19:14:32 GMT
	<1993Jan11.070048.14078@riscsm.scripps.edu>
	<1993Jan11.192708.4411@ucsvc.ucs.unimelb.edu.au>
	<93011.104306K3006E7@ALIJKU11.BITNET>
Organization: Kubota Pacific Computer, Inc.

>   I think the reaction to net vandalism is not to create a proliferation
>   of more and more newsgroups.
>   1) This rewards the vandal by getting the kind of response and reaction
>      he or she sought in the first place.
>   2) The large amount of public pressure by the rest of the readership
>      seemed to be rather successful so far.
>   3) Creation of subgroups does not mean that people will stop posting
>      non-chess-related, obnoxious messages to these subgroups also.
>   4) It is rather straightforward to create a kill file.
>   5) Finally, cross-posting and the like will only cost more in net traffic
>      and disk space around the world.

I completely agree. Having advocated newsgroup splitting for RGC
several years ago, I now doubt that it would accomplish any good at
all for the very reasons posted. The point about cross-posting is
particularly apt.

>   I see the exact discussion come up in EVERY group I have read regularly
>   on the net (e.g., comp.binaries.ibm.pc). Unless we have moderation, and
>   also a "crap" group on top of that, I really doubt splitting r.g.c. is
>   the solution.

Right. There are a few groups (comp.arch, for example) where the
newsgroup hygiene is relatively good. The main reasons seem to be:

	- frequent updates and posting of the FAQ material. Those who ask
	  questions contained in the FAQ are referred to it *via email*.
	- an experienced readership who simply ignore the fools, charlatans,
	  and attention vampires.
	- resolution of the inevitable flame wars by private email.

--
John Pope
pope@kpc.com
Kubota Pacific Computers, Inc.
(408) 987-3362
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
From: arimakel@klaava.Helsinki.FI (Ari Kalevi Makela)
Subject: Re: Has anyone seen this line before?
Organization: University of Helsinki
Date: Mon, 11 Jan 1993 02:43:15 GMT

In <1993Jan10.072110.10222@Princeton.EDU> carabalo@phoenix.Princeton.EDU (David G. Caraballo) writes:

>Has anyone seen this line of the King's Gambit Accepted:  
>1. e4 e5  2. f4 exf4  3. Nf3 d5  4. exd5 Qxd5  5. Nc3 Qf5  ?

>I have not seen it in ECO-2, BCO-2, or MCO-13.  I have asked a
>few people about it -- no one else had seen this line! (Hence 
>my post)  It is a playable line (for both sides), intended as 
>an improvement over 5...Qe6.  I do not have access to any 
>databases, unfortunately.  All references/comments are 
>appreciated.  Has this occurred in any master or GM-level games?
>If no one finds any references to this opening, I'll post some of
>my favorite variations.

>  1. e4             e5             
>  2. f4             exf4    The KGA       
>  3. Nf3            d5      This is listing C36 in ECO-2

>  4. exd5           ...     4.Nc3 is not strong, and 4.e5 is 
>                            not too strong.
>     ...            Qxd5    I prefer 4...Nf6 actually.  Also, if
>                            4...Bd6 then 5 d4! is very strong. 
>                            4...Qxd5 is marked ?! in ECO-2, volume
>                            C, page 174.  Nevertheless, I'm
>                            suggesting a possible improvement at a
>                            later stage that may redeem this move.

That should be bad. Well, at least it is ugly.

>  5. Nc3            ...     Obvious and strong.
>     ...            Qf5     This is the key move.  This variation 
>                            is not in BCO-2, MCO-13, or ECO-2.  
>                            ECO-2 gives 5...Qe6  6. Be2  Bd6, etc. 
>                            (favors White), and 5...Qh5  6. Be2  Bg4
>                            7. d4, etc., also favoring White.

>There are many ways to continue from here.  e.g.,

>  6. d4             ...     I think this move is strongest.  White
>                            is preparing to play Bd3.

I hope this is not a half-past-four-in-the-morning-idea but to me 6. Bc4
intending Qe2+, 0-0 and d3/d4 seems stronger.


-- 
Ari K. M{kel{		    Department of Radiochemistry
ari.makela@helsinki.fi      University of Helsinki

"Night must fall now - darker, darker"
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
From: iwatters@cix.compulink.co.uk (Ian Watters)
Subject: PC Chess Programs                       
Reply-To: iwatters@cix.compulink.co.uk
Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1993 22:52:00 +0000

I was interested to see the following in the recent list of PC chess programs

>ChessChampion 2175   2340  by Chris Whittington
>   Program uses Shannon B strategy, not brute force like all the others.
>   Supersedes ChessPlayer by Chris Whittington.

Could someone confirm that this one is roughly this strong?  I've bought
programs by the same author before and been *very* disappointed with the
playing strength and style.

  //\/\/  iwatters@cix.compulink.co.uk

>>>MATRIX version  1.21e
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
From: pals@ipact.com (R. J. Pals)
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
Subject: Re: Should r.g.c be split into 2 groups?
Date: 6 Jan 93 12:38:52 CDT
Organization: IPACT, Valparaiso IN

In article <1993Jan5.184533.29598@koko.csustan.edu>, 
jadiel@altair.csustan.edu (Jose Juan DeLeon) writes:
> In article <C0D0L1.M4G@hplntx.hpl.hp.com> (Joseph Albert) writes:

>>Maybe we should separate this newsgroup into 2 separate groups, say:
>>rec.games.chess -and- rec.games.chess.misc
>>
>>the former would be restricted (absolutely) to posts which provide the
>>scores of games, analysis of games/positions/openings, or questions
>>answers are of the form of the first two items in this list.
>>rec.games.chess.misc would be a free-for-all in which anything conforming
>>to USENET guidelines, with some, no matter how remote, connection to
>>chess, could be posted.
>>
>>is there enough interest to organize a formal RFD?
> 
> Yes!  I just want to see some *real* chess discussion rather than a bunch
> of cry-babies.

I understand your frustration, but please let's not even attempt this.
In order to guarantee the desired results, the first group would have to
be moderated - a hassle and a delay.  Also, some good stuff would also
undoubtedly end up in .misc, giving us yet another group to scan, and
leaving us to sort out the good from the bad anyway.

IMHO the best "solution" is for us well-behaved regulars to studiously
and rigorously ignore the cry-babies and jerks.  Put them in your kill
file.  *The only reason they keep posting is that they get reactions.*
If NOBODY EVER replied to ANY of their posts, even with e-mail, they
would very quickly tire of it and go look for some people who react to
them.

We have met the enemy, and he is us.  Any kind of response to the
troublemakers encourages them.  Make them think that their posts aren't
even getting distributed to the net - DON'T REPLY!!

-- 
Randy Pals                |pals@ipact.com
IPACT, Inc.               |
From: anw@maths.nott.ac.uk (Dr A. N. Walker)
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
Subject: Re: 2267 Performance Rating for 10-year old in Montreal
Date: 5 Jan 93 12:02:28 GMT
Reply-To: anw@maths.nott.ac.uk (Dr A. N. Walker)
Organization: Maths Dept., Nott'm Univ., UK.

In article <31DEC92.15661460.0064@VM1.MCGILL.CA> CCHB@MUSICA.MCGILL.CA
(CCHB) writes:
>Does anyone know if a ten-year old has ever had an expert (or a master)
>rating before?

	How old is Luke McShane [IM] now?  And will he have an expert/master
rating when he is ten?

-- 
Andy Walker, Maths Dept., Nott'm Univ., UK.
anw@maths.nott.ac.uk
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
From: dcrosgr@uoft02.utoledo.edu
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
Subject: Farewell from DMC...
Date: 4 Jan 93 23:13:51 EST
Organization: University of Toledo, Computer Services

Well, it has been fun everyone. I've enjoyed yanking at your proverbial chains,
and hopefully making you a little more aware of the times when you talk without
thinking about what you are saying.

However, my seminar paper is due this Friday*, and school starts Monday. Thus,
I mmust take my leave from this entertaining group.

Now, now, don't cry. We all knew eventually I would have to leave and pursue
serious debate with those more skilled in rhetoric and evidenciary procedure.
This has been fun, but it has been like playing on a local team during the
baseball strike--chance to relax and realize just how good you are compared
to the average Joe.

Duty calls...

Sven, I give you back the title of most despised person on reg.games.chess. I
know you must have been happy with that title, and felt angry when I tore it
from you. But, it is yours once again. (I would hope you keep it not by being
so absurd though, and instead learn to formulate analogies which have a shred
of logic behind them. But, a leopard's spots and all of that...)

Take care all of you.

Oh, if you have serious e-mail, feel free to send it.


DMC


PS. Bruce, for your information, I did accept the offer to play--two days ago. 
Mr. Leverett was polite enough not to doubt my skills, but to request to play 
so that he could see my style. As such, he gets to play a game against me. 
                                                            

*A lovely piece about how Ohio's Product Liability Code should be modified so
that physicians are no longer exempt from strict liability when performing
"voluntary cosmetic" surgery which is neither reconstructive nor designed to
correct congenital defects, but purely for vanity reasons. (Layman's languge:
A quack who does boob jobs should be able to be sued as easily as a mechanic
who fixes your brakes.) 


Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
From: willem@aie.nl (Willem Langstraat)
Subject: Game two Short - Timman
Organization: AI Engineering BV, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
Date: Mon, 11 Jan 1993 21:00:13 GMT



Keycode: RL 26.4.1
Source: tt
White: Short,N
Black: Timman,J
Place: San Lorenzo  Round: 2  Year: 1993
1.e2-e4 e7-e5 2.Ng1-f3 Nb8-c6 3.Bf1-b5 a7-a6 4.Bb5-a4 Ng8-f6 
5.O-O Bf8-e7 6.Rf1-e1 b7-b5 7.Ba4-b3 d7-d6 8.c2-c3 O-O 
9.h2-h3 Bc8-b7 10.d2-d4 Rf8-e8 11.Nb1-d2 Be7-f8 12.Bb3-c2 Nc6-b8 
13.a2-a4 Nb8-d7 14.Bc2-d3 c7-c6 15.b2-b3 g7-g6 16.Qd1-c2 Bf8-g7 
17.Bc1-b2 Qd8-c7 18.Ra1-d1 Ra8-c8 19.Qc2-b1 Nf6-h5 20.Bd3-f1 b5xa4 
21.b3xa4 d6-d5 22.Qb1-a2 Rc8-d8 23.Rd1-c1 Bg7-h6 24.e4xd5 c6xd5 
25.c3-c4 e5-e4 26.c4xd5 Qc7-f4 27.Rc1-b1 e4xf3 28.Re1xe8 Rd8xe8 
29.Nd2xf3 Qf4-f5 30.Bf1-c4 Nh5-f4 31.Bb2-c1 Bb7xd5 32.Bc4xd5 Nf4xd5 
                           0-1    
Annotator: wl

Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
From: albert@hpl.hp.com (Joseph Albert)
Subject: Should r.g.c be split into 2 groups?
Date: Tue, 5 Jan 1993 02:36:34 GMT
Organization: Hewlett-Packard Laboratories -- Database Research Group

In article <geider.05au@amigdr.gna.org> geider@amigdr.gna.org (Frank Geider) writes:
>I'm just comming in Newsgroup 'rec.games.chess' after 6 monthes interruption.
>Is it another Newsgroup on Chess Game ?
>6 monthes ago, it seemed be more gmaes on rec.games.chess and also offer to
>play ? Is it any new law from moderator ?

Naw, no moderator here.  I guess you last read this newsgroup back in the
old days when chess was discussed here, back before a number of assholes
with no self-control decided that their pride was worth more than the
result of embarassing themselves in front of thousands of readers world-wide.

Maybe we should separate this newsgroup into 2 separate groups, say:

rec.games.chess
-and-
rec.games.chess.misc

the former would be restricted (absolutely) to posts which provide the
scores of games, analysis of games/positions/openings, or questions
answers are of the form of the first two items in this list.

rec.games.chess.misc would be a free-for-all in which anything conforming
to USENET guidelines, with some, no matter how remote, connection to
chess, could be posted.

is there enough interest to organize a formal RFD?

Joseph Albert
albert@hplabs.hp.com
From: dcrosgr@uoft02.utoledo.edu
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
Subject: Re: A game of chess with dmc!?
Date: 4 Jan 93 16:42:22 EST
Organization: University of Toledo, Computer Services

In article <1i9sv1INNcc7@shelley.u.washington.edu>, monaghan@cac.washington.edu (Tracy Monaghan ) writes:
> In article <1993Jan4.101358.805@uoft02.utoledo.edu> dcrosgr@uoft02.utoledo.edu writes:
>>In article <palane.726128033@pv7427.vincent.iastate.edu>, palane@iastate.edu (Paul A. Lane) writes:
>>> In <1992Dec31.170812.762@uoft02.utoledo.edu> dcrosgr@uoft02.utoledo.edu writes:
>>> 
>>>>Back it up if you are man enough. Lose pays plane fare.
>>> 
>>>>It'll never happen because your fear your lack of ability.
>>> 
>>> Or that proving something to you isn't worth risking money.
>>
>>If he is aware he is risking money, he never should have claimed, a second
>>time, that I couldn't play.
>>
>>He OBVIOUSLY knows he is proabbly wrong, and never should have made the claim.
> 
> Until such time, through your posts, that you demostrate even an understanding
> of chess moves, your knowledge of the game will remain suspect, your
> extensive high school tournament experience notwithstanding ;^)

OK, how do we know YOU know how to play?

And, please don't just post moves, as that will mean you have someone helping
you!!!

Gee, kinda hard to prove something to a closed mind, huh?

DMC