HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: palane@iastate.edu (Paul A. Lane)
Subject: Re: A game of chess with dmc!?
Organization: Iowa State University, Ames IA
Date: Mon, 4 Jan 1993 06:13:53 GMT

In <1992Dec31.170812.762@uoft02.utoledo.edu> dcrosgr@uoft02.utoledo.edu writes:

>Back it up if you are man enough. Lose pays plane fare.

>It'll never happen because your fear your lack of ability.

Or that proving something to you isn't worth risking money.

>Won't either of you grow some testicles?

Somewhere, you got the notion that putting an excessive amount
of money on the line proves something. A very good friend of mine likes
to try to get me to make stupid bets when I make an assertion (usually
sports-related). [O.K., he occasionally succeeds.] 

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

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

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

Paul A. Lane
From: wayne.mendryk@freddy.ersys.edmonton.ab.ca (Wayne Mendryk) 
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
Subject: Agdestein-Farago Game
Date: 5 Jan 93 18:34:00 GMT
Reply-To: wayne.mendryk@freddy.ersys.edmonton.ab.ca (Wayne Mendryk) 
Distribution: world
Organization: Freddy's Place BBS - Edmonton, AB - 403-456-4241

I found this "English Opening" game in my Chessbase files. Sorry I can't
remember who requested it.

Agdestein, S.-Farago,I. Wijk 1988  ECO: A34

1.c4 Nf6 2.Nf3

Watson in "The Symmetrical English" states: about half of Symmetrical
English games begin with this move" (p.120).

 c5 3.Nc3 Nc6 4.g3 d5 5.cxd5 Nxd5 6.Bg2 Nc7

(Note:Soltis in "Winning with 1.c4 states:"This method of liberating
Black's game (ie.via 4...d5 and ...Nc7) was a favorite of Rubinstein.
Black hopes to  build a Maroczy Bind. The Knight is not badly placed
at c7 since it can go to e6 and d4 quickly."pg.76
 7.O-O

     (7.e3 Bg4 8.Nc3 cd 9.ed e6 10.Qa4 Qd7 11.O-O Be7 12.Bf4 Nd5!?
     (if 12...O-O 13.Bxc7 and 14.d5) 13.Nxd5 ed 14.Rfe1 Rad8? (...O-O)
     15.Bg5! Bxf3 16.Bxf3 O-O 17.Bxe7 Nxe7 18.Qxa7+- Miles-Ljubojevic,
     Bugojno 1986

7...e5 8.Ne1 Bf5 9.f4 exf4 10.d3 Bd6 11.Bxf4 Bxf4 12.Bxc6+ bxc6
13.Rxf4 Bg6 14.Qa4 Qd6 15.Rc4 O-O 16.Ng2 Rfb8 17.Qc2 Ne6 18.b3 Rb4
19.Qd2 Rxc4 20.bxc4 Rb8 21.Rc1 Qd4+ 22.Kh1 Bf5 23.Nf4 h6 24.Kg2 Rb4
25.Nd1 g5 26.Nxe6 Bxe6 27.Rc2 Rb1 28.Rb2 Ra1 29.Nf2 Qf6 30.e3 Bg4
31.h3 Bf3+ 32.Kh2 h5 33.Rb8+ Kg7 34.Qb2 Qxb2 35.Rxb2 Re1 36.e4 Kf6
37.Rd2 Rf1 0-1
---
 . SLMR 2.1a . We have met the enemy and they are us-Pogo
                                                      
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
From: Jeff Boyd <BOYDJ@QUCDN.QueensU.CA>
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
Subject: RE: CHESS-L vs ZARKOV
Date: Sun, 10 Jan 1993 20:21:00 GMT
Organization: Chessnews list (chessnews-request@tssi.com)
NNTP-Posting-Host: helios.unl.edu



OOOOOOPS ... my previous post under this subject was intended
for Chess-L and I mis-addressed it.  My apologies,


jeff

Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
From: frakes@csvaxe.csuohio.edu
Subject: Re: Strength of Sargon III on Commodore 64
Organization: Cleveland State University
Date: Fri, 8 Jan 1993 15:57:59 GMT

In article <Daniel_Marsalone.1c6m@agwbbs.new-orleans.LA.US>, Daniel_Marsalone@agwbbs.new-orleans.LA.US (Daniel Marsalone) writes:
>    Another related question... How strong is the chess cartridge for the 
> TI99/4A???? This game was a heck of a lot easier to beat than the C-64
> Sargon. In the endgame, the Texas Instruments chess blew it. All you would
> have to do to beat it would be to remain with an equal amount of material
> and just trade down until there were few pieces on the board. Then the
> computer would just make a big blunder and lose the game. This seems weird.
> Since there are fewer pieces on the board to "think" about, why does the
> computer make worse moves than it makes in the opening and middle game?
>  
>     Any info will be greatly appreciated.
> 
> -- Via DLG Pro v0.995
> 
> Daniel Marsalone             Daniel Marsalone            Daniel Marsalone
> Internet: daniel_marsalone@agwbbs.new-orleans.LA.US
>     UUCP: rex!agwbbs!daniel_marsalone
> 

The fact that there are fewer pieces doesn't allow the computer to search
many more ply ahead.  The search tree grows extremely fast.  Perhaps you've
watched some chess programs like Sargon "think."  If you look at the ply, you
notice that the ply increases quickly at first and then gets slower and slower.
The effect of fewer pieces is not nearly enough to counteract the expanding
tree at higher plies, so the the same amount of thinking time may only yield
an extra 2 or 3 ply.

Another thing to keep in mind....  Depending on how the chess algorithm
works, it is easy for the program to miss things in the endgame that are
obvious to humans.  The easiest way to illustrate this is to consider a
situation where you have a couple pawns at their starting positions and
so does the computer.  There are four pawns on the board and each is 5 or
6 moves away from queening.  Even if there are just two such pawns on the
board (one for each player), the computer may have to look 12 ply ahead to
see who queens first and what happens immediately afterwards.  I'm
exaggerating things a bit here since I believe current chess algorithms are
a bit smarter than that, but the point is that things that may be obvious to
you may not be obvious to the computer and there is not a very significant
increase in search depth due to the lower number of pieces on the board to
compensate for the computer's stupidity in the endgame.

-Andy

P.S.  My connection to my MIT account is down so I'm writing from one of
my other accounts with the wimpy newsreader.  It's so easy to get spoiled
with Xwindows....

P.P.S.  It's hard to get used to the fact that we can now talk about
chess on rec.games.chess.  What a concept!
From: wayne.mendryk@freddy.ersys.edmonton.ab.ca (Wayne Mendryk) 
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
Subject: Re: 2267 Performance Rati
Date: 6 Jan 93 16:46:00 GMT
Reply-To: wayne.mendryk@freddy.ersys.edmonton.ab.ca (Wayne Mendryk) 
Distribution: world
Organization: Freddy's Place BBS - Edmonton, AB - 403-456-4241

SR>From: steven@Chemeng.Ed.Ac.Uk (Steven Rix)
SR>Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
SR>Subject: Re: 2267 Performance Rating for 10-year old
SR>Message-ID: <1ieb04INNrhr@gour.chemeng.ed.ac.uk>
SR>Date: 6 Jan 93 10:07:00 GMT
SR>Reply-To: steven@Chemeng.Ed.Ac.Uk

SR>Does anyone have any info on the rating progression of the latest rising sta
SR>eventeen-year-old Vladimir Kramnik?

SR>One year ago he was an FM rated 2580 or so; now he is a GM rated 2685! He is
SR>the one young player that Kasparov actually seems afraid of.

SR>Steve

Steve, according to Inside Chess, Kramnik recently placed first in the
Chalkidiki Greece tournament (Category 14) with 7.5 ahead of Lautier,
Illescas, Adams,I.Sokolov etc. And he finished third behind Lputian and
Azmaiparashvili in the Dortmund Open (on a tie-break after all had
finished with 8.5) Unfortunately Inside Chess didn't include a
crosstable in the tournament report so I cant tell you what his "end of
the year" rating is. According to my Chessbase files, Kramnik
participated at Oakham 1992 and had an ELO of 2590. At Oakham Kramnik
played the black side of a Queen's Gambit Accepted against the
tournament winner (Shirov) and crushed Shirov in 33 moves. In this
tournament Kramnik finished third (losing second of a tie break to
Akopian), with Shirov finishing first.


Wayne Mendryk
Edmonton,Alberta,Canada
---
 . SLMR 2.1a . There is no absolute knowledge-J.Bronowski
From: joltman@cookie-crisp.ai.mit.edu (T. Andy Frakes)
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
Subject: Re: Keep it up and I will come back!
Date: 7 Jan 1993 13:48:53 GMT
Organization: MIT Artificial Intelligence Lab
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: cookie-crisp.ai.mit.edu

In article <1993Jan7.020410.5558@cis.uab.edu>, sloan@cis.uab.edu (Kenneth Sloan) writes:
|> In article <1ifnp8INNgkr@life.ai.mit.edu> joltman@cookie-crisp.ai.mit.edu (T. Andy Frakes) writes:
|> >In article <1993Jan5.202400.4057@cis.uab.edu>, sloan@cis.uab.edu (Kenneth Sloan) writes:
|> > ...
|> >|> Actually, the best evidence is that precisely *one* human can beat
|> >|> Chinook.
|> >|> ...
|> >Make that "...at least one human..."
|> 
|> No.  I meant it as written.  I believe that the evidence supports the
|> conclusion that Tinsley is the *only* human who can beat Chinook.
|> 

Oh, ok.  I was thinking of proof rather than evidence.  Perhaps there should
be a match between Chinook and the "Second-best Human in the world." (if one
hasn't already taken place)

-- 
================================================================
=             T. Andy Frakes (joltman@ai.mit.edu)              =
=                                                              =
= This user does not believe in smiley faces.  Insert your own =
================================================================
From: vanderli@orion (Michel van der List)
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
Subject: Looking for Foltys-Alekhine, Prague 1943
Date: 11 Jan 93 12:38:07 GMT
Organization: Fox Chase Cancer Center

I'm looking to get the game-score for the above mentioned game. The ECO code is
A92. Anybody out there that might have this?

Michel

-- 
--------------------+----------------------------+-----------------------------
Michel van der List |   'Dat typies hollands     | The Fox Chase Cancer Center
vanderlist@fccc.edu |        vingertje'          |      7701 Burholme Avenue
(215) 728-3660      |                            |    Philadelphia, PA  19111
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
From: gls@windmill.att.com (the Knight on the Rim)
Subject: who wins?
Organization: James Schroeder Fan Club
Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1993 23:09:04 GMT

This weekend I got to play against a ChessSomething 2150.  The first game
was a warmup at five minutes each, and pretty sad at that:

SICHERMAN--CHESSSOMETHING. 1. e4 c6; 2. d4 d5; 3. ed cd; 4. c4 Nf6; 5. Nc3
e6; 6. Nf3 Bb4; 7. Bd3 O-O; 8. Ng5 h6; 9. h4 (It can't be *that* stupid!)
hg (Or can it?); 10. hg Ng4; 11. Bh7+ Kh8; 12. Bg8+ K:g8; 13. Qh7#.

The second game was at 20 in 30, and was a much better fight.  After trying
to sustain a paper-thin initiative, I sacrificed two pawns and got this
position:

			   ::    ::    -R    -K
			:: -P +R    ::    :: -P
			-P ::    :: +Q -P -P ::
			::    ::    ::    ::   
			   ::    ::    ::    ::
			::    :: -Q +P    ::   
			   ::    ::    +P +K +P
			::    ::    ::    ::   

ChessSomething has just surprised me by playing 1... Qb1-d3.  After much
contemplation I played 2. Rd7, and after 2... Qf5; 3. Qe7 Qg5+; 4. Kf1
Qh6; 5. R:b7 Black untangled itself (somewhat) with 5... Qh3+, eventually
bringing the Queen to g8.  It forced the queens off before I could snatch
the a-pawn, and I had to fight for a draw--not very hard, it turned out.

Do you see anything better for White?  I also looked at an immediate
2. Qe7, but thought at the time that 2. Rd7 was stronger.

-:-
	"You saved my life, Captain Buffalo!  Have a CIGAR!"
-- 
Col. G. L. Sicherman
gls@windmill.att.COM
From: joltman@cookie-crisp.ai.mit.edu (T. Andy Frakes)
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
Subject: Re: checkers
Date: 5 Jan 93 17:01:23 GMT
Organization: MIT Artificial Intelligence Lab
NNTP-Posting-Host: cookie-crisp.ai.mit.edu

In article <1993Jan5.141820.1041@cis.uab.edu>, hyatt@cis.uab.edu (Robert Hyatt) writes:
|> >In article <1993Jan5.022113.3309@cis.uab.edu>, sloan@cis.uab.edu (Kenneth Sloan) writes:
|> >> In article <1993Jan4.203742.822@uoft02.utoledo.edu> dcrosgr@uoft02.utoledo.edu writes:
|> >>>...
|> >>>Listen idiot, did I say the current champion was a computer???
|> >>>NO! I said that no human can beat the programs we have out there for checkers!
|> >> 
|> >> A very well publicized match was held recently between the generally
|> >> accepted best computer checkers machine and the generally accepted best
|> >> human checkers player.  The human won.
|> >
|> >I would be curious to know who went first most of the time. Checkers may be
|> >a game with a 'forced mate' in X moves, depending upon who goes first.
|> >
|> >> 
|> >>>It is finished. They don't even work on the programs anymore as the maximum
|> >>>number of permitations is EASILY crunched by your average home PC.
|> >> 
|> >> Checkers is still an active area of research for several people.
|> >> Including the folks who built the machine which lost the match to the
|> >> human.
|> 
|> It is not finished yet.  Chinooks great strength comes from a combination
|> of forward searching and backward searching.  They have an enormous database
|> of solutions to all the cases which have 7 or less checkers (total for both
|> sides) -- (I believe this is the right number.... Jonathan???)  and they are
|> currently working on 8.  This means that when chinook finds a position with
|> 7 or fewer checkers in it, it can look the position up in the endgame database
|> and find the perfect move.
|> 
|> It's strength comes from a deep forward search from the given board position
|> that often results in finding positions in the perfect-play endgame database.
|> When they complete the 8 piece endings, they might find that most (if not all) 
|> of the searches they do end up in one of the databases, resulting in perfect
|> play.  As for crunching thru the entire game (the "it is solved" quote above)
|> that is a long way from happening, particularly on "your average PC".
|> 
|> Bob

Hey, lets not confuse Mr. Crosgrove with the facts.  He's right and everyone
else is an "idiot" -- case closed.  He said that the average home PC can
"EASILY" crunch through all the "permitations" [sic].  If you don't believe
him, he's even got some heresay to back it up.  How much more proof do you
want?

================================================================
=             T. Andy Frakes (joltman@ai.mit.edu)              =
=                                                              =
= This user does not believe in smiley faces.  Insert your own =
================================================================
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
From: basu@panini.cs.jhu.edu (Soumit K Basu)
Subject: Psion 2.13
Organization: Johns Hopkins Computer Science Department, Baltimore, MD
Date: Fri, 8 Jan 1993 14:45:10 GMT

Anyone know where I can find the latest version of Psion (or any version for
that matter)?  Any help appreciated.  Thank you.


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Soumit K. Basu				sbasu@scholia.wbme.jhu.edu
Dept. of Biomedical Engineering		basu@cs.jhu.edu
Johns Hopkins University		skb72@jhunix.hcf.jhu.edu

	"Ask not for whom the bell tolls -- it tolls for me damn it."
					-- My variation on Hemingway

		   "Iudex bonus rem non verba spectat."
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
-- 
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Soumit K. Basu				sbasu@scholia.wbme.jhu.edu
Dept. of Biomedical Engineering		basu@cs.jhu.edu
Johns Hopkins University		skb72@jhunix.hcf.jhu.edu
From: M_vanderList@fccc.edu
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
Subject: Reference games sought for Alekhine variation of the Dutch Def.
Date: 7 Jan 93 00:31:05 GMT
Organization: Fox Chase Cancer Center
Originator: vanderli@orion

I am looking for reference games for the alekhine variation of the
dutch defense viz. 1. d4 f5 2. g3 Nf6 3. Bg2 e6 4. Nf3 Be7 5. o-o o-o
6. c4 Ne4. Anybody out there willing to search their massive ':-)'
databases to find me some games with this variation?

Obligatory non-chess remarks:

- Who cares about rating points. You can't buy bread with them.
  They are only useful for finding a comparably skilled player to
  start a game with. Whether that's at 500 points or at 2500 points
  is irrelevant.
- Dr. Schaeffer's technical report on the Chinook-Tinsley match
  is great reading material. (And I don't even know how to play
  checkers :-).
- Timman will win the Candidates. (As long as he does not blunder
  some pieces away... Hmmm maybe he will lose!).

Michel.

PS. I thought DMC was funny at first, but he ended up in my kill
    file. Thats the easy way to get rid of (in my mind) obnoxious
    people.
-- 
--------------------+----------------------------+-----------------------------
Michel van der List |   'Dat typies hollands     | The Fox Chase Cancer Center
vanderlist@fccc.edu |        vingertje'          |      7701 Burholme Avenue
(215) 728-3660      |                            |    Philadelphia, PA  19111
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
From: Peter_Stockhausen@mindlink.bc.ca (Peter Stockhausen)
Subject: Re: Should r.g.c be split into 2 groups?
Organization: MIND LINK! - British Columbia, Canada
Date: Tue, 5 Jan 1993 23:34:25 GMT

> Joseph Albert writes:
>
> Msg-ID: <C0D0L1.M4G@hplntx.hpl.hp.com>
> Posted: Tue, 5 Jan 1993 02:36:34
>
> Org.  : Hewlett-Packard Laboratories -- Database Research Group
>
> In article <geider.05au@amigdr.gna.org> geider@amigdr.gna.org (Frank
> Geider) writes:
> >I'm just comming in Newsgroup 'rec.games.chess' after 6 monthes
> interruption.
> >Is it another Newsgroup on Chess Game ?
> >6 monthes ago, it seemed be more gmaes on rec.games.chess and also offer
> to
> >play ? Is it any new law from moderator ?
>
> Naw, no moderator here.  I guess you last read this newsgroup back in the
> old days when chess was discussed here, back before a number of assholes
> with no self-control decided that their pride was worth more than the
> result of embarassing themselves in front of thousands of readers
> world-wide.
>
> Maybe we should separate this newsgroup into 2 separate groups, say:
>
> rec.games.chess
> -and-
> rec.games.chess.misc
>
> the former would be restricted (absolutely) to posts which provide the
> scores of games, analysis of games/positions/openings, or questions
> answers are of the form of the first two items in this list.
>
> rec.games.chess.misc would be a free-for-all in which anything conforming
> to USENET guidelines, with some, no matter how remote, connection to
> chess, could be posted.
>
> is there enough interest to organize a formal RFD?
>
> Joseph Albert
> albert@hplabs.hp.com

I support formal discussions on the split.
Peter

--

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


Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
From: wellerd@ajpo.sei.cmu.edu (David Weller)
Subject: Re: Request Book Recommendation for Beginner
Organization: Ada Joint Program Office
Date: Wed, 6 Jan 1993 16:10:27 EST

I tried to reply by mail, but it bounced, so here goes:

I recommend Pandolfini's "Chess Openings: Traps and Zaps" -- good coverage
of the 1. e4 openings, with about 200+ examples.  What I like the most
is Bruce's "Crime and Punishment" technique.  He shows where a player
goes wrong during the opening and how you can brutalize your opponent
when they goof.  Most of the games end in mate in less than 20 moves,
which shows the power of playing openings smartly.  I can personally 
attest to the fact that my playing power has improved significantly
since I've started working with his book.  

The BEST thing to do is to visit your local library and see if this
book is there, check it out, and judge for yourself.  

Duffy Patzerfish.
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
From: kader@dante.kgn.ibm.com 
Subject: Request Book Recommendation for Beginner
Date: Wed, 06 Jan 93 15:45:50 GMT
Reply-To: kader@dante.kgn.ibm.com 
Organization: IBM T. J. Watson Research
Keywords: Book

I am a beginner player and am looking for the best book
to learn the fundementals of openings and overall strategy of the game.
I know how to play, just don't know how to keep from getting destroyed.
Any advice would be appreciated.

  Regards, Steven
From: joltman@cookie-crisp.ai.mit.edu (T. Andy Frakes)
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
Subject: Re: I will accept DMC's challenge!! (was Re: DMC vs. Harper)
Date: 4 Jan 93 22:29:02 GMT
Organization: MIT Artificial Intelligence Lab
NNTP-Posting-Host: cookie-crisp.ai.mit.edu

In article <1993Jan4.131647.807@uoft02.utoledo.edu>, dcrosgr@uoft02.utoledo.edu writes:
|> 
|> Yeah. Right. Mr. Impartial himself. Why not just declare me the loser right now
|> and save both of us the drive?
|> 
As if I have any stake at all in this bet.  I don't care whether you win
or lose.  It really doesn't matter to me.  Do you think I care if someone's
head gets shaved over a chess match?  Whoop-de-doo!  Someone loses a tank of
gas?  Yay!  Even if the loser was erased from the face of the Earth, so
what?  You're just a drop in the bucket.  It would be like swatting one
gnat in a population of millions.  Despite what some people may think,
getting rid of you will do no good.  I'm sure there will be plenty more
people to take your place.

-- 
================================================================
=             T. Andy Frakes (joltman@ai.mit.edu)              =
=                                                              =
= This user does not believe in smiley faces.  Insert your own =
================================================================
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: Mon, 11 Jan 1993 19:56:28 GMT


                     THIS WEEK IN CHESS HISTORY
                        January 14-20, 1993

January 14
1868 - Henry Bettman born
1897 - Lasker defeats Steinitz to retain title
1933 - Fritz Englund died
1935 - Yakov Yukhtman born
1938 - Drazen Marovic born

January 15
1833 - Louis Paulsen born
1905 - James Mason died
1927 - David Janowski died
1950 - Hans Boehm born

January 16
1884 - Frederick Yates born
1932 - Victor Ciocaltea born

January 17
1866 - Karel Traxler born
1881 - William Napier born
1913 - Lev Loshinsky born
1961 - Maya Chiburdanidze born

January 18
Martin Luther King Day (USA)
1966 - Alexander Khalifman born
1973 - Al Horowitz died

January 19
1946 - Gennady Kuzmin born
1957 - E. Vladimirov born

Copyright 1993 Hanon W. Russell
All Rights Reserved
From: jaa+@F.GP.CS.CMU.EDU (James Altucher)
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
Subject: 2267 rating for ten year old
Date: 5 Jan 93 19:09:02 GMT
Article-I.D.: cs.C0EAJ3.Ayo.2
Organization: School of Computer Science, Carnegie Mellon
Originator: jaa@F.GP.CS.CMU.EDU


   
   How old were Ilya Gurevich and Stuart Rachels when they 
became masters. I think Ilya may have been around nine or ten. 

  -james
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
From: hilton@ncifcrf.gov (Bruce Hilton)
Subject: ChessMaster 3000 for sale/trade. Windows.
Organization: Frederick Cancer Research and Development Center
Distribution: usa
Date: Wed, 6 Jan 1993 18:47:28 GMT




I have a mint copy of Chessmaster 3000, still in shrinkwrap.

It is the WINDOWS version.

It is for sale for
$35 including shipping, or for your suggestion of a trade or wahtever.



-- 
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
+      Bruce D. Hilton		     +
+      hilton@fcs280s.ncifcrf.gov    +
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++