HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: disabito@progress.COM (Paul Disabito)
Subject: Harper vs. DMC
Organization: Progress Software Corp.
Date: Wed, 30 Dec 1992 22:44:51 GMT

I'd love to witness this game. It should be a classic.

Frankly, I'd like to see DMC lose. He is, after all, a
self-confessed arrogant lawyer wannabe.

But, in all fairness, his losing would not mean much. 
A worthless non-GM like Bruce Harper is still a pretty
tough opponent, no matter how worthless he is and no
matter how pointless his life may be away from the
chessboard. When a player loses to a master, it does
not prove that the loser knows nothing about chess. In
fact, I'm not sure it proves much of anything other than 
the result. A match would be a better indicator, although
losers can be very creative ("He's not better, he doesn't
know more--he just got lucky").

At any rate, it will be interesting to see if DMC accepts
this offer. I'm just afraid that it will divert people's
attention away from his original positions :-)

--Paul DiSabito

  
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
From: peskin@staff.tc.umn.edu (Yury Peskin)
Subject: Queen's Gambit question
Organization: University of Minnesota
Date: Sun, 27 Dec 1992 01:43:50 GMT

Hello chess people.  I have a question about the following game, which features
an uncommon Queen's Gambit line.

me - J. H. (2100 USCF), Queen's Gambit [D38]

1 d4 Nf6 2 c4 e6 3 Nc3 d5 4 Bg5 c6 5 Nf3 Nbd7 6 e3 Bb4 !?

  During the game I felt this move deserved "?!", but we were not in the
  beginner section - perhaps my opponent had a new idea?  :)

  Nowadays Black plays ...c5 in the Manhattan variation, regardless of any
  theoretical problems.  In my opinion ...Bb4 is incorrect with ...c6, since
  transposing to exchange variation now favours White.

7 cd5 ed5 8 Bd3 0-0 9 0-0 Re8 10 Qc2 h6

  Alekhine (who was not watching our game!) says 10 ... Nf8 is better.

11 Bh4 Qc7 ?!

  In Maroczy - Ed. Lasker, New York 1924 Black tried 11 ... Nf8 12 a3 Be7 (?),
  but this can not be correct: Black is now a tempo behind standard exchange
  variation lines.  Alekhine's notes do not mention this.

  One "recent" game with this variation: 11 ... Bd6 12 Rfe1 Nf8 13 e4 g5 14 Bg3
  Bg3 15 hg3 de4 16 Ne4 Ne4 17 Be4 Be6 18 Re3 Bd5 was Geller-Hernandez, Warsaw
  1969 (who says old Informator volumes are worthless?)

12 Bg3 Bd6 ? (careless) 13 Nb5 cb5 14 Qc7 Bc7 15 Bc7

This ending is very bad for Black, so he must find improvements.  My question
for players of Queen's Gambit:

What are the improvements?  Would you not play 11 ... Qc7 or 12 ... Bd6?  Or
was Black's error 6 ... Bb4?

Thanks.

p.s. New York 1924 tournament book has many interesting games for people
(like me) who enjoy older-style chess.  Your opponent will not always play
King's Indian defence!
-- 
==============================================================
We The Willing, Led By The Unknowing, Are Doing The Impossible
For The Ungrateful.  We Have Done So Much For So Long With So
Little, We Are Now Qualified To Do Anything With NOTHING.
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
From: mzabel@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (Mark A Zabel)
Subject: Re: Chess, hockey and bollocks
Keywords:  Bollocksium, Incontinentia Buttocks, etcetera
Organization: The Ohio State University
Date: Tue, 29 Dec 1992 17:48:09 GMT

>Mark - are you getting all this down?

Yeah, yeah, yeah - I read 'em too.

They certainly get more replies than my chess posts do.

-Mournful in the Midwest
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
From: Noshir.Patel@launchpad.unc.edu (Noshir Patel)
Subject: Match of the century
Organization: University of North Carolina Extended Bulletin Board Service
Date: Wed, 30 Dec 1992 20:57:33 GMT

EMail matches are slow and not nearly public enough.

I propose that a Bruce Harper vs DMC match be played on ICS.  Please post
the time beforehand (at least a day in advance) so that I can watch...

Hey, should be easy to set up if both parties are willing.

And I don't really care who wins, but I hope it's a slaughter...

--
   The opinions expressed are not necessarily those of the University of
     North Carolina at Chapel Hill, the Campus Office for Information
        Technology, or the Experimental Bulletin Board Service.
           internet:  laUNChpad.unc.edu or 152.2.22.80
From: amirishs@acf9.nyu.edu (shaahin amiri sharifi)
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
Subject: Botvinnik Autobiography----Help Wanted!
Date: 3 Jan 93 05:34:52 GMT
Organization: New York University

I have seen that somebody is posting Botvinnk Autobiography. I have
amsome part of this wonderfull series, and I'm wondering if sombody
has all the   part(from the very first up to last one, which is I guess
35), or if I can get it from ftp sites.
From: lemur+@CMU.EDU (Paul Reber)
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
Subject: Re: US Championship Round 15 (last) GAMES
Date: 23 Dec 92 16:14:13 GMT
Organization: Doctoral student, Psychology, Carnegie Mellon, Pittsburgh, PA

ekw@world.std.com (Elliott C Winslow) writes:
> Round 15
> 1-0 Fedorowicz,J-Sherzer,A
> 0-1 Men,B-Wolff,P

Seems a certain GM-to be choked in the final round.
Congrats to Pat and Alex for their good showings.
It would be nice to see some of these younger US GM's get out and
start kicking tail in some of the international tournaments and make
the transition to super-GM levels of chess.  Although we've had
flashes from Seirawan, Benjamin, DeFirmian, Fedorowicz and
Christiansen we need some new blood out there (my opinion, of course).
I don't think I could stand much more talk of Fischer or Kamsky being
the best US hope to become World Champ (ugh).

lemur

P.S. Of course, I'm not mentioning strong GM's like Kaidanov or
Yermolinsky.  I don't think their success has the same effect on the
US chess community that a US-bred chessplayer would (my opinion,
again).
From: dcrosgr@uoft02.utoledo.edu
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
Subject: Re: To (mostly) all; Sven especially.
Date: 31 Dec 92 17:05:25 EST
Organization: University of Toledo, Computer Services

In article <1992Dec31.072528.19480@midway.uchicago.edu>, hau4@ellis.uchicago.edu (sven  hauptfeld) writes:
> In article <19022@mindlink.bc.ca> Bruce_Harper@mindlink.bc.ca (Bruce Harper) writes:
>>I still don't think dmc knows how to play chess.  I think he and Sven should
>>have a match on the net, so we can all watch.  I would miss the brilliant and
>>compelling advocacy which we have all come to love, but I for one would be
>>willing to make that sacrifice.
>>
> I agree - if a third netter keeps score. Otherwise, dmc will claim, before his
> 2nd move, that my first two moves were 1.f3 and 2.g4 and that I am now just 
> bullshiting that I actually moved 1.e4 and 2.Nf3 because I realized how stupid
> my moves were...
> 
> 	Sven
> 

I make you the same offer I made Harper.

You got balls enough to accept?

Loser plays plane fare.

Well, I didn't think you did.
From: ralf@ark.abg.sub.org (R.Stephan)
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
Subject: Re: MChess Pro vs. ChessMachine
Date: 27 Dec 92 17:40:00 GMT
Organization: Not Very Ltd.

uzun@crash.cts.com (Roger Uzun) writes:
> >- MChessPro vs. ChessMachine Gideon 2.1 (Blitz mode - 60/5'):  8.5 - 1.5
> >- MChessPro vs. ChessMachine King 1.0   (Blitz mode - 60/5'):  8.0 - 2.0
> >- MChessPro vs. ChessMachine Gideon 2.1 (Tournament - 60/2h):  6.5 - 3.5
> >
> But in Madrid, Chessmachine Schroeder defeated MChess Pro on a 486/66,
> it is unclear to me that MChess Pro can beat the latest version
> of The Chessmachine and the Schroeder software, which is its
> default software, iin any competition with any 80X86 machine,
> because of the results of the latest world chess championship
> tournament, where The Chessmachine won, and MChess pro palced 10th,
> with MChess Pro and the Chessmachine meeting in head to head competion.


   NOT!!!!  Please check your facts.
   One CM win in one game is by no means a "defeat".  Here you see 30 games.
   And more coming...

   The results of the WCs are not only always doubtful (5 round Swiss),
   but this one is also rumored to have been manipulated by not pairing
   correctly (Swiss-wise).

ralf
--
***************
Sbetrg Pburerag
From: dcrosgr@uoft02.utoledo.edu
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
Subject: Re: To (mostly) all; Sven especially.
Date: 3 Jan 93 11:02:22 EST
Organization: University of Toledo, Computer Services

In article <1993Jan3.024502.4894@midway.uchicago.edu>, hau4@ellis.uchicago.edu (sven  hauptfeld) writes:
> In article <1992Dec31.170525.761@uoft02.utoledo.edu> dcrosgr@uoft02.utoledo.edu writes:
>>In article <1992Dec31.072528.19480@midway.uchicago.edu>, hau4@ellis.uchicago.edu (sven  hauptfeld) writes:
>>> In article <19022@mindlink.bc.ca> Bruce_Harper@mindlink.bc.ca (Bruce Harper) writes:
>>>>I still don't think dmc knows how to play chess.  I think he and Sven should
>>>>have a match on the net, so we can all watch.  I would miss the brilliant and
>>>>compelling advocacy which we have all come to love, but I for one would be
>>>>willing to make that sacrifice.
>>>>
>>> I agree - if a third netter keeps score. Otherwise, dmc will claim, before his
>>> 2nd move, that my first two moves were 1.f3 and 2.g4 and that I am now just 
>>> bullshiting that I actually moved 1.e4 and 2.Nf3 because I realized how stupid
>>> my moves were...
>>> 
>>> 	Sven
>>> 
>>
>>I make you the same offer I made Harper.
> 
> I have already accepted one offer, the one that came first. If you also
> accept it, we'll play. I'll reply to your offer (which came later) after I
> know your response to the first offer.

Let me explain the chronolgy of events.

Harper requested I prove I could play by playing you.
I told him if he was willing to "put his money where his mouth is" I would play
him.
He declined.
You then came in and stated you would like to play me.
I countered by making you the same offer I made harper.
You have declined.

Pure and simple Sven, I am MORE than willing to play you--provided the loser
suffers more than just a loss of game.

It is YOU who are unwiling to risk anything in the play.

> 
>>You got balls enough to accept?
> 
> Obviously, you are confused as of whose turn to accept or decline the offer
> it is.

Obviously you are WISHING I were backing down instead of yourself.

It is kind of like a poker game Sven:

Harper made the ante and dealt.
I raised, and he folded.
You then come in and want to "see my cards". 
But you are unwilling to see the raise.
Yet, you claim that I am the one unwilling to play.

Sorry Sven, that makes it YOU who are folding up.

> 
> 	Sven

DMC

Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
From: Peter_Stockhausen@mindlink.bc.ca (Peter Stockhausen)
Subject: Re: MAYBE BUSH WILL PARDON FISCHER TOO!
Organization: MIND LINK! - British Columbia, Canada
Date: Tue, 29 Dec 1992 23:06:46 GMT

> NEIL REGAN writes:
>
> Msg-ID: <1992Dec29.080217.1205@netcom.com>
> Posted: Tue, 29 Dec 1992 08:02:1
>
> Org.  : Netcom - Online Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest)
>
> IT SEEM RIDICULOUS THAT BUSH CAN PARDON WEINBERGER,YET OVERLOOK
> BOBBY FISCHER AS A CANDIDATE FOR A PARDON.  IT SEEMS EVERY 4
> YEARS ALL THE CROOKS IN THE ADMINISTRATION GET OFF FOR FREE
> WITH A PRESIDENTIAL PARDON WITH THE CHANGING OF THE GUARD!
> IF SO  WHY NOT  INCLUDE  BAD BOY  BOBBY?!
>
>                       NEIL
>

President Bush followed the "discussions" on this net every day. He based his
decision to exclude Bobby Fischer on the well informed contributions by our
most frequent writers.
Peter
--

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


Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
From: smmurthy@comet.lerc.nasa.gov (PLN Murthy)
Subject: Re: Mchess Pro
Organization: NASA Lewis Research Center
  I have just gotten Mchess Pro on my 386sx/20MHz Machine. I have 5 Meg. Ram.
    When I tried to set up Hash table size, it allowed me to go upto 2.56M only
    Is there a way to utilize all 5 Meg or atleast the upper memory 4 Megs. Than    ks in advance. Murthy.
Date: Tue, 22 Dec 1992 12:47:55 GMT

-- 

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
PLN Murthy			|     phone: 216-433-4000
NASA Lewis Research Center     	|    
Cleveland, Ohio  44135         	|     email: smmurthy@comet.lerc.nasa.gov 
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
From: Peter_Stockhausen@mindlink.bc.ca (Peter Stockhausen)
Subject: Re: Don't Blame Lawyers!
Organization: MIND LINK! - British Columbia, Canada
Date: Mon, 28 Dec 1992 21:27:36 GMT

> Ron_Kownacki@transarc.com writes:
>
> Msg-ID: <QfDpvKL0BwxKE0nKQG@transarc.com>
> Posted: 28 Dec 92 20:08:54 GMT
>
> Org.  : Carnegie Mellon, Pittsburgh, PA
>
> >From: dcrosgr@uoft02.utoledo.edu
> >Subject: Re: Don't blame lawyers!
> >Date: 26 Dec 92 18:26:17 EST
> >
> >In article <1ha35qINN5ne@life.ai.mit.edu>, joltman@cookie-crisp.ai.mit.edu
> (T.
> A
> >ndy Frakes) writes:
> >> Who is this DMC bonehead, anyway?  There's been so much traffic here
> >> recently that I've only been scanning the articles for real info or
> >> interesting debates.  Needless to say, I've skipped a majority of the
> >> articles and seemed to have missed all this DMC stuff (perhaps for
> >> the better).  On the surface it looks like this bozo is yanking a lot
> >> of chains and probably having a good time doing it (or perhaps I'm
> >> giving they guy too much credit and he's just a total moron, but
> >> probably not).  I recognize the style, though.  I've used it myself a
> >> few times before to spice things up when things are slow.  I even did
> >> it on this newsgroup a few months back with that one article titled
> >> "Listen Up, Bobby Bashers" as many of you probably remember.  Most
> >> people eventually figured it out, but some didn't (even after telling
> >> them!).
> >
> >While that may have been a tactic you used to while away the hours in your
> >otherwise pointless existance, my posts have been designed to question the
> >positions stated by 'experts' and if said positions are the result of
> informed,>impartial decision-making.
>
>
> This is great!  DMC vs. Frakes!  The inevitable confrontation that the
> rest of the rgc readership have been awaiting for months!  Now we'll
> resolve these issues!

Maybe some of the readership would enjoy some chess....
Peter
--

----------------------------------------------------------------
   Peter_Stockhausen@mindlink.bc.ca         Vancouver, Canada
----------------------------------------------------------------
From: dcrosgr@uoft02.utoledo.edu
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
Subject: Re: this has got to stop
Date: 1 Jan 93 13:25:48 EST
Organization: University of Toledo, Computer Services

In article <1hvtvbINNgti@agate.berkeley.edu>, jeff@emily10.Berkeley.EDU (Jeffrey C. Ely) writes:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Please, everybody just ignore this asshole. The inference people fail to make 
> which keeps this guy around is that *only an idiot* would behave this way!  
> That means that it is a waste of time dealing with him.  And I dont mean it is
> a waste of time because you wont convince himn he is an idiot,  that is 
> already obvious.  What I mean is it is a waste of time dealing with him 
> because his opinion is worthless. WHO CARES WHAT THIS GUY THINKS!!
> 
> The next time you get pissed off at what a total asshole this guy is and get 
> ready to write a response, go through the following thought experiment first:
> Think of what this guy must be like in person.  Imagine how you would react
> to him if you met him in person.  You'd probably just laugh at the guy as 
> a poor deluded guy who just gets on your nerves.  You'd want him to go away.
> You'd realize that fueling his idiotic need for attention will just keep
> him around.  So you'd ignore him.  Let's try to do that here.  
> 
> Please. Don't respond to anything he says.  If anything, just do it out of
> curiousity to see what he'll do if he has no one to irritate.
> 
> Jeffrey Ely
> 

Jeff, you go first.
From: dweddin@uoft02.utoledo.edu
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
Subject: BOOKUP 7 QUESTION
Date: 26 Dec 92 18:47:36 EST
Organization: University of Toledo, Computer Services

is there any way in using Bookup 7 using the "training mode"
to *NOT* see the correct continuation on the right side of
the screen...(other than taping a piece of paper over the screen)

thanks,

don wedding
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
From: fujimoto@carson.u.washington.edu (Bryant Fujimoto)
Subject: Re: TO THE GM's/IM's FROM DON
Organization: University of Washington
Date: Mon, 21 Dec 1992 10:56:52 GMT

dcrosgr@uoft02.utoledo.edu writes:

>In article <34463@rnd.GBA.NYU.EDU>, mginsbur@rnd.GBA.NYU.EDU (Mark Ginsburg) writes:
>> In article <1992Dec20.101509.578@uoft02.utoledo.edu> dcrosgr@uoft02.utoledo.edu writes:
>> 
>>>[...] Simply stated, Fischer played well because he won.
>>>NOTHING else matters.
>> 
>> Oh, I see (?!?).

>My personal philosophy on life can be boiled down to:

>A working imperfect solution is better than a non-working perfect solution.

>I have little respect for 'critics' who lack the ability to climb to the top,
>and it spills over....

[stuff deleted]

>> provide instructional value.  It's funny to see the analysis reduced to
>> what is perceived as personal attacks.  Chess moves are just that, chess
>> moves.  They are not an attempt to get "inside of Fischer's mind" or know
>> "what his strategy was."

>Well, when you couple that with statements which indicate the author believes
>that this is proof that Fischer is not as strong a player, you take it out of
>the realm of textbook discussion into one of arguing about someone's skill,
>which is so much MM. 

If you look in the sports pages you find critiques of coaches
and athletes written by journalists who are neither.  The sports
writers may claim a player is no longer effective, etc.  And it
seems some people enjoy arguing over which of two athletes
(or teams), who did not play at the same time, was the better athlete.
This appears to be the same sort of activity which you are condemning
in some of your posts (how well did Fischer and Spassky play? is
Fischer as good as he once was? etc.).  However, since this sort
of thing is accepted in other sports, why do you object to it here?

Bryant Fujimoto
fujimoto@denali.chem.washington.edu

[more stuff deleted]
From: wayne.mendryk@freddy.ersys.edmonton.ab.ca (Wayne Mendryk) 
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
Subject: Gardner's Lecture Notes
Date: 25 Dec 92 19:16:00 GMT
Reply-To: wayne.mendryk@freddy.ersys.edmonton.ab.ca (Wayne Mendryk) 
Distribution: world
Organization: Freddy's Place BBS - Edmonton, AB - 403-456-4241

Here are the key points which Rob Gardner (CFC rating 2238) gave at a
chess lecture in Edmonton recently.

1.Combinations often take place because one player gets his pieces to
superior locations.

2.Sometimes controlling the center in the opening will allow a player to
get his pieces to superior locations.

3.Developing better and more quickly will often be a factor in getting
the superior piece placements conducive to combinations.

4.The oppponent's king is the target of many combinations and attacks

5.An element in many successful attacks is the ability of the attacker
to coordinate many of his pieces.

6.There are many, many factors in determining whether a piece is well
placed (which is one reason why serious chess players can spend so much
time studying).

7.Sometimes a piece is well placed because it has the option of
capturing enemy pieces (even though those pieces may be worth less and
be well defended).

8.If the King is the target, exposing the king is often important.

9.Time can be considered an important factor in that the attacker would
like his pieces to cooperate quickly in the attack while the defender's
pieces are too slow to defend.

10.There are many possible reasons to sacrifice; exposing the enemy
king, gaining time, destroying an important defender, luring an enemy
piece to a square where it can become a target, luring an enemy piece
away from the defense, clearing one of the attacker's pieces out of the
way, etc.

11.The reason a sacrifice can game time is that the attacker may have to
respond to the sacrifice rather than do what he/she would like to do.

12.Although setting up an attack requires positional knowledge (to know
whether one is indeed placing his pieces on superior squares), the
ability to calculate accurately several moves ahead is also important.

13.When calculating ahead, it can sometimes take a complicated judgement
to decide who is better in the position that has been imagined.

14.The style of a game will often determine the relative importance of
strategy (positional considerations) and tactics (calculations).

15. Obviously, striving the attack the enemy king can backfire if the
situation is inappropriate.

Comments anyone?

---
 . SLMR 2.1a . Chess is one of the noblest inventions of the human mind
                
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
From: wayne.mendryk@freddy.ersys.edmonton.ab.ca (Wayne Mendryk) 
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
Subject: Another problem with "Com
Date: 27 Dec 92 12:33:00 GMT
Reply-To: wayne.mendryk@freddy.ersys.edmonton.ab.ca (Wayne Mendryk) 
Distribution: world
Organization: Freddy's Place BBS - Edmonton, AB - 403-456-4241

B>Subject: Another problem with
"Combination Challenge!" by Hays and Hall JB>Message-ID:
<1992Dec27.182545.8613@pony.Ingres.COM> JB>Date: 27 Dec 92 18:25:45 GMT

A few months ago I posted some of my thoughts on the book
"Combination JB>Challenge!" by Lou Hays and John Hall.  After discussing
position #1, it JB>became apparent that there were at least two
different versions of the JB>book in circulation (if position #1 has a
pawn on c6, then your book is a JB>newer version than mine).

John I must have an older version of the book like you. However all of
the ommissions you mention below are not found in my book, so you must
have got a defective copy.

JB>I recently discovered another unfortunate problem with my version of the
JB>book: pages 169-176 are missing entirely; these would have contained the
JB>solutions for problems #821-834, and diagrams for problems #835-888.  Does
JB>the newer version also have this omission?  Does anyone know if Hays Publish
JB>is willing to supply the missing pages?

JB>john//
JB>jrb@ingres.com
---
 . SLMR 2.1a . "If you want to improve...drink...light beer!"  Diesen re
From: Jeff Boyd <BOYDJ@QUCDN.QueensU.CA>
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
Subject: Re: A game of chess with dmc!?
Date: Thu, 31 Dec 1992 01:53:00 GMT
Organization: Chessnews list (chessnews-request@tssi.com)
NNTP-Posting-Host: helios.unl.edu



Bruce_Harper@mindlink.bc.ca (Bruce Harper) wrote:
>  You can take White (that means you go first).
>  dmc    "Mr. Expert"*
>  1. ?

Ah, Mr. Harper is more worried then he lets on.  The true mark of
challenge would be "Make your first 2 moves as White. My first is h5."


jeff
From: uzun@crash.cts.com (Roger Uzun)
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
Subject: Re: mchess pro vs gnuchess
Date: 28 Dec 92 07:03:40 GMT
Organization: CTS Network Services (crash, ctsnet), El Cajon, CA

Katana logs into ICS frequently using MChess Pro on a 486, and he
stated that MChess pro easily defeats gnuchess 4 and 3.1.
I played against katana and gnuchess/Maxwell/gnufour frequently,
and I found MChess pro to be FAR FAR superior, I have defeated
gnufour/Maxwell/gnuchess on several occasions, MChess pro
blew me away 3 out of 3 times, I was never in any of the games
against it.

-Roger
--------------------------------------------------------------
bix: ruzun
NET: uzun@crash.cts.com
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess