HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: mginsbur@option.GBA.NYU.EDU (Mark Ginsburg)
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
Subject: Re: Piket-van Mil
Date: 20 Aug 92 04:23:37 GMT
Organization: NYU Stern School of Business



Apologies; my previous post refers to the opening moves 

1. Nf3 f5
2. e4!? fe  (Lisitsin Gambit)
3. Ng5  d5
4. d3 Qd6  (Botvinnik's 'schoolboy refutation')
5. Nc3!    (Christiansen, first in Players Chess News)
5......h6
6. Nb5

and now, what's black's best move, and secondly, if 6...Qc6, what's
white's best move.  Hmmm.

-mark 
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
From: ron@osf.org (Ron Birnbaum)
Subject: Re: Bobby teaches but did he write?
Organization: Open Software Foundation
Date: Mon, 17 Aug 1992 15:05:25 GMT

In article <1992Aug15.235349.1@gallua.gallaudet.edu>, rlwilliams@gallua.gallaudet.edu writes:
|> In previous posts people have often recommended "Bobby Fischer teaches 
|> chess," as an outstanding book. I'm curious what people know about this 
|> book. Did Bobby write it himself? Is it an "as told to" book? Or did he 
|> just give his name to it. I'd like to know his level of involvement in the 
|> project.

  I don't see IM Valvo responding to this, but he has previously mentioned
  on the net that Fischer had a lot to do with the book. IM Valvo was also
  involved, as was another player, I believe.

-Ron




|> 
|> rlwilliams@gallua
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
From: mathew@elroy.Jpl.Nasa.Gov (Mathew Yeates)
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
Subject: Re: Girls
Date: 13 Aug 92 18:35:05 GMT
Organization: Image Analysis Systems Group, JPL

jlwestm@ptsfa.PacBell.COM (Jeff Westman) writes:

>In article <1992Aug12.163152.6197@constellation.ecn.uoknor.edu> gene@midway.ecn.uoknor.edu (Gene E. Johannsen) writes:

>;So my question to you is, do you know any good but basic (BASIC) books on
>;tactics?  She needs a gentle introduction, in order for her to maintain
>;interest.  If it gets too hard too fast, its all over.  And not a children's
>;book, either.  That would be bad, too.
>;
>;Thanks,
>;gene

>Gene -

>An excellent book is "Bobby Fischer Teaches Chess."  I don't know the

Forget the chess books. Try reading poetry to her.

-Mathew
From: ed@cbnewsl.cb.att.com (edward.m.hummel)
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
Subject: Re: Rules of Chess
Date: 19 Aug 92 02:08:21 GMT
Distribution: na
Organization: AT&T

In article <1992Aug18.093635.22667@ists.ists.ca> sizone!justin@ee.ryerson.ca  (Justin) writes:
>According to the official rules of chess (USCF), if you want to be a 
>jerk, and follow them verbatim (lawyer style) -- then:
>(1) As soon as checkmate occurs, the game is over.
>(2) If an illegal move is not called by the opponant before the
>	end of the game, then the move must stand.
>
>So.  I pick my Queen up from wherever it happens to be on the board,
>slam it down somewhere else, completely illegally, creating a checkmate
>situation.  Declare the game is over, and point out that you didn't
>call the illegal move prior to the end of the game.  And win.
>
>Question:  Does this actually work?  And if it does, has anyone ever
>won a major prize doing it?

It doesn't work.  The rules are clear.  To quote: Section I.12, Paragraph
A.  "The game is won by the player who has mated his opponent's king,
provided that the mating move was legal.  This immediately ends the game."
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
From: mzabel@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (Mark A Zabel)
Subject: Chess Groupies
Organization: The Ohio State University
Date: Sun, 16 Aug 1992 09:40:39 GMT

Are they everywhere, or just Columbus?  I heard that Fisher
has one now!

WAY TO GO - BOBBY'O
From: jriechel@Bonnie.ICS.UCI.EDU
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
Subject: (none)
Date: 19 Aug 92 01:15:34 GMT



         #######  ##   ##  #######  #######  #######
         ##       ##   ##  ##       ##       ##
         ##       #######  #######  #######  #######
         ##       ##   ##  ##            ##       ##
         #######  ##   ##  #######  #######  #######

#######  #######  #######  ######   ##       #######  ##   ##
##   ##  ##   ##  ##   ##  ##    #  ##       ##       ### ###
#######  #######  ##   ##  ######   ##       #######  ## # ##
##       ## ##    ##   ##  ##    #  ##       ##       ##   ##
##       ##   ##  #######  ######   #######  #######  ##   ##

            For your enjoyment, edification, ect..

-+=-+=-+=-+=-+=-+=-+=-+=-+=-+=-+=-+=-+=-+=-+=-+=-+=-+=-+=-+=-


White:  Pa3b2c3d3e4f4g4h3 Ne3h2 Bg2g3 Rd1e1 Qe2 Kg1
Black:  Pa6b5c5d6e5f7g7h6 Nc6f8 Be7h7 Rc8e8 Qd8 Kg8

  -----------------------------------------
8 |    |    | *R | *Q | *R | *N | *K |    |
  -----------------------------------------
7 |    |    |    |    | *B | *P | *P | *B |   P = Pawn
  -----------------------------------------   N = Knight
6 | *P |    | *N | *P |    |    |    | *P |   B = Bishop
  -----------------------------------------   R = Rook (aka Castle)
5 |    | *P | *P |    | *P |    |    |    |   Q = Queen
  -----------------------------------------   K = King
4 |    |    |    |    |  P |  P |  P |    |
  -----------------------------------------
3 |  P |    |  P |  P |  N |    |  B |  P |   *'s precede Black pieces
  -----------------------------------------
2 |    |  P |    |    |  Q |    |  B |  N |
  -----------------------------------------
1 |    |    |    |  R |  R |    |  K |    |
  -----------------------------------------
    a    b    c    d    e    f    g    h

Problem #2:  Black to play and win.  From the game Timman-Akopian, Chess
Olympiad, Manila 1992.  Also from IM Jack Peters' Los Angeles Times column.


I will post the solution in ~1 week.  Or mail me if you wish.  James

-----
jriechel@bonnie.ics.uci.edu
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
From: fhh@watson.ibm.com (Feng-Hsiung Hsu)
Subject: Fischer match scheduling
Date: Fri, 14 Aug 1992 17:39:16 GMT
Disclaimer: This posting represents the poster's views, not necessarily those of IBM
Organization: IBM T.J. Watson Research Center

The match, if it does start on Sept. 2, will be using the
Fischer clock as reported.  One game per day, 5 games per
week with Saturday and Sunday off.  No adjournments.  Each
player is given a 90 min cushion at the start of the game, and
2 min is added to the clock for each move (I don't know
whether before or after making the move).

Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
From: strgh@warwick.ac.uk (J E H Shaw)
Subject: Re: Checkers match
Organization: Computing Services, Warwick University, UK
Date: Fri, 21 Aug 1992 08:52:51 GMT

In article <714358642@romeo.cs.duke.edu> trt@duke.cs.duke.edu (Tom Truscott) writes:
>
>Since the match is currently even, I would suspect that Marion
>Tinsley will start to pull ahead as he learns the program's
>strategic weaknesses.  Or perhaps Tinsley, who is getting old,
>will become fatigued.  Who knows?!
>
According to Thursday's `Guardian' (quoted without permission):
"...
   Observers point out that Dr. Tinsley played 14 hours on Tuesday
   and was forced to play on a planned rest day yesterday whereas
   computers never have an off-day."

Still a fantastic success for Chinook!
                -- Ewart Shaw
-- 
J.E.H.Shaw,  Department of Statistics,  |  JANET:  strgh@uk.ac.warwick.cu
             University of Warwick,     |  BITNET: strgh%uk.ac.warwick.cu@UKACRL
             Coventry  CV4 7AL,  U.K.   |  PHONE:  +44 203 523069
yacc - the piece of code that understandeth all parsing
From: emarkp@ocf.berkeley.edu (E. Mark Ping)
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
Subject: Re: handicap in chess
Date: 20 Aug 1992 01:50:21 GMT
Organization: U.C. Berkeley Open Computing Facility
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: sandstorm.berkeley.edu

In article <1992Aug19.214908.4373@ists.ists.ca> sizone!justin@ee.ryerson.ca (Justin Wells) writes:

}  In chinese chess, there is no stalemate situation.  The rules require
}  you to move a man every turn.  If at the end of your turn your king
}  (emporer) remains in check, you lose.
}
}  Does anyone know why, historically, the stalemate rule was introduced
}  into Western chess?  And does anyone else feel that the chinese rule
}  makes much more sense?

  I just finished reading a brief history of chess a few weeks ago.  The
condition of stalemate has undergone a few different interpretations.  In
some cases, many people felt that the side which was stalemated had lost,
since it certainly hadn't won!  Another view was that a stalemate position
was illegal, and the last move (which allowed the stale) was taken back.  An
interesting rule which was in effect in various places for a time was that
the player causing stalemate should lose the game, since it denoted highly
inferior play (if you can't win in such a situation...).  The concept of a
draw allowed a more reasonable rule.  Certainly the party which caused the
stale shouldn't get the full win, because he has prevented the game to end
with a checkmate via legal moves.  And it does seem kind of silly to give a
full win to a player who is stalemated, because he probably should have
lost.  Eventually, it became the practice to score a stalemate the same as a
draw:  .5-.5.

  Things like this are really interesting; chess wasn't a game created off
the top of someone's head some day.  It's taken many, many years to evolve
into what we play today.  That's food for thought for those people who think
they can improve on the game with a slight change to the rules.
-- 
E. Mark Ping
emarkp@ocf.Berkeley.EDU

  "Stand aside, I take large steps."    --Michael Dorn
  "Say, that's a nice bike."            --Cyberdyne Systems T-1000
  "Pituita es."                         --Unknown Latin Scholar

And of course, this in no way reflects my views of UC Berkeley.
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
From: jdd@engr.ucf.edu (Joseph Dumas)
Subject: Re: US Open
Organization: engineering, University of Central Florida, Orlando
Distribution: usa
Date: Wed, 12 Aug 1992 14:37:40 GMT

In article <92224.132743U55342@uicvm.uic.edu> <U55342@uicvm.uic.edu> writes:
>
>I do have another question: is the USCF here to serve its members or
>                            the wealthy chess computer companies???
>
Good question.  I wish the decision-makers at USCF would ask it of
themselves every time they are about to change the rules involving
computers.  (This is not intended to flame Eric.)

>                            I get the feeling from reading the postings
>                            that the rank-and-file members of the USCF
>                            are getting "bullied."
You get that feeling too, eh?

>                            What makes matters
>                            worse is that netnews users are probably
>                            more "computer-sophisticated" and so are
>                            less paranoid about computers taking over.
>
Maybe less paranoid (although probably even more aware of their immense
potential to be used for good or ill).  But, speaking as one who works
with computers every day, the *last* thing I want to see during my
leisure time, i.e. when I am taking a weekend or longer to play in a
chess tournament, is another computer.  I'm there for the blood-and-
guts thrill of crushing, or being crushed, by another living, breathing,
being with a personality.

Besides, ever go out for a beer with your computer opponent after a
game?

Joe
-- 
--->  Joe is jdd@engr.ucf.edu (Joseph Dumas):  "Cats are snooty and wouldn't
fetch a stick on a bet.  They also scratch.  I dislike cats....  I like dogs
because they forgive easily...and will settle for thirty seconds of care and
attention if that is all you have to spare."  --Lewis Grizzard
Xref: sparky rec.games.chess:6188 rec.games.go:1593 comp.ai:3135 rec.games.programmer:3478
From: mst@vexpert.dbai.tuwien.ac.at (Markus Stumptner)
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess,rec.games.go,comp.ai,rec.games.programmer
Subject: Re: comp.games.research
Date: 18 Aug 92 12:37:53 GMT
Followup-To: rec.games.chess,rec.games.go,rec.games.programmer
Organization: DB and ES Subdivision, TU Vienna

From article <1992Aug18.111846.24716@organpipe.uug.arizona.edu>, by neilb@scs.leeds.ac.uk (N Bowers):
> strategy game design etc.  rec.games.board is not the place IMHO.

Why?  If Othello and Gomoku are not boardgames, then what are they?  I
do see that people feel a bit overawed by the war, SF, and fantasy
game discussions in rec.games.board, but if these look overpowering,
that is so because these are the games that people are interested in.
If there is so little traffic on these games, then a new group is even
less necessary.

> Several times I have almost suggested rec.games.strategy, 

This is a completely misleading title, apart from the fact that I do
not think a new group is warranted for.  From the minute it is
started, you'll have people crossposting their Battletech and
Warhammer strategies to it.  Perhaps you should call it
rec.games.board.traditional, or rec.games.board.abstract, or something
like that.  If you want serious discussions about programming these
games, then it should be a comp group (.games.research, or .ai.games,
or such).
-- 
Markus Stumptner                                mst@vexpert.dbai.tuwien.ac.at
University of Technology Vienna                 vexpert!mst@relay.eu.net
Paniglg. 16, A-1040 Vienna, Austria             ...mcsun!vexpert!mst
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess,rec.games.go,comp.ai,rec.games.programmer
From: cmspring@undergrad.math.waterloo.edu (Colin Springer)
Subject: Re: comp.games.research
Keywords: chess go othello games abalone
Organization: University of Waterloo
Date: Tue, 18 Aug 1992 23:07:39 GMT

In article <1992Aug18.111846.24716@organpipe.uug.arizona.edu> neilb@scs.leeds.ac.uk (N Bowers) writes:
>In article <1992Aug18.172526.392@csc.canterbury.ac.nz> wft@math.canterbury.ac.nz (Bill Taylor) writes:
>>I'd like to see a newsgroup for strategic board games in general,
>>othello, go-moku, etc, but OTHER THAN commercial board games of the
>>war-game or role-playing type.
>>
>> [...]
>>
>>Does this suggestion ring a bell with anyone else ?
>
>YES!
>
>Several times I have almost suggested rec.games.strategy, since there
>seemed to be no obvious place for discussion of reversi/othello,
>strategy game design etc.  rec.games.board is not the place IMHO.
>
>Perhaps rec.games.strategy.programmer as a subgroup? :-)
>	rec.games.strategy.design also implies creation of new games,
>which would belong in r.g.s.

I second that motion!  There is a definite interest for rec.games.strategy
amongst those of us who are not interested in wading through the hundreds of
articles in rec.games.board only to find no strategy games whatsoever!
I personally am quite interested in Othello, and know of several others
with this interest.  Such a newsgroup, together with rec.games.chess and
rec.games.go should cover the complete spectrum of strategy games.

How do we petition to create this newsgroup?  I'm sure it would be well
used, and is much needed.

Colin Springer

ps.  Anybody for e-mail Othello?
From: Bruce_Harper@mindlink.bc.ca (Bruce Harper)
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
Subject: Correction! (Bishops and Queens)
Date: 22 Aug 92 05:22:44 GMT
Organization: MIND LINK! - British Columbia, Canada
Distribution: world

My mistake - the position I was thinking of was a position where if a Bishop
were on a certain square, that side would win, while if a Queen were there,
that side would lose.  Promotion was part of the puzzle, but it wasn't exactly
an example of e8 = B wins and e8 = Q loses.

Trying to devise such a position is a good way to occupy an evening or two.
From: loon@underdog.ee.wits.ac.za (LOON M J)
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
Subject: Re: Bobby teaches but did he write?
Date: 17 Aug 92 12:59:31 GMT
Organization: Wits Electrical Engineering (Undergrads).

In article <1992Aug15.235349.1@gallua.gallaudet.edu> rlwilliams@gallua.gallaudet.edu writes:

>In previous posts people have often recommended "Bobby Fischer teaches 
>chess," as an outstanding book. I'm curious what people know about this 
>book. Did Bobby write it himself? Is it an "as told to" book? Or did he 
>just give his name to it. I'd like to know his level of involvement in the 
>project.

>rlwilliams@gallua

This was my first chess book! Its pretty old, and I even think out of 
print (I've been keeping an eye out for it ever since I lost it). It was an 
excellent book, probably because it was in the form of quick problems rather 
than books (also excellent) but require the extra effort of taking out a 
chess board. 

I'm pretty sure Bobby "wrote" the book himself (inverted commas because 
there's not much writing - almost zero, in fact - (and consequently as much 
reading) there is just one position per page and the solution on the next 
page.


--
Marc Loon <loon@underdog.ee.wits.ac.za>
Student No: 8807871/X (just thought you'd want to know)
University of the Witwatersrand
Johannesburg

Conversation: a voice competition between two people
in which the one taking a breath is called the listener.
From: nash@visus.com (Richard V. Nash)
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
Subject: Re: Fischer/Spassky time control
Date: 17 Aug 92 12:20:32 GMT
Reply-To: nash@visus.com
Organization: Visual Understanding Systems, Pgh PA

In article <1992Aug14.142620.46@wsuhub.uc.twsu.edu> bagai@wsuhub.uc.twsu.edu  
writes:
> I am told that the upcoming match will use Fischer's clock with the
> following time control:
> 
> 	Each player initially gets 90 minutes on his clock and an
> 	additional 2 minutes after each move is made.
> 
> 	No secondary time controls, no adjournments, no nothing ....
> 
This post seems to imply that two minutes is added top the time controls after  
each move. From what I know about the Fischer clock I don't believe this is  
true.

For those of you who don't understand how the Fischer clock works, let me  
explain. There are two timers for each player. The first, the two minute timer,  
starts fresh from 2 minutes at the beginning of each of your moves. Only after  
that two minutes runs out does the main timer start running. Essentially you  
get two free minutes each move. If you don't use all of the two minutes the  
remaining time is NOT added to the main timer. When the main timer trips the  
flag, your time is up.

The problem is that Bobby patented this idea a few years ago. I don't know of  
any commercial clocks that work this way. Then again, they are paying 5 million  
dollars for the match, it shouldn't be hard to produce a clock like this for  
just a few thousand.
--
+---------------------------------------------------------------+
| Richard V. Nash  | Visual Understanding Systems, Inc.         |
| nash@visus.com   | Tel. (412)-488-3600   Fax. (412)-488-3611  |
+---------------------------------------------------------------+
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
From: bak@bak.kodak.COM (Bruce A. Kern)
Subject: xics ICS interface needed for sun 
Reply-To: bak@bak.kodak.COM (Bruce A. Kern)
Organization: Eastman Kodak
Date: Thu, 20 Aug 92 13:38:38 GMT

In article <1992Aug20.131427.3946@pixel.kodak.com>, bak@bak.kodak.COM
(Bruce A. Kern) writes:
I've been trying to build the xics interface to the Internet Chess Server.
However the tar file on sevenlayer.cs.wisc.edu seems to be corrupt.
Whenever I try to untar it I get a checksum error and not all files are
unpacked.  If anyone has an uncorrupt version of that file, or better yet
a binary built for SunOS 4.1 I'd appreciate an email copy.
            
=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+
+=+=+=+=+
Bruce A. Kern					(716) 726-6700
Eastman Kodak Company				Bruce_Kern@Kodak.COM
=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+
+=+=+=+=+
From: berto@and.nl (Bert van Oortmarssen)
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
Subject: Re: Checkers match
Date: 21 Aug 92 07:56:19 GMT
Organization: AND Software BV Rotterdam


If Chinook will solve the game of checkers (within a few years), it might be 
interesting to have a look at the 10x10 variant of this game (a.k.a. 
polish checkers, as played in Russia, Holland, France, ...). 
10x10 checkers has a higher complexity and will (probably) never be sold. 
In Holland there are some twenty programs and every half year a torunament is
held. Winner of the last (5+) tournaments was  TRUUS, which really is a strong
program (will probably be amongst the top-10 of players in Holland).

I am writing a longer article about 10x10 checkers & computers (not finished 
yet), so contact me if you are interested.


Bert van Oortmarssen
AND-software bv. Rotterdam
berto@and.nl

Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
From: jhc@iris.uucp (James H. Coombs)
Subject: Re: Chess Program?
Reply-To: jhc@iris.brown.edu.UUCP (James H. Coombs)
Organization: IRIS - Brown University
Date: Tue, 18 Aug 1992 04:55:47 GMT

In article <1992Aug18.132921.3281@ucsvc.ucs.unimelb.edu.au> u855ops12@ucsvc.ucs.unimelb.edu.au (Patrick Blanchard) writes:

>   I am looking for a chess program (IBM PC) that not only plays a fairly
>strong game (not that I'm a strong player - just an optimist) but is also
>useful for analysing old games to see where I went wrong, etc.. Do the programs
>that get a regular mention in this newsgroup do this? (i.e. Zarkov, Mchess,
>Knightstalker, etc.)

Yes, I have posted examples of Zarkov's analysis.  I can't say just what
the other programs offer.

You need to tell us what PC.  You mean an 8088, no Turbo or anything?
And what is "fairly strong"?  Do you have a rating?  You want something
rated at least 200 points above you.  On an 8088 with TinyTurbo, Zarkov
2.6 is probably playing at about 2000.  Without a TinyTurbo?  A wild
guess: 1700.

I base my guess on an effective processor speed of 5 times the 8088
without the Turbo.  Then I use the formula that you lose 100 points for
every time you cut the speed in 1/2.  How wild is my guess?  I feel
confident that the program would play in the range of 1500-1800.  I
would be very surprised by anything outside that range.

Others know more and probably could offer better estimates.  --Jim
From: emarkp@ocf.berkeley.edu (E. Mark Ping)
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
Subject: Re: stupid chess trivia
Date: 18 Aug 1992 01:43:28 GMT
Organization: U.C. Berkeley Open Computing Facility
Distribution: US
NNTP-Posting-Host: sandstorm.berkeley.edu

In article <1992Aug17.192457.9789@talon.ucs.orst.edu> linb@ucs.orst.edu (Benjamin Lin) writes:
}My guess is that the most common first name of USCF
}players rated over 2000 is Mark.  Any comments?
}-benoni
} 

  Well...My name is Mark, yet I'm not rated over 2000.  :-)
  I guess I can't help you.


-- 
E. Mark Ping
emarkp@ocf.Berkeley.EDU

  "Stand aside, I take large steps."    --Michael Dorn
  "Say, that's a nice bike."            --Cyberdyne Systems T-1000
  "Pituita es."                         --Unknown Latin Scholar

And of course, this in no way reflects my views of UC Berkeley.
From: philip@spr.usask.ca (Tim Philip)
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
Subject: Re: Rules of Chess
Date: 18 Aug 92 17:13:01 GMT
Distribution: na
Organization: University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, Canada


	I once read a story (I believe it was in Pandolfini's two big
	chess volumes) where someone tried something similiar.  The game
	went,

	1. e4 e5
	2. Nf3 Bc5
	3. Bc4 Qf2 mate

	The rules stated that *ANY* move creating checkmate on the board
	wins the game.  It didn't mention anything about legal or illegal
	moves.

	I don't remember how important the game was, but it was apparently
	a tournament game!

	Tim.
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess