HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: david@bourbon.ee.tulane.edu (David Kaufmann)
Subject:  Lasker-Torre (Was) Re: Who are the seconds in the Fischer/Spassky match?
Organization: E.E. Dept., Tulane University, New Orleans, LA
Date: Tue, 8 Sep 1992 22:22:29 GMT
Nntp-Posting-Host-[nntpd-2405]: bourbon

An additional note: the Lasker-Torre game was quite exciting, with
Lasker missing a win at the critical moment.

Lasker lost only 19 tournament games in his career. Two were to
Capablanca (NY 1924, Moscow 1935, I think was the other); 3 were at
Nottingham 1936 when he was an old man. He lost once to Alekhine and
Nimzovich, both at Zurich 1934 (when Lasker was in his 60's).

He lost to Rubinstein in a spectacular R&P S. Peterburg 1909 and a
couple at the famous 1914 tournament. The rest were early, with
Pillsbury doing the best against him.

I'll try to get a list of them. Would make a good book.

David Kaufmann
INTERNET:	david@bourbon.ee.tulane.edu
From: fry@zariski.harvard.edu (David Fry)
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
Subject: F-S II game 6 moves 1-45
Date: 10 Sep 92 20:56:53 GMT
Article-I.D.: husc3.1992Sep10.165654.15518
Distribution: world
Organization: Harvard Math Department


   1. d4 d5  
   2. c4 dxc4  
   3. Nf3 Nf6  
   4. e3 e6  
   5. Bxc4 c5  
   6. 0-0 a6  
   7. dxc5 Qxd1  
   8. Rxd1 Bxc5  
   9. b3 Nbd7  
   10. Bb2 b5  
   11. Be2 Bb7  
   12. Nbd2 Ke7  
   13. a4 bxa4  
   14. Rxa4 Rhb8  
   15. Rc1 Bd5  
   16. Ne5 Bd6  
   17. Nxd7 Nxd7  
   18. Rxa6 Rxa6  
   19. Bxa6 f6  
   20. Bc4 Bxc4  
   21. Rxc4 Nc5  
   22. Rc3 f5  
   23. Ba3 Ne4  
   24. Rc7+ Kd8  
   25. Bxd6 Nxd2  
   26. Rxg7 Rxb3  
   27. h4 h5  
   28. Bf4 Ke8  
   29. Kh2 Rb2  
   30. Kh3 Ne4  
   31. f3 Nf2+  
   32. Kg3 Nd3  
   33. Bg5 e5  
   34. Kh3 Nf2+  
   35. Kh2 Nd3  
   36. Bh6 Ne1  
   37. Kg1 Nd3  
   38. Bg5 Rb1+  
   39. Kh2 Rb2 
    40.     Re7+      Kf8  <- from Reuters...different format
    41.     Re6       Kg7
    42.     Kh3       Re2
    43.     Rd6       Ne1
    44.     Bf6+      Kg8
    45.     Bxe5      Rxe3
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
From: jhc@m2lll.uucp (James H. Coombs)
Subject: Re: Rating of Radio Shack 1650
Reply-To: jhc@iris.brown.edu.UUCP (James H. Coombs)
Organization: IRIS - Brown University
Date: Tue, 15 Sep 1992 18:33:00 GMT

In article <92259.072252GUF@psuvm.psu.edu> <GUF@psuvm.psu.edu> writes:

>As I am new to this group, does anyone know what the rating would be
>of an older model RS 1650 (the new one is a 1650L) chess computer?

The 2150L is about 1950.  The 1650L is not worth rating.  It might be
good for a child.  You should get something at least 200 points
stronger than you so that you can improve and still use it.  You will
also probably want to play it at faster speeds while you take full time
(don't want to wait for its moves).  In this case, you subtract 100
points for every 50% reduction in time.  You didn't say whether you own
one or are considering one.  If you are only considering, you would
probably do better with the Fidelity 2000, which costs only about
$100 (and is rated about 1951).

--Jim
From: Bruce_Harper@mindlink.bc.ca (Bruce Harper)
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
Subject: Re: What defense (on e2-e4)Fischer would dislike most?
Date: 9 Sep 92 23:12:31 GMT
Organization: MIND LINK! - British Columbia, Canada

The Breyer.
From: seh@neutron.physics.arizona.edu (Steven E. Hoell)
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
Subject: Re: GAME 5??? WHEN????
Date: 9 Sep 92 21:15:27 GMT
Distribution: na
Organization: University of Arizona, Tucson AZ

So Fischer no longer observes a Sabbath. Guess he's no longer part of
Herbie's church?

Steve Hoell	                 	People are biodegradable. Overpopulation
seh@neutron.physics.arizona.edu         is not a problem.
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess,sci.lang
From: hau4@ellis.uchicago.edu (sven  hauptfeld)
Subject: Re: Prononciation Of Names
Followup-To: sci.lang
Reply-To: hau4@midway.uchicago.edu
Organization: University of Chicago Computing Organizations
Date: Fri, 11 Sep 1992 23:48:05 GMT

In article <1992Sep11.224117.20607@cs.brown.edu> jhc@m2lll.UUCP (James H. Coombs) writes:
>In article <1992Sep11.074543.7403@midway.uchicago.edu> hau4@midway.uchicago.edu writes:
>>In article <65640@cup.portal.com> wms@cup.portal.com (W Mark Schneider) writes:
>
>>>Oh, and to answer my own question, Dr. Euwe claimed then that
>>>it was impossible to pronounce his name correctly in English
>>>as that language did not have the correct sound.
>
>>Then it is also impossible to laugh or cry in English as those sounds also
>>don't exist in the language.
>
>That's exactly correct.  Those sounds are extra linguistic.  They have
>nothing to do with one's language.  That's why babies can laugh and cry
>right from birth, and they don't have to wait until they learn a
>language.  --Jim

Linguistically this follows, but logically not. Look at the actual meaning of
the sentences above. The first one either means that "an English-speaking
person cannot pronounce 'Euwe' because the sound \"o is missing in the English
language" or has no relevant meaning whatsoever. When I replied in similar
words, the meaning was analogous: "to laugh or cry in English" actually means
"for an English-speaking person to laugh or cry". This should be obvious.

Jim's answer assumes a logically different meaning of the first statement,
but it doesn't fit in its context.

	Sven

P.S. Followups to sci.lang, please!
Organization: Carnegie Mellon, Pittsburgh, PA
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
Date: Fri,  4 Sep 1992 22:38:20 -0400 
From: William Stephen Kish <wk0x@ANDREW.CMU.EDU>
Subject: Re: ICS ???

Excerpts from netnews.rec.games.chess: 2-Sep-92 ICS ??? Kris Van
Hees@cc4.kuleuv (368)

> I have been trying to connect to the ICS servers for some time now and
> it isn't succeeding at all.  The connection is being refused.  Have the
> two server been shutdown???  I know that eaststar has been shutdown
> somewhere in June.  Now, what has happened to eve?

Currently, the only Internet Chess Server is on valkyries.andrew.cmu.edu
(128.2.232.4), on port 5000.

-Bill
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
From: craig@jido.b11.ingr.com (Craig Presson)
Subject: Re: Fischer press conference
Reply-To: craig@jido.b11.ingr.com
Organization: Intergraph Corporation, Huntsville, Alabama
	<1992Sep8.200554.26676@midway.uchicago.edu>
Date: Fri, 11 Sep 1992 20:09:45 GMT

In article <1992Sep8.200554.26676@midway.uchicago.edu> hau4@ellis.uchicago.edu (sven  hauptfeld) writes:
   Actually, one good thing to say about Fischer's character is that he never
   was a sore loser. The "worst" comment he made after a loss (that I know of)
   was after 0-4 to Tal in '59 candidates, (approximately:) "I was winning in
   all four games, but I lost them." [...]

I heard a lecture of his in 1964, in which he showed off his first win
against Tal. His wryly spoken comment on the previous 4 games was: "I
had always felt that I was the better player, but it's hard to prove
that when your score against the guy is 0-4."

-- Craig
From: phr@soda.berkeley.edu (Paul Rubin)
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
Subject: Re: fischer-spassky
Date: 10 Sep 92 19:26:59
Organization: CSUA/UCB
	<1992Sep7.074430.11871@alijku05.edvz.uni-linz.ac.at>
	<4107@svin09.info.win.tue.nl> <PHR.92Sep10101844@soda.berkeley.edu>
	<1992Sep10.181349.28714@constellation.ecn.uoknor.edu>
NNTP-Posting-Host: soda.berkeley.edu
In-reply-to: gene@midway.ecn.uoknor.edu's message of Thu, 10 Sep 1992 18:13:49 GMT

In article <1992Sep10.181349.28714@constellation.ecn.uoknor.edu> gene@midway.ecn.uoknor.edu (Gene E. Johannsen) writes:

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


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

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

   Do you predict either of those happening before 2001?

We'll have to wait and see!  :-)
From: fry@zariski.harvard.edu (David Fry)
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
Subject: F-S II game 6 moves 1-39
Date: 10 Sep 92 19:33:11 GMT
Organization: Harvard Math Department


   Spassky Fischer  
   (White) (Black)  
   1. d4 d5  
   2. c4 dxc4  
   3. Nf3 Nf6  
   4. e3 e6  
   5. Bxc4 c5  
   6. 0-0 a6  
   7. dxc5 Qxd1  
   8. Rxd1 Bxc5  
   9. b3 Nbd7  
   10. Bb2 b5  
   11. Be2 Bb7  
   12. Nbd2 Ke7  
   13. a4 bxa4  
   14. Rxa4 Rhb8  
   15. Rc1 Bd5  
   16. Ne5 Bd6  
   17. Nxd7 Nxd7  
   18. Rxa6 Rxa6  
   19. Bxa6 f6  
   20. Bc4 Bxc4  
   21. Rxc4 Nc5  
   22. Rc3 f5  
   23. Ba3 Ne4  
   24. Rc7+ Kd8  
   25. Bxd6 Nxd2  
   26. Rxg7 Rxb3  
   27. h4 h5  
   28. Bf4 Ke8  
   29. Kh2 Rb2  
   30. Kh3 Ne4  
   31. f3 Nf2+  
   32. Kg3 Nd3  
   33. Bg5 e5  
   34. Kh3 Nf2+  
   35. Kh2 Nd3  
   36. Bh6 Ne1  
   37. Kg1 Nd3  
   38. Bg5 Rb1+  
   39. Kh2 Rb2
From: bill@myope.cvs.rochester.edu (Bill Vaughn)
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
Subject: Re: Scoring on the Fischer, Spassky game
Date: 15 Sep 92 20:38:47 GMT
Organization: University of Rochester, Rochester NY

In article <23670@alice.att.com> ark@alice.UUCP () writes:
>In article <1992Sep15.115737.13028@ifi.uio.no> sigurdg@ifi.uio.no (Sigurd Gl{rum) writes:
>
>> From what I have heard Fischer demanded that he should win
>> the match in case of a 9-9 tie, effectively giving him a
>> 2 point advantage since Spasskij must score at least 10-8
>> in order to win.
>
>Not true -- the score can reach 10-9 without first reaching 9-9.
>-- 
>				--Andrew Koenig
>				  ark@europa.att.com

First of all I believe that the purse is split evenly if the score
reaches 9-9.  There is no winner or loser.  However, Fischer
will still consider himself "World Chess Champion" in that event.
(However, surely no one else will).

Secondly, if the score reaches 10-9, then it either had to be 9-9
or 10-8 before that decisive game. In either case the match is over,
so why are they playing this extra game?

--
Bill Vaughn               /  This space   \   Email: bill@cvs.rochester.edu
Center for Visual Science \   has been    /   Phone: 716-275-8674
Univ. of Rochester        / intentionally \   Fax:   716-271-3043
Rochester, NY 14627       \   occupied.   /   Voice: Hey, you
From: Bruce_Harper@mindlink.bc.ca (Bruce Harper)
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
Subject: TN = "Theoretical novelty"
Date: 16 Sep 92 04:48:19 GMT
Organization: MIND LINK! - British Columbia, Canada
Distribution: world

Don't ask what the term really means, but that's what TN stands for.
Organization: Penn State University
Date: Tue, 15 Sep 1992 07:22:52 EDT
From: <GUF@psuvm.psu.edu>
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
Subject: Rating of Radio Shack 1650

As I am new to this group, does anyone know what the rating would be
of an older model RS 1650 (the new one is a 1650L) chess computer?
Thanks.
Gil Gall (guf@psuvm.psu.edu)
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
Subject: F-S II, game 4 update (1:46pm EDT)
From: fry@tara.harvard.edu (David Fry)
Date: 6 Sep 92 14:14:20 EDT
Distribution: world
Organization: Harvard Math Department

   Spassky Fischer
   (White) (Black)
   1. d4 d5
   2. c4 d5xc4
   3. Nf3 Nf6
   4. e3 e6
   5. Bxc4 c5
   6. 0-0 a6
   7. d4xc5 Qxd1
   8. Rxd1 Bxc5
   9. b3 Nbd7
   10. Bb2 b6
   11. Nc3 Bb7
   12. Rac1 Be7
   13. Nd4 Rc8
   14. f3 b5
   15. Be2 Bc5
   16. Kf1 Ke7
   17. e4 g5
   18. Nb1 g4
   19. Ba3 b4
   20. Rxc5 Nxc5
   21. Bxb4 Rhd8
   22. Na3 gxf3
   23. gxf3 Nfd7
   24. Nc4 Ba8
   25. Kf2 Rg8
   26. h4 Rc7
From: blowfish@carina.unm.edu (rON.)
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
Subject: Re: F vs S game score
Date: 14 Sep 92 08:30:32 GMT
Organization: University of New Mexico, Albuquerque

In article <1992Sep14.014823.22859@nntpd.lkg.dec.com> abbasi@star.enet.dec.com writes:
>>What's the score in the match?  Who leads whom?  I've been informed that
>>ties do not count? What is the format of the scoring?  Thanks!
>the score after game 8 is 3-2 for Fischer favore.
>I think the match is won who ever scores 10 wins first, draws dont count,
>but iam NOT sure on this. iam sure i'll be corrected if iam wrong.

First to 10 wins. Draws don't count. If they tie at 9, they split the money.
r.
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
From: pope@gold.kpc.com (John Pope)
Subject: Re: F-S II (Game 5) - analysis
Organization: /nfs/gold/u/home/pope/.organization
Date: Fri, 11 Sep 1992 05:06:00 GMT


> I don't agree with this assessment.  Why withdraw the well-placed
> Bishop from a5 with 23.Bc3(?)?
>
> 23.h4 is much more logical.  If 23...h5, then 24.Re3, followed by
> 25.Ng5, with sacrifices on h5 and f5 in the air (the Rook goes to g3).

Of course black would not be likely to play 23...h5(?) without the
black bishop, though. Simply continuing with ...Qe7 and ...c4 is
stronger.

> But 21.Qd2 is likely the best and most natural way to offer the
> sacrifice.  The sacrifice is a positional one, and it's Black, not
> White, who must justify his misplaced queenside pieces.
> 19.Ba5 and 20.b3 is good, not bad, and the Bishop on a5 is hardly
> "stranded" - it ties up Black's whole army (and stops his "other
> counterplay - ...a5...)

Withdrawing the B to c3 made sense because the only point I can see to
the sacrifice is to gain pressure on the dark squares. After the BQ
moves, I don't understand how the B on a5 is tying down more than one
piece, let alone "Black's entire army". Besides, there is black's
"other" other counterplay: ...c4.

Perhaps in game 7 we shall see what the two opponents think about all
this...
--
John Pope
pope@kpc.com
Kubota Pacific Computers, Inc.
(408) 987-3362
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
From: gls@windmill.ATT.COM (the Human Windmill)
Subject: Re: Smythescript
Organization: F. K. Dingy & Son
Date: Fri, 11 Sep 1992 01:07:28 GMT

In <Bu6612.6Ix.1@cs.cmu.edu>, pjj+@cs.cmu.edu writes:
> 
> Smythescript is more compact than algebraic, but in return depends
> more on the global state of the board. That makes it harder to follow
> (especially blindfold :-)) even for someone familiar with the notation.
> Indeed, gls himself, the net's authority (and, I believe, co-inventor)
> of this notation, made no less than 6 mistakes in the game referred to
> (admittedly without causing any ambiguity).

Well, there you are!  No, I had nothing to do with inventing Smythescript;
it's all Bill Smythe's doing.  (On the other hand, I am the sole inventor
of FORSMYTHE Notation.)

-:-
	Breathe deep, the gathering gloom
	Pizza boxes fill your room
	Roving roaches seal your doom
	Run right out and buy a broom,
	  You can use the rent money.

	Cold-hearted orb that rules the night
	Dead flies in your ceiling light
	Pipes are grey and plaster white,
	But we decide which version's right
	  And which is a parody.
-- 
Col. G. L. Sicherman
gls@windmill.att.COM
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
From: Mark Ginsburg <mginsbur@rnd.stern.nyu.edu>
Subject: Rohde-Malpert
Organization: Chessnews list (chessnews-request@tssi.com)
Date: Sun, 13 Sep 1992 03:24:04 GMT


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

GM Rohde expresses his displeasure with his opponent following him into the
hall on the tenth move and offering a draw, while explaining his under
2400- money would be part of the prize pool (which GM Rohde points out is
not a factor, and furthermore is incorrect anyway).

When GM Rohde tried to get away from Malpert, Malpert followed him to the
wallchart and started gesturing at various people and their scores, trying
to convince the GM to take the draw.  GM Rohde then said, "Don't talk to  
me."  Naturally, GM Rohde was unsettled but he now says, "I congratulate
Mr. Malpert for just barely holding the draw with his fastidious 
attitude."

Enough said.  (I wasn't there, but I'm at a party right now at GM
Benjamin's apartment, and GM Rohde is here, so here's a rare
net-entry from Rohde).

-mark
From: olle@redgum.ucnv.edu.au (John Olle)
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
Subject: Fischer-Spassky II & ICS, VCS
Keywords: Fischer, Spassky, ICS, VCS
Date: 3 Sep 92 04:43:04 GMT
Organization: UCNV, Bendigo, Victoria, Australia
Originator: olle@redgum.ucnv.edu.au

I am on the East coast of Australia and have tried to get onto
ICS and VCS to find out more about the match and play some chess.

I cannot get on.  Is someone setting up the games in something like real
time on ICS or VCS?

I suspect that many curious players logged on and crashed both systems.
Could some nice person please please post here what has and what will
happen.

The first game was played at 11:00 pm to 5:00 am my time I think.  Am
toying with the idea of getting a modem and watching the match from my
bed if it is available on line.

A lot of people are very appreciative of the unselfish efforts of others
to make it all possible.

My opinion of the related political controversy?
- I think both sides are partially right and partially wrong.  When this
happens I think that is up to the individual to make up his/her own
mind.

For me, I am thrilled to see some fine chess from some fine players.
As for the war?  I am a pacifist.

John Olle
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
From: ed@cbnewsl.cb.att.com (edward.m.hummel)
Subject: Re: Fischer-Spassky - Game 4 - the mistake
Organization: AT&T
Date: Tue, 8 Sep 1992 00:12:33 GMT
Keywords: New World Champion

In article <1992Sep7.170901@IASTATE.EDU> haefner@IASTATE.EDU (Ralph I Haefner) writes:
>Once again my fellow cyclone is way off the mark.  The point is that Fischer
>wants to be considered World Champion.  For this to be legitimate he would
>have to play Kasparov.  And the only way to force Kasparov into playing him
>is to so decisively defeat Spassky that there is no question Fischer deserves
>the shot.  The current score  +1 -1 =2 does nothing to show Fischer is 
>deserving of a chance to play Kasparov.

Fischer is doing pretty well -- all things considerd.  Twenty years off
is a VERY long time.  Recall that in 1975, Fischer was asking for match
conditions with Karpov that required play until a set number of wins
was achieved.  It was believed that Fischer wanted such conditions so
that he could play himself back into shape after a three year layoff.
I expect it takes a while to work off 20 years of rust.  Even so, the
games clearly indicate that Fischer has significant strength.  Spassky's
play is also somewhat uneven -- but even at that, it is better than
many expected.

Fischer cannot "force" Kasparov into a match.  He could go through the
FIDE process and earn a shot at FIDE's title, but it is very unlikely
he would do that.  What Fischer will offer Kasparov is a chance for
a very large purse.  If he beats Spassky (even by 10-8), he will have
enough credibility to interest Kasparov.  "Deserving a shot" has
nothing to do with it.  Fischer would not be playing for Kasparov's
title.  Rather, Fischer would be giving Kasparov a shot at Fischer's
title.  GMs can play matches for all kinds of reasons under all kinds
of auspices.  I would expect that Fischer would insist that the match
be played according to his rules and that the FIDE conditions be ignored.

Fischer might go directly for Kasparov, or he might warm up with Karpov
first.

Newsgroups: rec.games.chess,rec.games.programmer
From: md85-epi@byse.nada.kth.se (Urban Koistinen)
Subject: Re: How to check the repetition of moves in Chess/Shogi (was Re: Complexity - Ideas)
Organization: Royal Institute of Technology, Stockholm, Sweden
Date: Sat, 12 Sep 1992 09:35:35 GMT

In article <1992Sep9.083511.10761@mits.mdata.fi> karttu@mits.mdata.fi (Antti Karttunen) writes:
->
->Actually I just need this information for my Shoogi Server software,
->so that I can check when the same position is repeated.
->I remember that there was some similar discussion few months ago
->in the groups rec.games.chess and gnu.chess, concerning how the
->overall position for each move is saved in chess programs so that
->they can check whether the moves are repeated. (And what information
->are needed to save from each situation.)
->If somebody has saved any of those articles, could you mail them
->to me, thanks!

Yes, there was a discussion.

The way GNU Chess currently use to detect draws is to first check
if it could possibly be a repetition, (this can be done quickly
using the hash value of the position, and a table with the number
of times a position identified by hash value have occured.
Then if a repetition seem likely a more exact method is used, stepping
backwards through the previous positions.
-- 
Urban Koistinen - md85-epi@nada.kth.se
From: CAPSA <capsa@igc.apc.org>
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
Date: 14 Sep 92 20:57 PDT
Subject: Re: Pronunciation guide from old _Chess
Nf-ID: #R:1992Sep11.081310.118@ipact.com:-771824351:cdp:1451600041:000:502
Nf-From: cdp.UUCP!capsa    Sep 14 20:57:00 1992


Andy Soltis is one of the most knowing of our chess columnists, but the Italian
word "giuoco" is best pronounced by an English-speaking person as "jewoko", not
as "joko".  I would not stake my life on it, but Maroczy would best be pronounced to rhyme with "gutsy", not "hotsy-totsy".

I have other reservations -- for example, Alyechin or Alyawchin (the gutteral
"ch") -- but some of the players did not STRESS a "correct" pronunciation of
their names, so I'll waive them.

Fraternally,

Jerome Bibuld

Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
From: gfowler@silver.ucs.indiana.edu (george h. fowler)
Subject: Re: notation.
Organization: Indiana University
Date: Sun, 13 Sep 1992 20:11:43 GMT

I too greatly prefer algebraic over descriptive notation, but the argument
offered by s9874203@titan.ucc.umass.edu, that 

>One reason is that q doesn't stand for queen in all languages. For this
>reason (and possibly other reasons), algebraic notation is better than
>descriptive notation.

is NOT a valid argument. After all, the most commonly used version of
algebraic also employs single-letter abbreviations for piece names, also
bound to English (Russian, Spanish, ...). To avoid this problem, we would
have to name the square of origin and square of destination, e.g., Nf3
would be g1-f3. That's what all the computer programs I've seen do. The
problem, of course, is that this doesn't tell you what piece moved, and is
hard to follow off the board for more than a few moves.
     The real argument for algebraic is its concision and precision
(conciseness??). I used to take OTB games down in internation postal
notation, just to bedevil my opponents. (Not very effective, believe me.)
Who cares what notation anybody uses (as long as it isn't this 
Smythescript shit) (hey, is that a joke or what? I can't make any sense
of it.)? Algebraic is like the metric system, logical and widely accepted
among chessplayers of the world. 
     I assume Fischer as a kid started out using descriptive notation.
In fact, I think I've even seen some scoresheet facsimiles in descriptive.
I wonder when he switched to algebraic?

     George Fowler
     Dept. of Slavic Languages
     Indiana Univrsity
     GFowler@IUBACS.Bitnet
            @UCS.Indiana.EDU
From: erch03@castle.ed.ac.uk (D Smith)
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
Subject: test
Date: 10 Sep 92 13:55:34 GMT
Distribution: rec
Organization: Edinburgh University

testing 123
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
From: jeff@econ.Berkeley.EDU (Jeffrey C. Ely)
Subject: Kasparov vs. Letterman 1990
Organization: Chessnews list (chessnews-request@tssi.com)
Date: Wed, 9 Sep 1992 19:24:13 GMT


During the '90 World Championship match, Kasparov played a correspondence game 
against David Letterman on Late Night.  Does anybody have the moves to that
game?


+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++|+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Jeff Ely                         |    "He said the Sun's not yellow...  
Department of Economics          |     It's Chicken!" 
UC Berkeley        
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
From: mox@vpnet.chi.il.us (William Moxley)
Subject: Re: The chess via e-mail
Organization: Vpnet Public Access
Date: Wed, 09 Sep 1992 03:11:24 GMT

In article <1992Sep8.095125.9498@mnemosyne.cs.du.edu> mgleibma@nyx.cs.du.edu (Michael Gleibman) writes:
>Hello! Can aybody tell me, how can I play chess via e-mail,
>may be, there are any chess servers on the Internet?
>Thanx.
>Michael Gleibman.

Anyone who would like an email partner can email me with the following
information: 

Name:
Email Address:
Rough level of play: (Novice, Intermediate, Expert)

Send it to mox@vpnet.chi.il.us

--
William Moxley
mox@vpnet.chi.il.us

Newsgroups: rec.games.chess