HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: srivasta@physics.ucla.edu (Srivastava)
Subject: Can XBOARD be used to play between 2 humans?
Organization: UCLA Department of Physics
Date: Mon, 21 Dec 92 21:42:28 GMT

Hi,
    Excuse me if it is covered in FAQ. I am a novice, just getting
    interested in the game. I have installed gnuchess and xboard on
    our sparc-2. xboard seems to allow play between 2 machines but
    not between 2 humans. I am probably wrong about this and would
    like someone to tell me how to set it up for 2 human players.

    Thanks in advance,   Sanjay.

-- 
=======================================================================
Sanjay Srivastava		email:  srivasta@physics.ucla.edu
Dept. of Physics, UCLA.			ibc6sxs@uclamvs.bitnet
=======================================================================
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
From: greg@zaphod.uchicago.edu (Greg Kuperberg)
Subject: It is legal to play chess in Yugoslavia
Organization: Dept. of Mathematics, U. of Chicago
Date: Tue, 22 Dec 1992 18:14:39 GMT

I have not yet seen the following comment about the legality of the
Fischer-Spassky chess match in Yugoslavia:

As far as I know, it is legal for an American citizen to play chess in
Yugoslavia or with Yugoslavian citizens or both.  What is not legal is
many kinds of business activity with Yugoslavian individuals or
organizations.  Apparently that includes accepting prize money in a
Yugoslavian chess tournament or royalties from its commericial
activities.

If you want to play chess with someone in Yugoslavia, you shouldn't
take my word for it, but I think that legal counsel would tell you
that it's fine as long as no money is involved.

Obligatory chess question:  Does there exist a chess position in
which Black has enough material to mate White in theory, but Black
cannot mate White even with White's cooperation, while on the other
hand White can mate Black without Black's cooperation?
From: wp01jst1@ucsbuxa.ucsb.edu (John Tomas)
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
Subject: Re: US Championship Round 14 GAMES
Date: 26 Dec 92 17:39:59 GMT

In article <34514@rnd.GBA.NYU.EDU> mginsbur@rnd.GBA.NYU.EDU (Mark Ginsburg) writes:



>Chess question:  why did Rachels refrain from the well-known
>9. dxe6 e.p. in his game with Gulko?

>Didn't Petrosian lose a hideous game to Tal this way?

>I think 9. dxe6 Bxe6 is quite a comfortable edge for white.

>Comments?

>-mark

The answer to these questions is "yes."  Nunn's comment on the line in
his book *The Complete Pirc* is "It is hard to understand how 6 ... Nc6
came to be so popular, since in most cases Black has a drab position 
with only an uphill struggle towards equality in prospect."

Petrosian did indeed lose very quickly to Tal in 1974 after 10 Bf4 h6?
Nunn comments that ... h6 is just too slow and suggests instead ... Nc6
with the aforementioned difficult struggle towards equality.

Interestingly, Botteril and Keene's 1973 *The Pirc Defense* only 
discusses plans involving ... c6.

When I used to play ... Nc6 I went with the c6 plans after a couple of
bad experiences with ... e5.  Then I gave up ... Nc6 altogether.

Rachels is not a professional chess player, of course, so what may be
well-known, may not be well-known to him.  The Pirc is not all that 
frequent a guest in international events, after all.

John Tomas

Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
From: mem@world.std.com (Jeff Lesser)
Subject: ICS Ratings
Keywords: ICS Ratings
Organization: The World Public Access UNIX, Brookline, MA
Date: Tue, 29 Dec 1992 02:17:57 GMT


Could somebody please let me know the typical adjustment that one would
make to estimate a person's USCF rating from his/her ICS rating or vice-versa?
 
(It seems that the ICS ratings are a lot lower -- is this true?)
 
Thank you.


Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
From: mzabel@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (Mark A Zabel)
Subject: Obligatory Chess Revisited
Organization: The Ohio State University
Date: Wed, 23 Dec 1992 04:17:38 GMT

In article <1992Dec22.164800.14729@eye.com> kevin@eye.com (Kevin Stokker) write
s:
>In article <1992Dec21.161453.2240@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu> mzabel@magnus.acs
.ohio-state.edu (Mark A Zabel) writes:
>[deleted]
>>To all:
>>Anyway, I have a suggestion - why don't we agree to require
>>each post to have an obligatory chess section to each article?
>>For example,
>>
>>obchess:  Where does White get comp for the piece after
>>          1.e4 e5 2.Nc3 Nf6 3.Bc4 Nxe4 4.Bxf7 Kxf7 5.Qf3+ Kg8
>>          6.Ng5?? Qxg5!  ???  Why is this book?
>>
>>or obchessreply: After 7.Qxd5+ Be6 8.Qxe6 is mate!  You patz!
>>
>Great idea, but what are you talking about in the previous move order?
>I don't have a board in front of me, but what knight are you trying to
>move to g5?? And how is black moving his bishop to e6 when the d-pawn is
>still there?  And how is white moving his queen to d5 with the black
>knight on e4?  And...

     Yeah, it's really a ?? move!  Actually, I posted a correction
     earlier.  Insert 5.Nxe4 d5 and the comments should make
     more sense.

     See!  People really are alert to chess on this net!
     We just need more occasions to prove this point upon.

-Mark
From: rick.franks@hal9k.ann-arbor.mi.us (Rick Franks) 
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
Subject: BSSES
Date: 15 Dec 92 00:11:00 GMT
Distribution: world
Organization: HAL 9000 BBS, (313)663-4173, Ann Arbor, MI, USA
Reply-To: rick.franks@hal9k.ann-arbor.mi.us (Rick Franks) 

Tom, I called the author's BBS of the chess door, hoping he would have a
bbs list of his game on other BBSes, but he didn't. I wrote him a
message asking if he could make one up for me. I'm waiting for his
responce.
---
 . Cam-Mail . The Chess Board BBS 803-236-7711 : Myrtle Beach, SC
From: IO10928@MAINE.MAINE.EDU (ABHAY)
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
Subject: Re: Pardon Fischer?
Date: 28 Dec 92 18:35:01 GMT
 <1992Dec22.011249.594@uoft02.utoledo.edu>
 <1992Dec28.052513.14461@midway.uchicago.edu>
Organization: University of Maine System

In article <1992Dec28.052513.14461@midway.uchicago.edu>, hau4@ellis.uchicago.edu
(sven  hauptfeld) says:

>This is really idiotic. Do you think that government having jurisdiction over
>its people mean that those people are its property? And do you think that a US
>citizen who kills somebody in another country would be immune of a trial by a
>US court?

YES! If the person killed is not an american, then he can't be tried in
U.S. He can be tried in that foreign country, if he is caught there or if
  he is convicted and that country has extradiction treaty with U.S.!!!
( U.S. doesn't have Extradiction treaty with Yugo.)

>You must be either kidding or totally ignorant.
I don't think so Sven!
>        Sven
Abhay
From: science@oasys.dt.navy.mil (Mark Zimmermann)
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
Subject: Re: Nice Pieces!
Date: 2 Jan 93 01:51:30 GMT
Organization: Carderock Division, Naval Surface Warfare Center
X-Organization: (formerly David Taylor Research Center)

I concur with Randy --- the USCF "Kasparov" set & board that I got
several months ago is *very* nice, particularly for the price ... and
I don't actually mind USCF's advertisements (they're arguably less
fluffy than most advertising I see these days, and always seem honest
enough; who is that model in the catalog, anyway?:-) ... my only
immediate complaint is that the attache-case that they also offer to
carry the "Kasparov" set & board around in is very ill-made
(particularly the plastic lining) --- I had to send it back for a
refund.  But the pieces come with a decent enough box, and if I can
just manage not to scratch up the board too soon, I'll be ok.  The set
itself is great --- I think that my results have gone up 100 rating
points since I started using it!

Overall, IMHO the USCF mail-order service has improved *greatly*
during the past few years; they've never lied to me over the phone
(unlike many other outfits) and offer a full money-back guarantee.
Shipping prices are too high and too complex to compute (they should
just have a flat rate, maybe $3/order like the better software houses
have, and forget about the few-pennies discounts on books), and they
could offer a discount for big orders ... but in general, I like to
order from USCF and hope that they continue to expand their catalog.
Their online advice is nice too.  Now, if they could only sell lucky
pens.... :-)
From: linb@ucs.orst.edu (Benjamin Lin)
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
Subject: KnightStalker Demo
Date: 29 Dec 1992 00:53:36 GMT
Organization: University Computing Services - OSU
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: ucs.orst.edu

I ftp'd the KnightStalker Demo from valkyries.andrew.cmu.edu
and it works well.  In the chess base demo, you cannot change
databases, but apparently you can in knightstalker.  Does that
mean that I can get .cbf files from Chess Base and use KSdemo to
play over the games w/o having to actually buy KS?  Perhaps the
demo is only able to load the demo databases and will not be
compatible with actual databases used for Chess Base???  Also,
is there a way to convert ascii games into .cbf format w/o
using Chess Base?

-benoni
    
  
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
From: Bruce_Harper@mindlink.bc.ca (Bruce Harper)
Subject: Re: A game of chess with dmc!? - I guess not
Organization: MIND LINK! - British Columbia, Canada
Date: Thu, 31 Dec 1992 01:20:51 GMT

What a shocking surprise.  No game.

You're going to make a great addition to the legal profession, just as you
have to this group.

Sorry to decline the offer to meet you in person - I can't think of anything
I would rather do less.  Is there anyone else listening who feels
differently?

I don't think you'd cheat because I don't think you could find anyone to help
you.  I won't cheat because I said I won't.

I think the way in which you'd lose would give us all an idea of your
understanding of chess.

This is getting pretty pathetic - I think your brief tour of
usenet.rec.games.chess has ended on a pitiful note of cowardice and
hypocrisy. If you don't play chess, this really isn't the right group for
you, is it, even if your understand of law and logic was what you wished it
were.

So that's that.  It would have been pretty funny...
From: linb@ucs.orst.edu (Benjamin Lin)
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
Subject: Zilber the Sheriff
Date: 1 Jan 1993 22:50:49 GMT
Organization: University Computing Services - OSU
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: ucs.orst.edu

[ Searching for Bobby Fischer by Waitzkin is an excellent book.
Jeff Sarwer, who someone asked about recently, is mentioned in
the book and so is Israel Zilber.  Here is one of Zilber's games.
What happened to Sarwer? ] 


[Event "Latvia Championship"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "1952.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Mikhail Tal @ a very young age"]
[Black "Israel Zilber ... aka The Sheriff"]
[Result "0-1"]

1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 d6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 Nf6 5. Nc3 e5? 
6. Ndb5?! 

     [ 6. Bb5+! with the idea of Nf5 ]

a6 7. Na3 b5 8. Nd5!? Bb7

     [ if 8...Nxe4 9. Qf3 f5? 10. Bd3 Nc5 11. Nf6+?! gxf6
          12. Qxa8 Bb7 looks ok.  Better is 11. Bxf5
       after 8...Nxe4 9. Qf3 Nc5 10. Bg5 Qxg5 11. Nc7+
          if 10...f6 instead, then 11. Nxf6 gxf6 12. Bxf6
          with both of Black's rooks enprise. ]

9. Bg5 Nbd7 10. Bxf6 Nxf6

     [ Black's position is quite solid and exchanges
       seem to help him.  Perhaps White should try
       the immediate 10. c4 Qa5+? 11. Bd2 Qd8
         12. Nxf6+ Nxf6 13. cxb5 Nxe4 14. bxa6
       if 10...Bxd5 11. exd5 looks fine.
       if 10...bxc4 11. Nxc4 with lots of threats.
       if 10...Be7 11. Bxf6 Nxf6 12. Nxe7 Qxe7 13. cxb5
       After the text, Black seems to gain the initiative
       by prying open the center. ]

11. Nxf6+ Qxf6 12. Qd3 Rd8 13. c4 bxc4 14. Qxc4 d5! 
15. Qb3 Bc5! 16. f3

     [ Of course not 16. Qxb7?? Qxf2+ 17. Kd1 dxe4+
       18. Bd3 Rxd3+ 19. Kc1 o-o 20. Qxe4 Be3+
       21. Kb1 Rfd8 ]

dxe4 17. Qxb7 exf3 18. Bb5+!? Kf8

     [ White sacs the bishop to give his rooks more
       play.  Otherwise, they cannot "communicate."
       If 18. Qxf3? Qh4+!! 19. Qg3 (not 19. g3?) Qb4+
       and White is lost because 20. Qc3 Qxc3+
       21. bxc3 Bxa3 or 20. Ke2? Qd2+ 21. Kf3 Qe3+
       22. Kf4 Rd4+ 23. Kf5 Rf4+ 24. Kg5 h6+ 25. Kh5 g6+
  
       Black avoids the bishop trade after 18. Bb5+ axb5
       19. Qxb5+ Rd7 20. Qxc5 ]

19. Qxf3 Qh4+! 20. Ke2 axb5 21. Rhf1 f6 22. Rad1 Kf7 
23. Qf5 Bxa3 24. bxa3 Qc4+ 25. Kf2 Qf4+ 26. Qxf4 exf4 
27. Rb1 Rd2+ 28. Kg1 g5 29. Rxb5 Re8 30. g3 Ree2 
31. Rf3 Rg2+ 0-1
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
Subject: Re: Pardon Fischer?
From: chris@kasey.umkc.edu (Christopher Mitchell)
Date: 22 Dec 1992 17:22:40 GMT
Reply-To: chris@kasey.umkc.edu (Christopher Mitchell)
Distribution: world
Organization: University of Missouri - Kansas City
NNTP-Posting-Host: kasey.umkc.edu


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
> 

I think you're missing a point here...Bobby Fischer isn't just a person
"outside" of our "territories."  Bobby Fischer is a United States
citizen, thus subject to our laws (as particular Muslims were subject to
Khomeni's proclamation).  Since Fischer chooses for the time being to maintain
his U. S. citizenship, then he also chooses to be a part of our political
process, i.e., the right to vote, petitioning congress, etc. as well as being
subject to any and all of our laws.

A proclamation by Khomeni is similar in that a particular Muslim sect
(forgive me for not knowing details) has members who have chosen to be
members and have chosen to be subject to the sect's laws.  They had their
own leader (Khomeni) whom had certain powers (as granted by their God). 
Since they believe *all* Muslims are subject to these laws and powers,
then Salman Rushdie was as well, and thus his particular blaspheme was
to be condemned.

Bobby Fischer too is subject to our laws.  He either comes home and lives up
to his commitment to our country, or I'm sure he's welcome to stay right where
he is.

Chris


--
|                      |
| Chris Mitchell       | Academic Computing Services
| chris@kasey.umkc.edu | University of Missouri - Kansas City
|                      |
From: dcrosgr@uoft02.utoledo.edu
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
Subject: Re: TO THE GM's/IM's FROM DON
Date: 21 Dec 92 10:28:51 EST
Organization: University of Toledo, Computer Services

In article <1992Dec21.105652.903@u.washington.edu>, fujimoto@carson.u.washington.edu (Bryant Fujimoto) writes:
> dcrosgr@uoft02.utoledo.edu writes:
> 
>>In article <34463@rnd.GBA.NYU.EDU>, mginsbur@rnd.GBA.NYU.EDU (Mark Ginsburg) writes:
>>> In article <1992Dec20.101509.578@uoft02.utoledo.edu> dcrosgr@uoft02.utoledo.edu writes:
>>> 
>>>>[...] Simply stated, Fischer played well because he won.
>>>>NOTHING else matters.
>>> 
>>> Oh, I see (?!?).
> 
>>My personal philosophy on life can be boiled down to:
> 
>>A working imperfect solution is better than a non-working perfect solution.
> 
>>I have little respect for 'critics' who lack the ability to climb to the top,
>>and it spills over....
> 
> [stuff deleted]
> 
>>> provide instructional value.  It's funny to see the analysis reduced to
>>> what is perceived as personal attacks.  Chess moves are just that, chess
>>> moves.  They are not an attempt to get "inside of Fischer's mind" or know
>>> "what his strategy was."
> 
>>Well, when you couple that with statements which indicate the author believes
>>that this is proof that Fischer is not as strong a player, you take it out of
>>the realm of textbook discussion into one of arguing about someone's skill,
>>which is so much MM. 
> 
> If you look in the sports pages you find critiques of coaches
> and athletes written by journalists who are neither.  The sports
> writers may claim a player is no longer effective, etc.  And it
> seems some people enjoy arguing over which of two athletes
> (or teams), who did not play at the same time, was the better athlete.
> This appears to be the same sort of activity which you are condemning
> in some of your posts (how well did Fischer and Spassky play? is
> Fischer as good as he once was? etc.).  However, since this sort
> of thing is accepted in other sports, why do you object to it here?

Because what Benjie (and the others) did was the equivelent of 
taking two missed passes thrown by the WINNING Superbowl quarterback, and using
them to 'prove' that the man is NOT as good as he was last year (which, by the
way, his team ALSO won). 

Maybe he saw 600 pounds of lineman running towards him.
Maybe it was based on a run pattern that was blocked.
Maybe he was just stopping the clock.

Besides, it is not Fisher's coach which was making the comments, it was
the quarterback of a semi-pro farm team for the losing team...

Not very reliable with such limited examination.


Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
From: monaghan@cac.washington.edu (Tracy Monaghan )
Subject: Re: US Championship Results
Organization: UW Computing
Date: Mon, 21 Dec 1992 21:40:18 GMT

US Championship
Durango, Colorado
2-19 December, 1992
                        1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6
1   Wolff,Patrick       x 0 = = = 0 1 = 1 = 1 1 1 1 1 1   10.5   +8  -2  =5
2   Gulko,Boris         1 x = = 0 = = 1 1 = 1 = = = 1 1   10     +6  -1  =8
3   Sherzer,Alex        = = x = 0 = 1 0 = = 1 1 1 1 1 1   10     +7  -2  =6
4   Seirawan,Yasser     = = = x 1 1 = 1 = = = 0 = = = 1   9      +4  -1  =10
5   Gurevich,Dmitry     = 1 1 0 x 1 0 1 1 0 0 1 = 1 = =   9      +7  -4  =4
6   Gurevich,Ilya       1 = = 0 0 x = = 1 = 0 0 1 1 = 1   8      +5  -4  =6
7   Yermolinsky,Alex    0 = 0 = 1 = x 1 = = 1 0 = 1 = =   8      +4  -3  =8
8   Fedorowicz,John     = 0 1 0 0 = 0 x = = 1 1 = 1 1 1   8.5    +6  -4  =5
9   Benjamin,Joel       0 0 = = 0 0 = = x = = 1 1 1 1 1   8      +5  -4  =6
10  Dzindzichashvili,R  = = = = 1 = = = = x 0 = = 0 = 1   7.5    +2  -2  =11
11  Browne,Walter       0 0 0 = 1 1 0 0 = 1 x = 1 0 = 1   7      +5  -6  =4
12  Ivanov,Alexander    0 = 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 = = x 0 1 = 1   7      +5  -6  =4
13  Rachels,Stuart      0 = 0 = = 0 = = 0 = 0 1 x = 1 1   6.5    +3  -5  =7
14  Men,Boris           0 = 0 = 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 = x = 1   5      +3  -8  =4
15  Ivanov,Igor         0 0 0 = = = = 0 0 = = = 0 = x 1   5      +1  -6  =8
16  Shirazi,Kamran      0 0 0 0 = 0 = 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 x   1      +0 -13  =2


Any comment on the high number of draws by Seirawan?

He would not have finished so high if the FS-II (only wins) rules were
followed.

Is his style ultra-conservative, playing for draws (6 of which were less
than 20 moves)?

His openings (scillian as black; d4, c4 or Nf3 as white) didn't seem
conservative to this fish, but how did they compare at least in diversity to
the other players?
From: dcrosgr@uoft02.utoledo.edu
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
Subject: Re: Pardon Fischer?
Date: 29 Dec 92 13:21:44 EST
Organization: University of Toledo, Computer Services

In article <1992Dec29.160749.14336@cbnewsl.cb.att.com>, ed@cbnewsl.cb.att.com (edward.m.hummel) writes:
> dcrosgr@uoft02.utoledo.edu writes:
>>There have been practicing lawyers who have entered this debate,
>>do any of them have exapmles of the US trying people for crimes
>>committed overseas.
> 
> Wasn't Noriega tried and convicted of crimes he committed while
> he was overseas?  (Some obvious differences are that he wasn't a US
> citizen and that the crimes were within the US.)

Bingo--within the US. Planning to smuggle something into the US is a crime that
is within the US. (At least, as soon as it is committed.) Same thing with the
drug lords.

> 
> My worthless opinion is that the US claim to jurisdiction in the
> Fischer case is not a clear cut black and white argument.  I expect
> that Fischer received legal advice that the US claim could be
> challenged (probably on grounds similar to those being raised 
> here.)  The indictment and the issuance of a warrant does indicate
> that there are people (including lawyers) who believe a crime may
> have been committed.
> 
> Maybe the courts will get an opportunity to decide.
From: dcrosgr@uoft02.utoledo.edu
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
Subject: Re: Pardon Fischer?
Date: 28 Dec 92 10:49:22 EST
Organization: University of Toledo, Computer Services

In article <1992Dec28.050119.13835@midway.uchicago.edu>, hau4@ellis.uchicago.edu (sven  hauptfeld) writes:
> In article <BzMF1E.L9o@wrs.com> gak@wrs.com writes:
>>In article 5444@midway.uchicago.edu, hau4@ellis.uchicago.edu (sven  hauptfeld) writes:
>>>
>>>Nonsense. Fischer wasn't indicted for playing chess, but for doing business.
>>
>>I'm not going to bother pointing out how ridiculous this is.
>>(Hmmm...guess I just did.)  What makes it all the more ridiuclous is
>>that it's true.
>>
> 
> Unless you explain WHY it is `ridiculous', I must point out that your comment
> is precisely such.
> 
> 	Sven
> 

Let me help.

It is 'ridiculous' because it is a limit on one's work/art/love. Christ.
If an American were to write a book of poems entitled--

"Suffering of the Serbs" (or whatever ethnic group you fill in) and sold
copies of it outside of the FS match, would the State department be calling
for blood? Tell us Sven, would you be as in favor of locking them up?

And, if not, please explain how what that person did would be any different
than what Fischer did.

(This should be good!)  

Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
From: mem@world.std.com (Jeff Lesser)
Subject: Re: Mchess Pro
Organization: The World Public Access UNIX, Brookline, MA
Date: Tue, 22 Dec 1992 22:51:46 GMT

zeng@apple.com (T. Zeng) writes:

>In article <1grateINN9dq@pith.uoregon.edu>, kgowen@cie.uoregon.edu (Kevin
>Gowen) wrote:
>> 
>> 
>> Seriously, don't even *think* about running M-Chess Pro on this primitive
>> system.  It wants 12 Meg to run its hash tables, will take 4Meg if that's
>> all that's available, and God only knows what it'll do with only 1Meg.
>> Will it even run?  Please consider upgrading, if you can afford it.  You'll
>> get a lot more "oomph" out of MChess if you do.

>Does anybody know how deep M-Chess Pro search ?  From the rating it has,
>it seems to me it should search about 8-9 ply or deeper. But that will
>require
>pretty fast machine.

>Or it is because the program has pretty good evaluation function so that
>a shallower search will give a very good result.

>I am reading the book 'All the right moves' by the author of the chess
>program
>Hi Tech. I would like to find out how deep M-chess ( or any chess program
>that has similar strength ) ? 


>---Tie

>> -kevin
>> kgowen@cie.uoregon.edu


MChess Pro searches less deeply than most programs, but "sees" much more
at each search ply.  It finds very deep mates in very shallow searches,
for example.
From: arimakel@klaava.Helsinki.FI (Ari Kalevi Makela)
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
Subject: Re: Petrosian-Bronstein, Amsterdam 1956
Date: 1 Jan 93 22:55:30 GMT
Organization: University of Helsinki

Thanks a lot. I have really wanted to see that game.


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

"Night must fall now - darker, darker"
From: rick.franks@hal9k.ann-arbor.mi.us (Rick Franks) 
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
Subject: DEMO.QWK
Date: 19 Dec 92 13:11:00 GMT
Distribution: world
Organization: HAL 9000 BBS, (313)663-4173, Ann Arbor, MI, USA
Reply-To: rick.franks@hal9k.ann-arbor.mi.us (Rick Franks) 

->    Using Telix (Zmodem), I just d/l a DEMO.QWK packet from the
-> Looking
-> Glass BBS, although I had 3 packets from your BBS in my subdirectory.
-> Although you both use DEMO.QWK, it was no problem. It just named the
-> new packet DEMO.QW2 and all packets are intact.
->    This is in response to some previous posts on the subject in which
-> you said that one of you would have to register and change the name.

Ok, I thought about that. But I also thought no matter what name the
commpessed packet was, once uncommpressed, the uncompressed packet would
still be demo.??? so I didn't memntion it. But Don may want to know
what you discovered.
---
 . Cam-Mail . The Chess Board BBS 803-236-7711 : Myrtle Beach, SC