HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: proskuro@mathn.usc.edu (Wlodek Proskurowski)
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
Subject: EG
Date: 13 Apr 1992 10:58:34 -0700
Organization: University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA
NNTP-Posting-Host: mathn.usc.edu

Info on subscription to EG (the international journal of ARVES):

	annual fee is f 35 (Dutch guilders) for surface mail, and 
		      f 50		    for air mail

Pay to Postbank (postal giro) account 44390 in the name of the treasurer 
A.Willink, EG account, Wagnerlaan 1A, 1217 CP Hilversum, The Netherlands.

The first two issues (Nos.103 and 104) have already appeared.

Editorial board:
Editor-in-chief: Ward Stoffelen
Contributing editors: Jan Timman, Jon Speelman, John Nunn, John Roycroft,
Julien Vandiest and Jan van Reek.
Regional contributors: Jan Rusinek, Virgil Nestorescu, Vazha Neidze.

Some interesting endgame books are also available through ARVES.

PS. My favorite books on endgames are
	John Nunn - Tactical Chess Endings (2nd edition), Macmillan, 1988
	John Nunn - Solving in style (also problems), Allen & Unwin, 1985
	M.I.Dvoretskij - Art of analysis (in Russian), 1989 [fantastic!]
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
From: ccecks@nuscc.nus.sg (Chua Kong Sian (Mr))
Subject: ICS
Organization: National University of Singapore
Date: Sat, 11 Apr 1992 00:44:34 GMT

There are two ICS at the moment. They are:

    eve.assumption.edu     192.80.61.5
    elof.iit.edu           192.41.245.90

Just telnet <addr> 5000.


On a side note, I like to obtain a few copies of Chess Informant.  I use
to be able to borrow them from our local libraries, but suddenly, they
decided to move chess informant into the reference section.  So maybe
its time I purchase my own copies.  Do they have a mail order address or
something?  Any pointers appreciated.  Thanks!


.no sig.
From: lb2e+@andrew.cmu.edu (Louis Blair)
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
Subject: Re: The Game of the Century
Date: 17 Apr 92 20:33:52 GMT
Article-I.D.: andrew.4dvnMkS00Vp58d2Y9c
	<1992Apr14.064424.3386@CSD-NewsHost.Stanford.EDU>
Organization: Carnegie Mellon, Pittsburgh, PA

Mike Perkins wrote:
>Horowitz refers to a "stunning masterpiece known as The
>Game of the Century" by thirteen year old Bobby Fischer.
>Does anyone know the game?

Dennis Baker wrote:
>Hans Kmoch's "Game of the Century":
>
>Donald Byrne - Bobby Fischer
>New York 1956
>Grunfeld
>
>1.Nf3 Nf6 2.c4 g6 3.Nc3 Bg7 4.d4 O-O 5.Bf4 d5 6.Qb3 dxc4 7.Qxc4 c6
>8.e4 Nbd7 9.Rd1 Nb6 10.Qc5 Bg4 11.Bg5? Na4!! 12.Qa3 Nxc3 13.bxc3 Nxe4!!
>14.Bxe7 Qb6! 15.Bc4! Nxc3 16.Bc5! Rfe8+ 17.Kf1 Be6!! 18.Bxb6 Bxc4+
>19.Kg1 Ne2+! 20.Kf1 Nxd4+ 21.Kg1 Ne2+ 22.Kf1 Nc3+ 23.Kg1 axb6 24.Qb4
>Ra4! 25.Qxb6 Nxd1 26.h3 Rxa2 27.Kh2 Nxf2 28.Re1 Rxe1 29.Qd8+ Bf8
>30.Nxe1 Bd5 31.Nf3 Ne4 32.Qb8 b5 33.h4 h5 34.Ne5 Kg7 35.Kg1 Bc5+
>36.Kf1 Ng3+ 37.Ke1 Bb4+ 38.Kd1 Bb3+ 39.Kc1 Ne2+ 40.Kb1 Nc3+ 41.Kc1
>Rc2 mate

Mike Perkins writes:
>At what move in the above game did Fischer diverge from what was
>known then?

I'm guessing, but it was probably Byrne who diverged first with 10 Qc5.
At least, Fischer called it "a risky move" when he annotated the game.

Mike Perkins writes:
>Is the game known as the Game of the Century for being an upset victory,
>for Fischer's innovations, or for another reason?

The game was awarded the first brilliancy prize at the tournament.
As Dennis Baker indicated, it was Hans Kmoch (author of Pawn
Power in Chess) who called it "the game of the century".  Here is
some more of what Hans wrote:

     The following game, a stunning masterpiece of combination
play performed by a boy of thirteen against a formidable
opponent, matches the finest on record in the history of chess
prodigies.

     There are several famous precedents:  Morphy's triumph at
thirteen over visiting Jacob Loewenthal in New Orleans, 1850;
Reshevsky's victory at eleven over Janowski in New York,
1922; Pomar's much heralded win at twelve against Saemisch
at Madrid, 1944, and even more sensational draw at thirteen
with Alekhine, Gijon 1945.

     On depth and brilliancy of play, however, only the famous
game in which Capablanca at twelve won against Corzo is com-
parable to this one.  And even then it must be said that Capa's
performance owed something to analysis while Bobby Fischer's
sparkles with stupendous originality.
From: DCBCS@CANAL.CRC.UNO.EDU (Dennis Baker)
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
Subject: Re: Sticking to your principles
Date: 14 Apr 92 02:17:00 GMT
Article-I.D.: canal.01GIT7W5C3IO8X2TXZ

Uh oh.  I could get into trouble here, not to mention chancing that this
will all be off-topic.  But here goes...

On 13 Apr 92 12:29:04 GMT, azjohn@eagle.larc.nasa.gov
(John Paul Phillips) writes:

>    I believe that the church was called "Worldwide Church of God", because
>I'm currently attending their services. (They being nuts, well... I won't 
>exactly call myself nuts 8^) ). The people who has been members since the 
>early '70's have told me that Bobby was a member but left. They didn't know
>why, just that he stopped attending services. In a nutshell, (pun very much
>intended), the church practices most of the Jewish customs described in the
>Old Testament while believing that Christ is the Messiah. Thus, they observe
                     ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

				Is this a *fact*?

>the Sabbath from Friday sunset to Saturday sunset and devote it to services 
>and church activities. Also, there is some special days of observance, like 
>the Passover and The Days of Unleavened Bread. Members believe themselves to
						^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>be true Christians. 
 ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Is this a *fact*?

> Some people has accused Bobby Fischer of using those as a pyschological
> weapon to rattle his opponents. Well, I dunno, but I'm sure that this 
>theory has been discussed in some books. 

>   I can't help but be curious... Dennis, why did you call that church, if 
>that was the one you were referring to, as "that nut group" ? Any facts to
>back that opinion up? (If they indeed were nuts, then I'll like to know! ;^)).

Perhaps you should first tell me just exactly what a *fact* is first! <grin>

As for backing myself up, yes, I can.  Can you?  My question to you would be,
how do you know what you know?  Seriously.  How do you know what you know?
Or what you think you know?  Or what have you decided you know?

Dennis Baker
<DCBCS@uno.edu>
From: g0m0078@zeus.tamu.edu (giri)
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
Subject: Shortest games...
Date: 10 Apr 92 12:29:00 GMT
Organization: Texas A&M University, Academic Computing Services
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41


Hello netters,

There has been some discussion on the shortest games in Chess.

As far as I know, the shortest game played between IM's is 4
moves (Gibaud vs Lazard).

The shortest game involving a GM is 7 moves between Fine and
Borochowe. This game is particularly interesting because
the white moves ONLY the pawns and the black moves ONLY the
Knights.

The shortest game involving a GM in which the GM has been
CHECKMATED is 11 moves played between Reti and Tartakover.

One of my favorite players and seemingly Karpov's idol,
Capablanca has lost only 35 tournament games in his 
whole career. In one of the games, he loses in 13 moves.

Corrections and additions welcome,

IF there is sufficient interest I will post all these games
on the net. Otherwise, e-mail me.


Have Fun,

giri
From: aaron@vector.uoregon.edu (Aaron Putnam)
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
Subject: Elof ICS
Date: 17 Apr 92 19:27:00 GMT
Distribution: rec.games.chess
Organization: /users/aaron/.organization


  Some bad news regarding the chess server at elof.iit.edu:  Apparently
someone on that machine has changed my password, and erased my directory,
though the directory may have just been moved.  I've sent email to the
sysadmin informing him of this, and should have a response within 4-5
days.  The latest version which was backed up was from several days ago,
so many of the bugfixes will have to be re-made; This isn't that big of
a problem.  However, I have some qualms about continuing to run and
develop the server on a machine where someone with root access would do
something of this nature, so I am now in search of a new site to run and
develop the chess server. (Preferrably one which is closer to a backbone
site than elof.iit.edu was, as well).  The game itself doesn't take up
more than 1.5M of memory, and if necessary this can be reduced a great
deal by some cleanup of the data structures.  CPU time is also pretty
low - the only high usage is the internet load.  Output is buffered, and
sent in large chunks, to reduce the number of packets being sent, so the
network load is much less than it could be.  It was running on a 68040
NeXT - a machine of around this power would be nice, but something smaller
would probably also be suitable.  Naturally I would need an account on the
machine.

  -Desmodus / -Aaron
From: glickman@husc10.harvard.edu (Mark Glickman)
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
Subject: Re: 50 out of 100?
Date: 17 Apr 92 12:20:36 GMT
Organization: Harvard University Science Center

In article <1992Apr16.213719.14563@cs.brown.edu> jhc@iris.UUCP (James H. Coombs) writes:
>>    2) read Elo's book
>
>Which is?  Is it really worth a read?  I feel that I have a novice's
>understanding of the rating system to go along with my novice's
>understanding of chess.  What will I get out of this book?

The cited book is "The Ratings of Chessplayers - Past and Present"
Arpad Elo (ARCO, 1978).

Don't bother reading it, if your purpose is understanding how the 
rating system works.  The underpinnings of the rating system are
not clearly explained, the derivation is confusing, and Elo 
systematically disregards all serious research ever devoted to the 
subject.  For example, he doesn't make any mention (if I recall
correctly) of the Bradley-Terry model for paired comparisons (I don't
have a reference off the top of my head, but the paper was printed
in 1953, and is a foundational statistical paper on the subject)
upon which the Elo system is based.  The rest of the Elo's book is pretty
interesting, nonetheless.

You might take a look at Beasley's book "The Mathematics of Games"
which has a chapter on ratings systems.  Not too detailed, but
a pretty good overview.

                - Mark
From: linb@UCS.ORST.EDU (Benjamin Lin)
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
Subject: Re: clock repair (and new clock recommendations)
Date: 15 Apr 92 17:50:13 GMT
Article-I.D.: talon.1992Apr15.175013.13452
Distribution: na
Organization: University Computing Services - OSU

In article <1992Apr15.151322.13450@cis.uab.edu> sloan@cis.uab.edu (Kenneth Sloan) writes:
>Do you have experience repairing BHB-style clocks?  I have one of the
>ones on the nice wooden box (hmmm - this model seems to be no longer
>available through USCF) with a problem: I think the problem is that the
>pivot point for the bar is not "sticky" enough.  Repeated tightening of
>the screw there fixes the problem for perhaps one or two games.
>
>One of the clocks seems to have trouble starting when it is *over*wound
>- but that's easy to fix.
>
>So...if you *really know* how to fix the pivot point (perhaps a drop of
>Locktite?) please let me know before I start on destructive testing.
>
>Pessimistically: the floor is open for recommendations.  I've used a
>long string of BHB-style clocks in the past ad have been reasonably
>happy.  I'm leery of battery-driven models, and absolutely detest the
>LCD display abominations...(sorry, I got carried away). 
>
>Going through the USCF catalog:
>
>BHB: they've been around so long, they must be OK.  I'd probably go for
>the "special flag".  Whatever happened to the nice wooden case, and the
>plastic model with the white plastic buttons?
>
Plastic buttons are fine, but I hate those tiny metal buttons.
I blitz games, they are impossible to hit w/o missing a few times :-(
I've played with Heuer clocks, and they have nice big plastic buttons !
I think they stopped making them.  The flags were a little misleading
and the clock broke after a good blitz beating.
Why don't BHB and others make bigger buttons?
BTW, does anyone know how to lossen the buttons on those big white Russian
clocks.  The buttons are so hard to press down.
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
From: frants@Xenon.Stanford.EDU (Leonid Frants)
Subject: Xics bug?
Organization: Computer Science Department, Stanford University.
Date: Fri, 17 Apr 1992 16:33:39 GMT

When I ported the xics program to my sparc station it worked fine
when I played white, but did not work when I played black.
It seems that the mouse clicks were interpreted as if the board
was set up upside down. Is that a bug, an old bug fixed in a new
version or did I do something wrong.

Example: White moves pawn to e4, as black I want to move my pawn
to d5 as I know it does not immediately lead to any loss
of material, but after I click on d7 and then d5 squares the move
typed in the window by the system is shown as 'd2-d4' and then it
says illegal move.

Does the author have any ideas?

Great program, by the way.

Leonid.

Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
From: colemant@yvax.byu.edu
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
Subject: complete underpromotion games sought
Date: 13 Apr 92 10:12:29 -0700
Organization: Brigham Young University

Our chess club here at BYU is looking for complete games where underpromotion
came in handy.  I saw postings weeks ago but did not extract them.

thank you --  Tom Coleman       Colemant@yvax.byu.edu
From: jarmo@ae.tut.fi (Jarmo Sorvari)
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
Subject: Re: 1.Nf3 f5 2.e4!? Gambit
Date: 7 Apr 92 09:15:23 GMT
Organization: Tampere Univ. of Technology, Finland.


In article <1992Apr6.145448.15079@osf.org> ron@osf.org (Ron Birnbaum) writes:
> I've been told that the Gambit which goes 1.Nf3 f5 2.e4 fe 3.Ng5 has
> been discussed on the net, but I missed it! If anyone has this
> analysis, please send it to me via email or post it!! Has anything
> new come on this line to improve the ECO analysis? As Black, I
> prefer 3...e5, and think Black equalizes despite what ECO says. Any
> informatin on this line will be appreciated! Thanks.

3.- e5 is very dangerous!  Some time ago, in the game Rohde-Castro (US
Open?), Rohde played the novelty 4. d4!!, and black was already very
close to being lost!

Supposedly black's best bet is 3.- d5 4. d3 Qd6, intending 5. dxe4 h6.
I can't remember the details after this.
--
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
! Jarmo Sorvari                         Control Engineering Laboratory      !
! jarmo@ae.tut.fi                       Tampere University of Technology    !
--------------------------------------- BOX 527, 33101 Tampere, Finland -----
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
From: jhc@iris.uucp (James H. Coombs)
Subject: Re: Mapping ply-depth with ratings
Reply-To: jhc@iris.UUCP (James H. Coombs)
Organization: IRIS - Brown University
Date: Thu, 16 Apr 1992 18:24:46 GMT

In article <1992Apr15.200117.19677@thunder.mcrcim.mcgill.edu> gilles@Damrod.McRCIM.McGill.EDU (Gilles Fayad) writes:

>be nice to be able to determine your rating while playing against computers.

I posted a note but did not think to say....  If you know the rating of
your machine at 3 minutes per move, you can reduce that rating for
every 50% reduction in time (according to CCRQ/I.C.D.).  For a Fidelity
2000:

	secs	rating
	180	2000
	 90	1900
	 45	1800
	 22.5	1700
	 11.25	1600
	  5.62	1500

You can also try to take into account the effect of having the machine
work on your time (which CCRQ says hits at about the rate of 1/3).  So,
if you play the machine at 5 seconds per move and take 180 seconds for
yourself, you can "rate" the computer as if it were given 65 seconds
per move.  This complication does not seem worth the effort because
there is some distortion in rating yourself against a machine that you
play all of the time.  I play my machine at a rating of over 1600, but
I am performing at more like 1300 in tournaments.  The same inflation
is likely to occur whenever you play any opponent over and over.

--Jim
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
From: jhc@iris.uucp (James H. Coombs)
Subject: Re: Goldman analysis
Reply-To: jhc@iris.UUCP (James H. Coombs)
Organization: IRIS - Brown University
Date: Mon, 13 Apr 1992 16:05:23 GMT

>>is that Warren Goldman wrote a book that devoted four and

Ok, so what book is this?  I haven't noticed any mention of the title,
and I haven't seen any books on the CK by Goldman.  Thanks.  --Jim
From: hyatt@cis.uab.edu (Robert Hyatt)
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
Subject: Re: Curious about Alpha-Beta searching
Date: 17 Apr 92 13:25:31 GMT
Organization: University of Alabama at Birmingham

In article <22583@alice.att.com> ark@alice.UUCP () writes:
>In article <1992Apr15.120957.11505@visus.com> nash@visus.com writes:
>
>> I'm curious. Could someone out there describe briefly what the alpha-beta  
>> search algorithm is all about?
>
>It's really very simple, though it can be described in complicated ways.
>
[text deleted]

A simpler explanation:

First, alpha-beta is an improvement to the minimax algorithm that drastically
reduces the number of nodes searched, based on how good the move ordering is.
For optimal ordering, a minimax search examines w^d nodes (w to the d power)
while alpha-beta examines 1/2 w^(d/2)  (1/2 of w to the (d/2) power).

Assume I give you the task of walking up to a fence with three holes in it
that you can't see into; there you must stick your hand in each hole for one
minute, and after you finish all three you have to tell me which one was the
LEAST unpleasant (or the most pleasant, depending on whether you are optimistic
or pessimistic - :^)  )

If you somehow choose the best hole first, and stick your hand in it, you
find that the worst thing that happens is that you get a little "warm" water
poured on your hand -- not bad at all (especially if your hand is dirty...)

Then you go to the second hole and stick your hand in it.  Immediately, your
hand it "pricked" by a pin.  Hopefully you quickly take your hand out and go
on to hole #3.  Why?  because the pin prick was worse than anything that
happened in the first hole.  Why wait around in this hole to see if you are
going to get a finger removed (or worst).  It is already clearly worse than
the first one so on we go. 

Note that we only "occupied" the second hole for a fraction of a second, not
the entire minute.  This saved a bunch of time.  Hopefully, the same thing will
happen for hole #3 and we will finish the entire thing in slightly over a
minute.

Note also, that if we did not choose the "warm water" hole first, this saving
would not have happened.  It would not be reasonable to withdraw after the
pin prick, as the two other holes could be even worse and we would have to go
BACK to the pinprick hole for the remainder of the minute.  This is why move
ordering is so important in alpha-beta.  If we search the best move first, we
get lots of cutoffs and the search goes faster; if not, it doesn't.  In fact,
if you look at the three holes in the order (worst) (middle) (best) you will
take the full three minutes, which is exactly what can happen in tree searching.
Alpha/beta can degrade to near minimax performance if the move ordering is 
poor.

Bob Hyatt
-- 
!Robert Hyatt                    Computer and Information Sciences   !
!hyatt@cis.uab.edu               University of Alabama at Birmingham !
From: ekw@world.std.com (Elliott C Winslow)
Subject: Reshevsky's effect on the draw rules
Organization: The World Public Access UNIX, Brookline, MA
Distribution: the world
Date: Thu, 16 Apr 1992 04:30:08 GMT

Some arbiter might want to correct me on this if I've got it wrong,
but I belive that it is mostly thanks to Reshevsky's sieazy wording
that the rules now make *any* question involving draw or win or such
to be an offer.  So the question "Are you playing for a draw?" can be
replied to with "I accept your offer."  More vague questions are best
answered with "Arbiter!"

Amusingly enough, Bisguier himself told me a Reshevsky story the
Monday after Sammy died, which leaves little doubt about his "will to
win" and his competitive nature.  I will get his okay before placing
it on the net.  It involves the US-Sweden match from the Helsinki
Olympiad.

  --Elliott
#include <disclaimer.h>
  Elliott Winslow IM  ekw@world
  Asst. Editor, Chess Life USCF
Organization: University of Illinois at Chicago
Date: Friday, 10 Apr 1992 20:48:12 CDT
From: <U51115@uicvm.uic.edu>
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
Subject: Re: Looking for improvement suggestions
 <1992Apr10.181945.26728@cs.brown.edu> <1992Apr10.214208.10227@cis.uab.edu>
 <1992Apr10.224435.22885@colorado.edu>

  Has anybody noticed that when you're in a middle of a chess game, your hand c
ramps up because of the rigorous workout us chess studs have to endure? I think
 I know why people who play chess are always so much better in life. I think be
cause when you play chess, it's like a war and so much of your concentration is
 absorbed into winning a game. Chess players are warriors who never die. We hav
e heart and determination. We see things differently than normal people because
all we talk about is chess. Before I played Chess, I was a nobody. Now I have g
irls everywhere. Chess made my life a dream come true. Everytime we step out in
to the battlefield, we know that it could be our life on the line. It's a matte
r of courage. Those who don't play Chess are nothing but mortals compared to us
. We know each and everytime we play that we could get gooder and gooder. To al
l you chess players out there, I salute you.

Organization: Carnegie Mellon, Pittsburgh, PA
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
Date: Fri, 10 Apr 1992 22:18:07 -0400 
From: Louis Blair <lb2e+@andrew.cmu.edu>
Subject: Re: Shortest games...

>As far as I know, the shortest game played between IM's is 4
>moves (Gibaud vs Lazard).

The general opinion amongst chess historians these days is
that this game never really happened.  For details, see the
Oxford Companion to Chess or the Soltis book of chess lists.
(Or pester me.  Maybe I will post them if there is interest.)

>The shortest game involving a GM is 7 moves between Fine
>and Borochowe. This game is particularly interesting because
>the white moves ONLY the pawns and the black moves ONLY
>the Knights.

I think I remember that there is doubt about this game, too,
but I am much less certain here and my memory might be
playing tricks on me.  I might be thinking of the wrong
game.  I'll try to check up on this, but it may take me a day
or two.
From: gls@windmill.att.com (Col. G. L. Sicherman)
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
Subject: Re: the French, fried
Date: 11 Apr 92 17:55:23 GMT
Organization: Kentucky Fried Fox

In <1992Apr9.225154.17132@dartvax.dartmouth.edu>, Wachtenheim@dartmouth writes:
> 
> 1. P-K4, P-K3       1. e2-e4, e7-e6
> 2. P-Q4, P-Q4       2. d2-d4, d7-d5
> 3. N-Q2, P-QB4      3. b1-d2, c7-c5
> 4. PxQP,            4. e4xd5, 

[and 4.... cd?! 5. Bb5+ Bd7; 6. de!]

> Is this move 4...BPxP always a mistake for black even if 6...PxP rather
> than 6...BxB??  

6. ... fe is better than 6. ... B:b5, but it's no picnic.  White simply
exchanges bishops, completes his development, and piles up on e5; e.g.,
7. B:d7+ Q:d7; 8. Ngf3 Nc6; 9. O-O O-O-O; 10. Nc4.  White has no weaknesses
and Black has weak center pawns.  It's playable but not what most French
players would enjoy.

-:-
	"Where did he learn to dance like that?"
	"On Saturn!"
-- 
Col. G. L. Sicherman
gls@windmill.att.COM