HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: pjj+@cs.cmu.edu (Peter Jansen)
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
Subject: Smythescript (was Re: chinook)
Date: 6 Sep 92 18:29:26 GMT
Organization: School of Computer Science, Carnegie Mellon


In article <1992Aug29.002043.26721@desktalk.desktalk.com> dss@styx.desktalk.com (David S. Spencer) writes:
>In article <1992Aug28.213535.7250@cbnewsh.cb.att.com> gls@windmill.ATT.COM (Col. G. L. Sicherman) writes:
>>In <BtpCM0.Mzw@math.uwaterloo.ca>, alopez-o@neumann.uwaterloo.ca writes:
>>> 
>>> Well, at least for humans the rule is:
>>>   Don't try to play any faster because your opponent has little time.
>>> 
>>> Especially after a greatly hurried move from your opponent, chances 
>>> are you can obtain some positional advantage by playing a very fine 
>>> game against his non-optimal moves.
>>
>>In the Buffalo area the strategy of running yourself low on time to make
>>your opponent play carelessly was called the "Thrush Gambit" . . . I can't
>>imagine why!
>>
>>I've used it myself, once.
>>
>>RETI OPENING.  W. R. Tallmadge -- Sicherman, Club Tournament, Buffalo 1976.
>>1. A- S- 2. 7XXU 31 3. F A- 4. 3C N 5. 4 7XS 6. T 3X1 7. N- 7XI 8. 34 H-
>>9. 32 4
>>
>>I am not comfortable with positions like this, but nothing has gone wrong
>>so far.
>>
>>10. 7I 8A1 11. I T- 12. 7A U 13. A NK 14. NJ 8A1 15. 7XXT 7XF 16. A 8E1
>>17. 7N UK
>>
>>...
> 
> Apparently games played in the "Thrush Gambit" are recorded using the 
> never before seen "Thrush Notation".  
> 

Sicherman calls it 'Smythescript', I think.  It was designed
to be easy to understand to whoever knows the conventions of the
notation, while being totally incomprehensible to anyone else.
It's an interesting cryptography puzzle to try to break this 'code'
(though you probably need more than 1 game of 'plain text'!).

Smythescript is more compact than algebraic, but in return depends
more on the global state of the board. That makes it harder to follow
(especially blindfold :-)) even for someone familiar with the notation.
Indeed, gls himself, the net's authority (and, I believe, co-inventor)
of this notation, made no less than 6 mistakes in the game referred to
(admittedly without causing any ambiguity).

As to the game, well...
I suppose it wouldn't look all that great in algebraic...  :-)

-- Peter
From: mapmef@gdr.bath.ac.uk (M E Fletcher)
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
Subject: Re: Who are the seconds in the Fischer/Spassky match?
Date: 8 Sep 92 11:27:07 GMT
Organization: School of Mathematics, University of Bath, UK

In article <1992Sep5.010906.19127@mnemosyne.cs.du.edu> bwatkins@nyx.cs.du.edu (The God of all machines) writes:
>
>Do they need seconds?  I suppose they can afford them, but there are not
>adjournments....


I saw in one source that Fischer had enlisted the Phillipine Grandmaster
Eugenio Torre as a second for this match - but I haven't seen this stated
anywhere else. Anyway, what I really wanted to know is how to pronounce
"Torre". Is it Torr\'e (Torr-ay) or just Tor. Wasn't there a mexican
player from the 1920s also called Torre as well? How is his name
pronounced. Thanks if anyone knows, perhaps we could have a list of
pronounciations of difficult names. I only recently found out that
GM Alexander Khalifman is actually pronounced (Ha-leef-man) for instance.

Matt
From: arsenaul@ERE.UMontreal.CA (Arsenault Michel)
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
Subject: Fischer not among top players anymore
Date: 10 Sep 92 20:23:29 GMT
Distribution: na
Organization: Universite de Montreal


     It is now obvious; Fischer doesn't have it anymore...
I must confess that I was one of those convince that he would crush
his opponent in that match by about 9.5-4.5.  It seemed even more
obvious to me after the first 2 games where Fischer was just brilliantly
throwing in an opening novelty that completely confused Spassky,
who not more than a second class grandmaster since a few years.
In the 2nd game, it just seemed that White would be very pleased
with a slight edge not necessarily leading to a win.  A draw seemed 
likable for Spassky.
     But now, enlighted by the first 5 games scoresheets, it seemed
I was completely out of track! True, Spassky was crushed in the first
game, but only beacause of his own bad play, killing his own kingside
chances early in the game.  Then, without even be agressive, Spassky
easily held his opponent, waiting for mistakes to come.  And they came
by lots!  Just watch game 5's moves.  Ugly... 
     Fischer will get his million dollars or so, will go away with it and
won't appear in a chess tournament or match anymore.  He also made
great publicity for his brand-new chess clock for which he has patent.
That could lead to more dollars if it becomes the official one used in 
FIDE events.  Imagine if everyone of us has to change his chess clock 
for this new model because of a change in the rules... 
     I really hope I'm wrong, and that I will keep dreaming about Fischer
regaining his world title some day,

Michel Arsenault
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
From: alopez-o@neumann.uwaterloo.ca (Alex Lopez-Ortiz)
Subject: Re: Who are the seconds in the Fischer/Spassky match?
Organization: University of Waterloo
Date: Tue, 8 Sep 1992 16:14:30 GMT

In article <1992Sep8.112707.11007@gdr.bath.ac.uk>, mapmef@gdr.bath.ac.uk (M E Fletcher) writes:
> In article <1992Sep5.010906.19127@mnemosyne.cs.du.edu> bwatkins@nyx.cs.du.edu (The God of all machines) writes:
> >
> >Do they need seconds?  I suppose they can afford them, but there are not
> >adjournments....
> 
> 
> I saw in one source that Fischer had enlisted the Phillipine Grandmaster
> Eugenio Torre as a second for this match - but I haven't seen this stated
> anywhere else. Anyway, what I really wanted to know is how to pronounce
> "Torre". Is it Torr\'e (Torr-ay) or just Tor. Wasn't there a mexican
> player from the 1920s also called Torre as well? How is his name
> pronounced. 

The pronunciation is Torr-ay. The mexican player is Carlos Torre, of world
fame because of a couple of brilliant victories over LASKER, one of them
while Lasker was the world champion. (Carlos Torre was made (retroactively)
a GM by FIDE in 1982). Then Torre started playing chess against God and
was blacklisted by the world Jewry...

He recovered, and came back to play a few nice games. About Fide Master
level. He died a few years ago.


Alex

-- 
Alex Lopez-Ortiz                              alopez-o@maytag.UWaterloo.ca
Deparment of Computer Science                       University of Waterloo
Waterloo, Ontario                                                   Canada
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
From: hau4@ellis.uchicago.edu (sven  hauptfeld)
Subject: Re: Fischer - Spassky: The Prize
Reply-To: hau4@midway.uchicago.edu
Organization: University of Chicago Computing Organizations
Date: Sat, 5 Sep 1992 00:10:02 GMT

In article <palane.715642724@pv742b.vincent.iastate.edu> palane@iastate.edu (Paul A. Lane) writes:
>
>Please, wait until a flame happens until you start threatening legal action.
>And yes, talking about under oath is a specific threat.

You misunderstood me. I was not threatening. What I meant to say is that the
statement was based on my direct experience rather than on second-hand news
sources, so there is no qualifier like "if newspapers tell the truth" involved.

And note that no part of that (i.e. defensible under oath) statement was 
specifically about Vasiljevic or any other named person. I think I was very
clear and it is not my fault if you don't read carefully.

>
>Read the article. The guy is not lily white, but if you'd bothered doing any
>research, you might be taken seriously.
>
As I said, it was "just a little thought" and all the specifics were guessing.
(I deleted my original posting from this one, or this would become a tapeworm,
but I hope you remember.) I didn't intend to be taken seriously in the sense
that my guessing is authoritative factual knowledge. I just wanted to provoke
some thinking - on reasonable grounds.

>
>Hyperbole of the highest order. Any by the way, given that I have a news
>source of impeccable credentials, I'm also quite willing to back my words.
>
I don't mean to dispute the NYT, but you can not back your words based on a
news article in the sense of being a witness. (Again, this is a difference in
principle - I do not doubt that the NYT article is true.)

>If anyone is interested in details, I'd be glad to scrounge my paper from the
>trash and post a summary. It's not that this is a fellow who deserves to be
>canonized, but the claims made here seem to be excessive, given that Sven
>knows nothing about the fellow.

Well, now I know something, and as I see it, the information you provided just
shows that I was on the right track. Maybe even that I was completely right -
the term "black market" can include some of my guesses (yes, GUESSES, not 
CLAIMS, please - don't twist my words!) 

If you compare my posting and yours, and read carefully, you'll see that I 
weighed my words appropriately, and you've made exaggerated claims.

But what the heck! This is rec.games.chess, and this has gone too far from
the subject. 
>
>Paul A. Lane

Sven
From: fry@zariski.harvard.edu (David Fry)
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
Subject: F-S II game 6 moves 1-12
Date: 10 Sep 92 15:38:36 GMT
Article-I.D.: husc3.1992Sep10.113837.15511
Distribution: world
Organization: Harvard Math Department


Fischer put on a dark visor today before the game, presumably to
shield his eyes from something.  He has been bringing the visor with
him to the games before, but today's the first he wore it.

   Spassky Fischer
   (White) (Black)
   1. d4 d5
   2. c4 dxc4
   3. Nf3 Nf6
   4. e3 e6
   5. Bxc4 c5
   6. 0-0 a6
   7. dxc5 Qxd1
   8. Rxd1 Bxc5
   9. b3 Nbd7
   10. Bb2 b5
   11. Be2 Bb7
   12. Nbd2 Ke7
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
From: bereolos@ether.ecn.purdue.edu (Peter J Bereolos)
Subject: Re: fischer-spassky
Organization: Purdue University Engineering Computer Network
Date: Wed, 9 Sep 1992 17:38:12 GMT

In article <1992Sep9.004707.2601@mnemosyne.cs.du.edu> bwatkins@nyx.cs.du.edu 
writes:
>
>You say that the FIDE cycle admits all who wish to enter.  You are wrong.
>I recieved no invitation.  If the greatest chess player in the world
>were my next door neighbor, and he tried to get into the cycle, what
>would happen?  They would laugh and ignore him.  I see no at-large
>tournments offering even one berth.  You must be well-connected in
>your own country to get into a zonal.  After that, the interzonal and 
>final matches are all a matter of winning _every_ game.  Easy, but
>much, much easier if you're well connected and don't have to.

I believe the winners of the US Open, US Junior, and the Grand Prix winner
all get berths into the US Championship which serves as the zonal every 3
years.

What's this bit about having to win _every_ game?

Pete

--
Peter Bereolos                     |                THE KITTLE WATCH
bereolos@ecn.purdue.edu            |        Hank Aaron-755  Ron Kittle-176
pur-ee!bereolos                    |
                                   |
From: marcelk@blade.stack.urc.tue.nl (Marcel van Kervinck)
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
Subject: F-S Game 6: result
Date: 11 Sep 92 11:05:24 GMT
Organization: MCGV Stack, Eindhoven University of Technology, the Netherlands.

According to the newspaper game 6 is a draw. The moves were also in the
article, but I don't have them here right now. I'll post them if no-one
else does. 

--
Marcel van Kervinck
marcelk@stack.urc.tue.nl        
Xref: sparky rec.games.chess:7068 gnu.chess:388
From: Amiga@cup.portal.com (Philip Barry Kirschner)
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess,gnu.chess
Subject: Re: FAQ about Computer Chess..Buying Guide
Date: Wed,  9 Sep 92 02:46:44 PDT
Organization: The Portal System (TM)

Battlechess by interplay productions is good.It will work for IBM & AMIGA!
From: stank@perrault.unet.com (Stan Knight)
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
Subject: Re: F-S II, game 4 - Spassky wins
Date: 8 Sep 92 19:29:59 GMT
Organization: Network Equipment Technologies, Redwood City

In article <1992Sep6.162422.15418@husc3.harvard.edu> fry@tara.harvard.edu (David Fry) writes:
>
>Spassky won game 4 today in 50 moves after sacrificing the exchange
>for a pawn in the early middle game of a Queen's Gambit Accepted.
>I don't have the moves yet, but Fischer said, "One day you give a
>lesson, and the next day your opponent gives you a lesson."
>

WOW!! I'm truly amazed. Not so much that Spassky won but that Bobby would
actually say something like this. Could this be the 1st sign ever that Bob
has started to mellow with age??

Stan Knight
|Guess what MY favorite piece is|
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
Subject: Re: Fuzzy Rules/PA State Championship Controversy
From: pmbarlow@miavx1.acs.muohio.edu (Dan Fielding)
Date: 5 Sep 92 13:28:18 -0500
Organization: Miami University Academic Computer Service"

In article <1992Sep4.194345.11062@cis.uab.edu>, sloan@cis.uab.edu (Kenneth Sloan) writes:
> In article <PHR.92Sep4100904@soda.berkeley.edu> phr@soda.berkeley.edu (Paul Rubin) writes:
>>If it is KBP vs KB, it is at best a draw for the master, who lacks
>>mating material.  See USCF rulebook for details.
> 
> I have the USCF rulebook in my hands - and it contradicts this claim.
> 
>     Sudden Death Rules:
>     8. The Drawn Game.  A game is drawn:
>         ...
>         F. if one player has insufficient material for a pos-
>            sible checkmate as described in USCF Rule I.12.I;

Maybe if you read the entire rule as it now stands, it would make sense.  this
rule was updated in the 11/90 Rating Supplement, and it now reads:

Sudden Death:  8. F.  if one player has insufficient material for a possible 
                      checkmate as described in USCF rule I.12.I, and his
                      opponent's flag falls first.  Sufficient material for a
                      checkmate requires that a position is possible in which 
                      mate-in-1 is forced.

It's this last sentence which was added in 11/90.

>     I.12. The Completed Game
>         ...
>         I. The game is drawn when one of the following 
>            endings arises, where the possibility of a win
>            is excluded for either side:
>             3. king and bishop against king and bishop,
>                with both bishops on diagonals of the same color.
> 
> I can't find any reference to KBP vs KB.  Perhaps I've simply missed it.
> Can you please provide a reference to support your claim?

Under the sudden death rule as above, Ken's got the right point here.  The
closest thing to the game as indicated is the rule above.  Which is not the
case because the A-player's bishop is on the opposite colour, and he's still
got some pawns left.  Therefore, a forced mate-in-one IS possible, though only
remotely, and the master could still legally play for a win.

> On the same note: several previous postings have discussed a criterion
> which revolves around whether or not it is possible (with full
> cooperation by the weaker side) to construct a mate, or a mate in one,
> etc.  I can't find this rule either.  Perhaps my rulebook is out of
> date.  Can someone please post a definitive, authoratative reference to
> this rule?

Guess what?  There isn't one.  The only four positional situations in which you
can't claim a win on time are the three in I.12.I, and the fourth, which USCF
has reasonably left out, is when you're down to your lone king against whatever
your opponent's got... even if it's 9 queens.  According to the Sudden Detah
rule, it is not only depent on what material you've got, but what your opponent
has as well.


Jus' little ol' me openin' my big mouth ag'in...

The Candy Guru, pb...

Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
From: jonas@beor.informatik.rwth-aachen.de (Josef Nelissen)
Subject: FSII - game 6 result
Organization: Rechnerbetrieb Informatik  /  RWTH Aachen
Date: 11 Sep 92 05:44:12 GMT

They made a draw after 61 moves. It was again an accepted Queen's
Gambit.
Perhaps the next time they follow the paths of a former play one
should just post: "Moves 1 to xx as in the y.play" to save bandwidth
:-) ?


-- 
Josef Nelissen, Lehrstuhl fuer Angewandte Mathematik, insbesondere Informatik;
RWTH-Aachen, 5100 Aachen, Germany, Tel. 0241/8021060
jonas@beor.informatik.rwth-aachen.de
** In the beginning was the word, 2 bytes long, aligned on an even boundary. **
From: miner@kuhub.cc.ukans.edu
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
Subject: Chessmaster 3000 - questions
Date: 12 Sep 92 10:25:02 CDT
Organization: University of Kansas Academic Computing Services

I'm an intermediate player and like my Chessmaster 3000 from Software
Toolworks.  Two problems:

a) I'd really like to get rid of the annoying 15-20 second wait for
the fancy artwork to go away before it gets to the playing board--any
way to do that that a non-engineer could understand?

b) Anybody know of any better documentation for this software?  The
User's Guide that came with it is definitely the worst manual I've
ever seen--leaves many questions unanswered, or answered very
unclearly. 
 
********************************** +.............................+
*- Ken <miner@kuhub.cc.ukans.edu>* :All opinions expressed herein:
*There is no privileged position.* :are my own and are not to be :
*	-God, Derrida, others    * : attributed to my employer   :
********************************** +.............................+

Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
From: Eric Schiller <schiller@sapir.uchicago.edu>
Subject: TN in F-S II.8
Organization: Chessnews list (chessnews-request@tssi.com)
Date: Mon, 14 Sep 1992 18:23:35 GMT


For those interested in the opening, 10...e5 was not a TN. It was played
in Babula-Zvepak, Karvina 1989. After 11.Bxg7 Kxg7 12 0-0-0 b5 13.dxe5
dxe5 14.Qe3 Qe7 15.Nd5 Nxd5 16.cxd5 Na5 the game was agreed drawn.

Eric Schiller
From: glickman@husc10.harvard.edu (Mark Glickman)
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
Subject: Re: Fischer games in Informator?
Date: 5 Sep 92 13:03:06 GMT
Article-I.D.: husc3.1992Sep5.090307.15394
Organization: Harvard University Science Center

In article <9209042129.AA15983@econ.berkeley.edu> jeff@econ.Berkeley.EDU (Jeffrey C. Ely) writes:
>Here's a thought.  Given that FIDE doesn't recognize this match,  
>Will any of these games be considered for inclusion in Informant?
>

Interesting question.  I bet they will - correspondence games make their
way into the Informants, and (I'm not sure of this) I suspect they're
not strictly under the auspices of FIDE.

               - Mark
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
From: gene@midway.ecn.uoknor.edu (Gene E. Johannsen)
Subject: Re: fischer-spassky
Date: Thu, 10 Sep 1992 18:13:49 GMT
Organization: Engineering Computer Network, University of Oklahoma, Norman, OK, USA

phr@soda.berkeley.edu (Paul Rubin) writes:


>    Okay, let's call it the chess story of the century.
>    (Note: not the most important match, the most important story!)

>More important than when J. Polgar becomes world champion, or when she
>then loses a match 10-0 to a computer which crushes everybody?
>Ok, maybe.

Do you predict either of those happening before 2001?

gene
From: marcelk@blade.stack.urc.tue.nl (Marcel van Kervinck)
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
Subject: Fischer Spassky Game 3
Date: 7 Sep 92 14:36:32 GMT
Organization: MCGV Stack, Eindhoven University of Technology, the Netherlands.

It appears that nobody brough game 3 to the net yet. Here it is, from
the dutch teletext|ceefax|videotex. 

# Fischer - Spassky
# Sveti Stefan 1992
# (3)
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 a6 4.Ba4 Nf6 5.O-O Be7 6.Re1 b5 7.Bb3 d6 8.c3 O-O
9.h3 Nb8 10.d4 Nbd7 11.Nbd2 Bb7 12.Bc2 Re8 13.Nf1 Bf8 14.Ng3 g6 15.Bg5 h6
16.Bd2 exd4 17.cxd4 c5 18.Bf4 cxd4 19.Nxd4 Ne5 20.b3 d5 21.Qd2 dxe4 22.Nxe4
Nd5 23.Bg3 Rc8 24.Re2 f5 25.Bxe5 Rxe5 26.Ng3 Rxe2 27.Ngxe2 Nb4 28.Rd1 Nxc2
29.Nxc2 Qxd2 30.Rxd2 Rc7 31.Ne3 Kf7 32.h4 Bc8 33.Nf4 g5 34.hxg5 hxg5 35.Nd3
Bg7 36.Nd5 Rc6 37.N5b4 Rc7 38.Nd5 Rc6 39.N5b4 Rc7
# 1/2

--
Marcel van Kervinck
marcelk@stack.urc.tue.nl
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
From: jhc@m2lll.uucp (James H. Coombs)
Subject: Re: Pawn Power In Chess
Reply-To: jhc@iris.brown.edu.UUCP (James H. Coombs)
Organization: IRIS - Brown University
Date: Fri, 11 Sep 1992 23:43:32 GMT

In article <Michael_Ledet.0pp2@agwbbs.new-orleans.LA.US> Michael_Ledet@agwbbs.new-orleans.LA.US (Michael Ledet) writes:

>I just bought "Pawn Power In Chess" by Hans Kmoch and would appreciate any
>comments of the quality and or usefulness of this book in furthering ones
>chess knowledge.  I am rated about 1600 USCF, so should I put this book
>aside for now and stick to tactics?  All comments appreciated.

I worked through the book when I was a beginner (about three months
after starting).  I learned a lot.  I got the book in part because it
was recommended in Chess Life.  Some people swear by it; others can't
get through the structuralist's practice of categorizing everything
(e.g., "leukopoenia" for weakness on the white squares---something like
that).  I say rip through it in a few days and find out what it has to
offer.  You can go through it more carefully later if it seems worth
it.

--Jim [1271 USCF; only because you said "all comments appreciated"]
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
From: hau4@ellis.uchicago.edu (sven  hauptfeld)
Subject: Re: Pronouncing GMs (was Re: Something Else, I Don't 
Reply-To: hau4@midway.uchicago.edu
Organization: University of Chicago Computing Organizations
Date: Thu, 10 Sep 1992 14:56:30 GMT

In article <2aae2888wnr070@ark.abg.sub.org> ralf@ark.abg.sub.org (Ralf Stephan) writes:
>mzabel@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (Mark A Zabel) writes:
>> s:
>> >>Anyway, what I really wanted to know is how to pronounce
>> >>"Torre". Is it Torr\'e (Torr-ay) or just Tor.
>> 
>>      What about Edgar Colle, the Belgian player from the 30s.
>
>What about Dzindzikhashwili?  8)

That's easy: imagine it's written JINJIHASHVILLY.

	Sven

Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
From: nolan@helios.unl.edu (Michael Nolan)
Subject: Re: Rohde-Malpert
Reply-To: nolan@helios.unl.edu
Organization: University of Nebraska - Lincoln
Date: 13 Sep 92 04:57:00 GMT

Mark Ginsburg <mginsbur@rnd.stern.nyu.edu> writes:


>Just an addendum to the game Rohde-Malpert, which occurred recently at the
>NYS Championship, Saratoga Springs, 1992:

Could someone please post or send me the full text of the game, Malpert
is a former Nebraska player and the NSCA would like the game for our state
magazine.
---
Michael Nolan
nolan@helios.unl.edu, nolan@tssi.com
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
From: hargitai@acf3.nyu.edu (hargitai)
Subject: Game seven result
Organization: New York University
Date: Sat, 12 Sep 1992 19:44:06 GMT

Fisher wins.

(just to annoy all the people who wrote him off)

hj

Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
From: olesen@math.uiowa.edu (Martin Olesen)
Subject: Re: Scoring on the Fischer, Spassky game
Originator: olesen@maple.math.uiowa.edu
Date: Tue, 15 Sep 1992 21:30:19 GMT
Organization: University of Iowa, Iowa City, IA, USA


In article <1992Sep15.115737.13028@ifi.uio.no>, sigurdg@ifi.uio.no (Sigurd Gl{rum) writes:
|> 
|> In article <14SEP199209371095@rigel.tamu.edu>, kbs4580@rigel.tamu.edu (SCHAUB, KEITH BRADLEY) writes:
|> > Scoring goes as follows:
|> > 	wins =1
|> >         losses =0
|> >         draws  =0
|> > first person to 10 games wins.
|> > At the moment Fischer leads 3-2.
|> > 
|> 
|> From what I have heard Fischer demanded that he should win
|> the match in case of a 9-9 tie, effectively giving him a
|> 2 point advantage since Spasskij must score at least 10-8
|> in order to win.  Fischer wanted the same advantage in
|> defending his championship 20 years ago against Karpov, but
|> this was of course refused.
|> 
|> Sigurd Gl{rum



    This is not true - in case of 9-9 the match is terminated
    and declared a draw, and the prize fund is split evenly.
    However as "World Champion" Fischer keeps his imaginary title
    in case of a drawn match.



                          Martin Olesen
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess