HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: cpf@alchemy.TN.Cornell.EDU (Courtenay Footman)
Subject: Re: Reuben Fine's Basic Chess Endings
Organization: /usr/local/lib/news/organization
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1992 15:15:11 GMT

In article <Bw546n.Fzo@world.std.com> jkenton@world.std.com (Jeff Kenton) writes:
>In article <1992Oct14.205247.27303@ichips.intel.com> sstrazdu@vulcan.intel.com (Stephen Strazdus) writes:
>>
>>Is there a good endgame book with these harder endgames?  I remember looking
>>at Pandolfini's "End Game Course" in a store once, but I don't think it
>>really got into the more difficult endgames.
>>
>
>There's always Reuben Fine's Basic Chess Endings.  It has nearly everything,
>including some reported errors.  The section on K+Q vs K+R is complex.
I have just gotten this book.  The bookseller said that someone had
compiled a list of errata, but that he (the bookseller) had no idea
of where to get it.  Can the net do better?

(The net seems to have found one error already-- Fine gives KBN v K as a
34 move win;  the net consensus seems to be 33. ) 
-- 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Courtenay Footman			I finally got back on the net.

cpf@alchemy.ithaca.ny.us		Now I will never get anything done
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
From: chris@barrister.ucs.uoknor.edu (Chris L Petroff	)
Subject: Re: F-S II game 19 (moves 1-68)
Originator: news@midway.ecn.uoknor.edu
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1992 01:08:52 GMT
Reply-To: chris@barrister.ucs.uoknor.edu
Organization: University of Oklahoma Cumputing Services
Followup-To: rec.games.chess

This can be gotten by fingering  fry@math.harvard.edu,  but decided to post since
I have not seen it yet.  Things look excellent for Fischer.  Spassky doggedly fighting
for the draw....


As of 22:31 GMT
    Sicilian Defense, Closed Variation:
    Fischer Spassky
    (White) (Black)
    1. e4 c5
    2. Nc3 Nc6
    3. Nge2 e5
    4. Nd5 Nge7
    5. Nec3 Nxd5
    6. Nxd5 Be7
    7. g3 d6
    8. Bg2 h5
    9. h4 Be6
    10. d3 Bxd5
    11. exd5 Nb8
    12. f4 Nd7
    13. 0-0 g6
    14. Rb1 f5
    15. b4 b6
    16. bxc5 bxc5
    17. c4 0-0
    18. Qa4 Bf6
    19. Rb7 Nb6
    20. Qb5 Rf7
    21. Rxf7 Kxf7
    22. Bd2 Rb8
    23. Qc6 Nc8
    24. Re1 Ne7
    25. Qa4 Qc7
    26. Kh2 exf4
    27. Bxf4 Be5
    28. Re2 Rb6
    29. Kh3 Ng8
    30. Rxe5 dxe5
    31. Bxe5 Qe7
    32. d6 Rxd6
    33. Bxd6 Qxd6
    34. Bd5+ Kf8
    35. Qxa7 Ne7
    36. Qa8+ Kg7
    37. Qb7 Kf8
    38. a4 f4
    39. a5 fxg3
    40. a6 Qf4
    41. Bf3 Nf5
    42. Qe4 g2
    43. Qxf4 g1Q
    44. Be4 Qa1
    45. a7 Qxa7
    46. Bxf5 gxf5
    47. Qxf5+ Kg7
    48. Qg5+ Kf8
    49. Qh6+ Kg8
    50. Qxh5 Qc7
    51. Qg6+ Kh8
    52. Qf6+ Kg8
    53. Qe6+ Kh8
    54. Qd5 Qf7
    55. Kg2 Qg6+
    56. Kh3 Qf7
    57. Qe5+ Kh7
    58. Kg4 Qg6+
    59. Kf4 Qh6+
    60. Kf3 Qg6
    61. Qe4 Kh8
    62. Ke2 Qd6
    63. Qe3 Qh2+
    64. Kd1 Qh1+
    65. Kd2 Qh2+
    66. Kc3 Qxh4
    67. d4 Kh7
    68. d5 Qf6+
From: Bruce_Harper@mindlink.bc.ca (Bruce Harper)
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
Subject: Re: Longevity of Lasker
Date: 13 Oct 92 23:42:35 GMT
Organization: MIND LINK! - British Columbia, Canada
Distribution: world

> Apparently Capablanca had pursued a championship match with Lasker
beginning
at least in 1911. So they negotiated for ten years before playing the
fateful match.

There was a minor event called World War I.  It wasn't Lasker's fault.
From: fry@zariski.harvard.edu (David Fry)
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
Subject: F-S II game 16 Fischer wins - all moves
Date: 7 Oct 92 21:22:33 GMT
Article-I.D.: husc3.1992Oct7.172233.16151
Distribution: world
Organization: Harvard Math Department


   Spassky Fischer
   (White) (Black)
   1. d4 Nf6
   2. c4 c5
   3. d5 d6
   4. Nc3 g6
   5. e4 Bg7
   6. Bg5 h6
   7. Bh4 g5
   8. Bg3 Qa5
   9. Bd3 Nxe4
   10. Bxe4 Bxc3+
   11. bxc3 Qxc3+
   12. Kf1 f5
   13. Rc1 Qf6
   14. h4 g4
   15. Bd3 f4
   16. Ne2 fxg3
   17. Nxg3 Rf8
   18. Rc2 Nd7
   19. Qxg4 Ne5
   20. Qe4 Bd7
   21. Kg1 0-0-0
   22. Bf1 Rg8
   23. f4 Nxc4
   24. Nh5 Qf7
   25. Qxc4 Qxh5
   26. Rb2 Rg3
   27. Be2 Qf7
   28. Bf3 Rdg8
   29. Qb3 b6
   30. Qe3 Qf6
   31. Re2 Bb5
   32. Rd2 e5
   33. dxe6(ep) Bc6
   34. Kf1 Bxf3
   White resigns
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
From: hwr@intercal.com (Hanon W. Russell)
Subject: 1992 U.S. Championship
Organization: Chessnews list (chessnews-request@tssi.com)
Date: Fri, 9 Oct 1992 22:12:10 GMT


USCF Press Release #50

1992 U.S. Championship Field Set for Durango, Colorado

The U.S. Chess Federation's 1992 U.S. Championship promises
one of the strongest fields of all time. This event, sponsored
by The Software Toolworks is scheduled for December 1 to 20 at the
Red Lion Inn in Durango, Colorado.

Leading the pack will be 17-year old grandmaster (GM) Gata
Kamsky of New York, the defending champion. A total of 14 GMs
out of 16 players will participate in this $30,000 competition.
The players include:

1  GM Gata Kamsky                 2739  Defending Champion
2  GM Alex Yermolinsky            2696  
3  GM Alexander Ivanov            2678  1991 Grand Prix Champion
4  GM Joel Benjamin               2675  
5  GM Boris Gulko                 2675  
6  GM Sergey Kudrin               2669
7  GM Patrick Wolff               2665
8  GM Roman Dzindzichashvili      2653
9  GM Yasser Seirawan             2642
10 GM John Fedorowicz             2641
11 GM Michael Rohde               2638  1991 U.S. Open Champion
12 GM Larry Christiansen          2635
13 GM Walter Browne               2618
14 IM Igor Ivanov                 2616
15 GM Nick DeFirmian              2614
16 IM Alex Sherzer                2604  1991 U.S. Junior Champion

Also co-sponsoring this event will be the Red Lion's Inn, the
City of Durango, the American Chess Foundation and the U.S. Chess
Federation (USCF)


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: Tue, 13 Oct 1992 17:03:58 GMT


                   THIS WEEK IN CHESS HISTORY
                      October 15-21, 1992

October 15
1951 - Rafael Vaganian born

October 20
1952 - Philip Sergeant died
1965 - Susan Arkell born

October 21
1982 - Ed Edmondson died

Copyright 1992 Hanon W. Russell
All Rights Reserved

Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
From: mzabel@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (Mark A Zabel)
Subject: Re: 1992 U.S. Championship
Organization: The Ohio State University
Date: Sun, 11 Oct 1992 18:43:14 GMT

In article <BvxLGJ.9vu@news.orst.edu> linb@ucs.orst.edu (Benjamin Lin) writes:
>In article <9210091812.0.UUL1.3#20523@intercal.com> hwr@intercal.com (Hanon W.
 Russell) writes:
>>
>>The U.S. Chess Federation's 1992 U.S. Championship promises
>>one of the strongest fields of all time. This event, sponsored
>
>How come Maxim Dlugy isn't playing in this event?  He also didn't play
>in the recent Reshevsky Memorial event.  Is this because of his duties
>as USCF President?

Probably, he certainly is good enough (and rated about 2680) to
play.
     I'm a little disappointed that Kaidanov won't be playing, as
I wonder how he would do in a tourney where he had to play a top
flight player in every round.  He has been a truly amazing open
tournament player this year - winning something like 22 of his
last 24 open tournaments.

-Mark
From: wp01jst1@ucsbuxa.ucsb.edu (John Tomas)
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
Subject: Re: F-S II game 16 comments
Date: 8 Oct 92 22:08:22 GMT


I recall analyzing this stuff in the early '60s and then never having
a chance to play it.  I suspect that Fischer did the same.
From: fry@zariski.harvard.edu (David Fry)
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
Subject: F-S II game 19 moves 1-68
Date: 14 Oct 92 22:48:39 GMT
Article-I.D.: husc3.1992Oct14.184840.16392
Distribution: world
Organization: Harvard Math Department


As of 22:31 GMT
    Sicilian Defense, Closed Variation:
    Fischer Spassky
    (White) (Black)
    1. e4 c5
    2. Nc3 Nc6
    3. Nge2 e5
    4. Nd5 Nge7
    5. Nec3 Nxd5
    6. Nxd5 Be7
    7. g3 d6
    8. Bg2 h5
    9. h4 Be6
    10. d3 Bxd5
    11. exd5 Nb8
    12. f4 Nd7
    13. 0-0 g6
    14. Rb1 f5
    15. b4 b6
    16. bxc5 bxc5
    17. c4 0-0
    18. Qa4 Bf6
    19. Rb7 Nb6
    20. Qb5 Rf7
    21. Rxf7 Kxf7
    22. Bd2 Rb8
    23. Qc6 Nc8
    24. Re1 Ne7
    25. Qa4 Qc7
    26. Kh2 exf4
    27. Bxf4 Be5
    28. Re2 Rb6
    29. Kh3 Ng8
    30. Rxe5 dxe5
    31. Bxe5 Qe7
    32. d6 Rxd6
    33. Bxd6 Qxd6
    34. Bd5+ Kf8
    35. Qxa7 Ne7
    36. Qa8+ Kg7
    37. Qb7 Kf8
    38. a4 f4
    39. a5 fxg3
    40. a6 Qf4
    41. Bf3 Nf5
    42. Qe4 g2
    43. Qxf4 g1Q
    44. Be4 Qa1
    45. a7 Qxa7
    46. Bxf5 gxf5
    47. Qxf5+ Kg7
    48. Qg5+ Kf8
    49. Qh6+ Kg8
    50. Qxh5 Qc7
    51. Qg6+ Kh8
    52. Qf6+ Kg8
    53. Qe6+ Kh8
    54. Qd5 Qf7
    55. Kg2 Qg6+
    56. Kh3 Qf7
    57. Qe5+ Kh7
    58. Kg4 Qg6+
    59. Kf4 Qh6+
    60. Kf3 Qg6
    61. Qe4 Kh8
    62. Ke2 Qd6
    63. Qe3 Qh2+
    64. Kd1 Qh1+
    65. Kd2 Qh2+
    66. Kc3 Qxh4
    67. d4 Kh7
    68. d5 Qf6+
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
From: mathew@elroy.Jpl.Nasa.Gov (Mathew Yeates)
Subject: Re: English (was book titles)
Organization: Image Analysis Systems Group, JPL
Date: Fri, 9 Oct 1992 05:52:45 GMT

In article <1992Oct8.164625.27786@sequent.com> edjohn@sequent.com (Ed Johnson) writes:
>In article <1992Oct8.012337.25451@cs.brown.edu> jhc@iris.UUCP (James H. Coombs) writes:
>>In article <Bvs0Gp.98L@news.orst.edu> linb@ucs.orst.edu (Benjamin Lin) writes:
>>>In article <PHR.92Oct7162046@napa.telebit.com> phr@telebit.com (Paul Rubin) writes:
>>
>>>Winning with 1 c4 b5!! or something like that.  Seriously though, I am
>>>looking for a good way to reply to 1 c4.  In a recent tournament, I 
>>>tried both 1...g6 and 1...b6.  How is it possible to prevent White's
>>>setup with c4,d3,e4 ?  Or how is it possible to take advantage of it?
>>
>>How about: 1.c4 c6 2.e4 d5.  On 3.d3, I would consider 3...cxe4 4.dxe4,
>>exchanging a flank pawn for a center pawn.  Helps if you play the
>>Caro-Kann!  I worried about having to prepare for the English until I
>>saw several transpositions in the CK books.
>>
>>--Jim
>>jhc@iris.brown.edu -- don't trust reply-to fields
>
>
>As someone who plays c4 all the time almost. I most hate c5 as a reply.
>
>I read in a book that the symetric engish is drawish.
>
>Ed

I have abandoned the Grob as Black EXCEPT against c4. It seems to be the
only case where black doesnt get rolled off the board. Some interesting
positions can arise- I recentely drew a game where my opponent ended up
with triple isolated c-pawns.

Mathew

Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
From: tafrakes@athena.mit.edu (T. Andy Frakes)
Subject: Re: who is world champion
Organization: Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1992 14:38:40 GMT

In article <2651@devnull.mpd.tandem.com>, rgp@mpd.tandem.com (Ramon Pantin) writes:
|> Fischer could have simply played as the champion with the same
|> rules that where in place when Spassky was the champion.
|> 
|> Was there something special about Fischer that made some rules ok
|> for Spassky when Spassky was champion but where somehow wrong for
|> Fischer when he was the champion? 
|> 
|> Any of those Bobby fanatics care to give a reasonable and objective
|> answer to this question?
|> 
|> I'll be amused be the unreasonable ones also, I just thought that
|> chess being a game played by rational people I could expect some of
|> that rationality shown here also.
|> 
|> Ramon Pantin

First, you'd probably say that anyone who doesn't think Bobby is a
1600 level shmuck is a "Bobby fanatic."  Second, just because Bobby
didn't make a big deal about the rules being bad while Spassky was
champion, didn't mean that he condoned them.  Besides, he ALWAYS
thought they were bad and said that they needed to be changed and
that something needed to be done about it, but he wasn't in a good
position to do much about it until he became champion (and he still
wasn't able to do as much as he wanted).  This argument that Bobby
thought that the rules were ok when Spassky was champion is stupid.
-- 
T. Andy Frakes (tafrakes@athena.mit.edu)
From: edjohn@sequent.com (Ed Johnson)
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
Subject: Re: English (was book titles)
Date: 8 Oct 92 16:46:25 GMT
Article-I.D.: sequent.1992Oct8.164625.27786
Organization: Sequent Computer Systems Inc.

In article <1992Oct8.012337.25451@cs.brown.edu> jhc@iris.UUCP (James H. Coombs) writes:
>In article <Bvs0Gp.98L@news.orst.edu> linb@ucs.orst.edu (Benjamin Lin) writes:
>>In article <PHR.92Oct7162046@napa.telebit.com> phr@telebit.com (Paul Rubin) writes:
>
>>Winning with 1 c4 b5!! or something like that.  Seriously though, I am
>>looking for a good way to reply to 1 c4.  In a recent tournament, I 
>>tried both 1...g6 and 1...b6.  How is it possible to prevent White's
>>setup with c4,d3,e4 ?  Or how is it possible to take advantage of it?
>
>How about: 1.c4 c6 2.e4 d5.  On 3.d3, I would consider 3...cxe4 4.dxe4,
>exchanging a flank pawn for a center pawn.  Helps if you play the
>Caro-Kann!  I worried about having to prepare for the English until I
>saw several transpositions in the CK books.
>
>--Jim
>jhc@iris.brown.edu -- don't trust reply-to fields


As someone who plays c4 all the time almost. I most hate c5 as a reply.

I read in a book that the symetric engish is drawish.

Ed
From: epstein@rene.ma.utexas.edu (Paul Epstein)
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
Subject: Re: Sudden Death Rule
Date: 16 Oct 92 22:25:16 GMT
Organization: University of Texas at Austin Mathematics

watsonb@alcohol.ecn.purdue.edu (Bradley S Watson) writes:

>I'd like to know how most people interpret rule 10.D in the 
>sudden-death rules section of the USCF rulebook.  The rule states:

>    In positions that are clearly drawn, such as positions
>    with no pawns remaining for either side and with greatly
>    simplified material (for example, king and knight versus
>    king and knight), the director may intervene to declare
>    the game a draw.  In these same positions either player
>    may stop the clock and ask the director for a draw.  If 
>    the request is rejected, two minutes will be added to the
>    time of the opponent of the person making the request.

>How "clearly drawn" does it need to be?  Last month in a tournament
>I directed, two 1300's reached an endgame with just a king, bishop, and
>pawn versus a king and a rook.  The guy with the bishop and pawn claimed
>a draw under this rule.  Even though this isn't as stone cold
>drawn as K+N vs K+N, I couldn't see any conceivable way he could 
>blow it, so I gave him the draw.  (His king and bishop weren't 
>separated, and his king wasn't trapped on the edge where mating
>or zugswang threats might develop.)  Was that the right decision,
>or does it really need to be something like K+N vs K+N to invoke
>this rule?

>Bradley

My opinion is that it all depends as to whether the guy's pawn could easily be
lost.  If so then the decision seems wrong.
I think that from almost any position, a grandmaster with a king and rook 
would beat a 1300 player with a king and bishop well over half the time.

Paul
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
From: rhb@world.std.com (Robert H Brueckner)
Subject: Re: In defense of Bobby Fischer
Organization: The World Public Access UNIX, Brookline, MA
Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1992 02:21:25 GMT

amarnath@aura.cis.upenn.edu (Amarnath Mukherjee) writes:

>Folks,

>Here's something on the lighter side...in defense of Bobby Fischer: 

>"The Reasonable Man adjusts himself to the world, the Unreasonable One persists
>in trying to adapt the world to himself; Therefore all progress depends on the
>unreasonable man."

>		- George Bernard Shaw.


>-am

What about women? They, according to Ogden Nash, "would rather be right
than reasonable."

RB

Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
From: olesen@math.uiowa.edu (Martin Olesen)
Subject: Re: 1992 U.S. Championship
Originator: olesen@walnut.math.uiowa.edu
Date: Sun, 11 Oct 1992 20:05:51 GMT
Organization: University of Iowa, Iowa City, IA, USA


     Since noone else have answered this question, perhaps
    I should.

     The question is why Kaidanov doesn't play in the U.S. Championship 92.
     With a US rating of about 2700 he should certainly be qualified.

     However the answer is: He is not elligible! To play one has to have had
      residency for one year, and Kaidanov will still be one
      month short of this when the championship is being played.


                               Martin Olesen
From: Peter_Stockhausen@mindlink.bc.ca (Peter Stockhausen)
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
Subject: Re: Fischer's Back! (alas)
Date: 9 Oct 92 05:56:43 GMT
Organization: MIND LINK! - British Columbia, Canada
Distribution: world

> sven hauptfeld writes:
>
> Msg-ID: <1992Oct8.193724.14351@midway.uchicago.edu>
> Posted: Thu, 8 Oct 1992 19:37:24
>
> Org.  : University of Chicago Computing Organizations
>
> In article <16127@mindlink.bc.ca> Peter_Stockhausen@mindlink.bc.ca (Peter
> Stockhausen) writes:
> >
> >This does sound a bit pessimistic. If Fischer beats Spassky with a
> >comfortable margin, than neither Karpov, nor Kasparov could avoid
> >a match, provided Fischer wants to play them.
>
> Anybody who thinks Kasparov would play a guy who won't play unless he is
> addressed as the World Champion must be very naive. And why do you think
> that neither K could avoid a match with Fischer?
>
>         Sven
>

Leaving alone the technicalities,either K, trying to avoid a match
would be ridiculed by the entire chess world from then on.
It simply comes down to a game of chicken.
Peter
--

----------------------------------------------------------------
   Peter_Stockhausen@mindlink.bc.ca         Vancouver, Canada
----------------------------------------------------------------


Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
From: baljeual@uther.calvin.edu (Alan Baljeu)
Subject: Re: When Deep Thought Beats Kasparov...
Organization: Calvin College
Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1992 16:38:24 GMT

rhaas@Chaos.mcs.kent.edu (Richard A. Haas) writes:

>In article <1992Oct9.142027.23800@morrow.stanford.edu> francis@oas.stanford.edu (Francis Muir) writes:
>>ANTHONY FRANCIS PRESTON writes:
>>
>>	One this that is being left out of that calculation is that 
>>	since the early chess programs, computer speeds have drastically 
>>	improved allowing the ply depth to be increased.  Programs are 
>>	limited to the speed of the computer.  To get another ply, you 
>>	exponetially expand the tree.  Even with all the pruning 
>>	techniques, you are approaching the limits.
>>
>>Another point is that as computer programs getter better, so will Kasparov
>>and his heirs incorporate some of this wisdom into their own playing, and
>>they too will improve beyond today's levels.
>>
>>							Fido

>Dear Sir,

>You must be joking.  Computer chess programs compete through an exhaustive
>search of the game tree of possible moves.  The thesis of the authors of
>the Scientific American article is that there is a (nearly) linear relation-
>ship between rated level of play and depth of plys searched by the computer.
>No mention is made of any other improvement in play, other than increased 
>searching capacity.  Several studies have shown that little of a human chess
>master's ability is involved in blind searching, rather a human master plays
>by recognition of familiar patterns (themes, forces, etc) and the application
>of guiding heuristics.

>How can you possibly believe that Kasparov will "learn" anything which will
>improve his play by the fact that Deep Thought blindly searches faster? 

Kasparov and Co. will improve the way people always improve.  As Deep Thought
searches deeper into the tree, it will discover new moves.  Kasparov and Co. 
can then analyze these new moves and come up with improved heuristics, methods
of attack, methods of defense, and otherwise improve their skill.
From: jhc@iris.uucp (James H. Coombs)
Subject: Re: Fidelity Travel Master
Reply-To: jhc@iris.brown.edu.UUCP (James H. Coombs)
Organization: IRIS - Brown University
Date: Fri, 9 Oct 1992 18:54:41 GMT

In article <1992Oct9.161730.5037@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu> mzabel@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (Mark A Zabel) writes:

>I was wondering if anyone out there could give me a little advice on
>purchasing a hand-held chess computer.  In particular, I would like to
>know more about the Fidelity Travel Master.  Jim, are you out there?

The Travel Master died from hardware defects.  ICD is now pushing the
Kasparov Travel Champion (KTC).  KTC has the Travel Master program with
some bugs fixed.  Unfortunately, they reduced the processor from 10 MHz
to 7, costing about 40 points but still in the Expert range (perhaps
2050-2080).  It's a peg pressure sensitive board.  Costs $129.95.
Carrying case is $30, but it looks as though you can get it free if you
order right away (or perhaps you have to be a CCR subscriber as well).
800-645-4710.  --Jim

P.S. You can get weaker machines for under $100.  A friend likes the
Saitek Trainer (also peg sensing).
jhc@iris.brown.edu -- don't trust reply-to fields
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
From: rhaas@Chaos.mcs.kent.edu (Richard A. Haas)
Subject: Re: When Deep Thought Beats Kasparov...
Organization: Kent State University
Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1992 01:33:59 GMT

In article <1992Oct9.142027.23800@morrow.stanford.edu> francis@oas.stanford.edu (Francis Muir) writes:
>ANTHONY FRANCIS PRESTON writes:
>
>	One this that is being left out of that calculation is that 
>	since the early chess programs, computer speeds have drastically 
>	improved allowing the ply depth to be increased.  Programs are 
>	limited to the speed of the computer.  To get another ply, you 
>	exponetially expand the tree.  Even with all the pruning 
>	techniques, you are approaching the limits.
>
>Another point is that as computer programs getter better, so will Kasparov
>and his heirs incorporate some of this wisdom into their own playing, and
>they too will improve beyond today's levels.
>
>							Fido

Dear Sir,

You must be joking.  Computer chess programs compete through an exhaustive
search of the game tree of possible moves.  The thesis of the authors of
the Scientific American article is that there is a (nearly) linear relation-
ship between rated level of play and depth of plys searched by the computer.
No mention is made of any other improvement in play, other than increased 
searching capacity.  Several studies have shown that little of a human chess
master's ability is involved in blind searching, rather a human master plays
by recognition of familiar patterns (themes, forces, etc) and the application
of guiding heuristics.

How can you possibly believe that Kasparov will "learn" anything which will
improve his play by the fact that Deep Thought blindly searches faster? 



Richard A. Haas
KSU Dept. of Mathematics and Computer Sciences
-----------------------------------------------





                                       ____o____
 ________________________     ________(_________)________
 \__          NCC 1701 | )   /                           \  
    \__________________|_)   \___________________________/
                  \ \                  /   /
                   \ \                /   /  
                    \ \              /   /     "Damn the Organians, fire  
                     \ \            /   /       those phasers Mr. Spock!"  
                      \ \          /   /     
                  _____\ \________/   /_       -- well it SHOULD be a quote
                  \__                   |(_  
                     \__________________|(      rhaas@chaos.mcs.kent.edu
From: gpylant@admin1.memst.edu
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
Subject: Re: Fischer's Odds (was Re: FSII -- PLAYER PERFORMANCE)
Date: 10 Oct 92 15:13:54 -0600
Organization: Memphis State University

>> schiller@whorf writes:
>> 
yes, but what would Vegas give for the final results of F-S?

Curt Jones (2386 USCF rated) of the Memphis Chess Club thinks
Boris will be lucky if he can finish with 5 total wins.

Personally, I project 10-5 also.

Gary Pylant
Date: Wednesday, 14 Oct 1992 00:12:36 EST
From: <RVESTERM@vma.cc.nd.edu>
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
Subject: Re: resigning wusses

"do you fancy yourself better than them?"

gimme a break, bud.  what a dumb and irrelevant question.