HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: rh@smds.com (Richard Harter)
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
Subject: Re: Fischer CNN
Date: 5 Sep 92 23:48:25 GMT
Reply-To: rh@ishmael.UUCP (Richard Harter)
Organization: Software Maintenance & Development Systems, Inc.

>In article <benwood.715537634@milton> benwood@milton.u.washington.edu (Ben Henwood) writes:
>)The reporter mentioned that Fischer faces a $250,000 fine from the
>)Treasury Department when he returns to the US for violating the
>)sanctions.  He noted that if Fischer wins the match and $3.5 million,
>)he could easily afford it.

Let's reduce this proposition to its basics.  Serbs, Croatians, and Bosnians
are killing each other.  The American governments response is to threaten to
fine an American and put him in jail.

Let's get back to chess, huh.  It makes a lot more sense.
-- 
Richard Harter: SMDS Inc.  Net address: rh@smds.com Phone: 508-369-7398 
US Mail: SMDS Inc., PO Box 555, Concord MA 01742.    Fax: 508-369-8272
In the fields of Hell where the grass grows high
Are the graves of dreams allowed to die.
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
From: paul@panix.com (Paul Gatker)
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
Subject: Re: Chessmaster 3000 - questions
Date: 14 Sep 92 00:03:03 GMT
Organization: PANIX Public Access Unix, NYC


 Another question: Given the same computer: is there a difference in the 
strength between the dos version and the windows version?

-- 
*******************************************************************
paul@panix.com                                    COMPULITE GRAPHICS
Brooklyn NY usa                                Design & Consultation
********************************************************************
From: fry@tara.harvard.edu (David Fry)
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
Subject: Re: Question about posting game comments...
Date: 6 Sep 92 12:30:35 GMT
Article-I.D.: husc3.1992Sep6.083036.15411
Organization: Harvard Math Department

In article <1992Sep06.020451.7901@vpnet.chi.il.us> mox@vpnet.chi.il.us (William Moxley) writes:
>Is it legal to post the move by move commentary from the Fischer/Spaasky
>match given in other services like Prodigy or Compuserve?  In the case 
>of Prodigy, how about their move by move graphics?  Would it be illegal
>to pass on screen captures?

If Prodigy or CompuServe reports that Grandmaster A said X, then it's
fine for you to say, GM A said X.  But you can't just reproduce the
report verbatim.  You can reproduce quotes, but not the entire story. I don't
think graphics or screen captures are legal, either. 

In short, you can report facts, you can't reproduce stories. On the
other hand, I doubt seriously that any legal action would come of
this.  As readers will remember, I've posted entire AP stories at
times, but I try to avoid it.


David Fry                                  fry@math.harvard.edu
Division of Applied Sciences               fry@huma1.bitnet
Harvard University                      ...!harvard!huma1!fry
Cambridge, MA  02138            
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
From: mzabel@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (Mark A Zabel)
Subject: Re: notation.
Organization: The Ohio State University
Date: Sun, 13 Sep 1992 17:54:03 GMT

In article <BuIssv.Bxu@nic.umass.edu> s9874203@titan.ucc.umass.edu (s9874203) w
rites:
>In article <92256.135708RVESTERM@vma.cc.nd.edu> RVESTERM@vma.cc.nd.edu writes:
>>i'd like to know what the advantage of
>>"d4 d5" is over "p-q4 p-q4".  the latter seems eminently more readable, and
>>i don't see what one notation over another is for, if not readablility.
>
>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.

Another big reason is that there is less chance for ambiguity.
For example, the notation N-B3 has a greater chance of being interpreted
incorrectly than Nf3.  There are four different B3s but only
one f3.  I used to dislike reading anything in algebraic, but
now I cringe when I must read descriptive.  Once you get used
to algebraic I would bet that you'll prefer it too.

-Mark
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
From: abian@iastate.edu (Alexander Abian)
Subject: Fischer-Kasparov match
Keywords: chess-math
Organization: Iowa State University, Ames IA
Distribution: usa
Date: Tue, 15 Sep 1992 17:36:20 GMT

Is it the case that there soon will be a Fischer-Kasparov match ?

Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
From: kbs4580@rigel.tamu.edu (SCHAUB, KEITH BRADLEY)
Subject: Scoring on the Fischer, Spassky game
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41    
Organization: Texas A&M University, Academic Computing Services
Date: Mon, 14 Sep 1992 14:37:00 GMT

Scoring goes as follows:
	wins =1
        losses =0
        draws  =0
first person to 10 games wins.
At the moment Fischer leads 3-2.
From: jeff@econ.Berkeley.EDU (Jeffrey C. Ely)
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
Subject: re: F-S II gossip
Date: 14 Sep 92 20:47:43 GMT
Organization: Chessnews list (chessnews-request@tssi.com)


In article 16334, fry@zariski.harvard.edu (David Fry) writes:
>Spassky's 31. Rc1 in game 8 was 
>judged a good move by Robert Byrne and Deep Thought II in the New 
>York Times, to which Fischer answered 31....Ncb3? 32. axb3 Nxb3. But 
>Spassky followed up with the awful 33.Rc6? rather than *33.Rc3* which 
>would have given him all the winning chances.

I believe it was 33. Qc3 that DT II suggested.
From: Amiga@cup.portal.com (Philip Barry Kirschner)
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
Subject: Re: Chess via modem between two people?
Date: Sun,  6 Sep 92 23:51:56 PDT
Organization: The Portal System (TM)
  <1992Sep6.124947.17529@wixer.cactus.org>

I allready have a program that will allow chess to be played over a modem.
The program name is BATTLECHESS and it can be played on AMIGA/IBM/And mac's
I think.If your intrested contact me. Again :BATTLECHESS by interplay.
 
Philip Kirschner Amiga.Cup.Portal.com I think!
 
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
From: hyde@cs.dal.ca (Bill Hyde)
Subject: Re: fischer-spassky
Organization: Math, Stats & CS, Dalhousie University, Halifax, NS, Canada
Date: Wed, 9 Sep 1992 20:58:31 GMT

In article <1992Sep9.181559.28959@mnemosyne.cs.du.edu>, bwatkins@nyx.cs.du.edu (The God of all machines) writes:
|> 
|> Indeed, the USA has wonderfull policies of allowing several open
|> tournaments' winners to play in its zonal.  I do not believe FIDE
|> requires this.  An all draw record will not win anything for you, how
|> ever.  It is certainly possible to fill up top spots so that a superior
|> player will never have a chance to play in the championships through
|> corrupt bargains with other players to throw games or play to draws.
|> 
|> Witness the USSR's players keeping fischer out of the championship
|> in the 60's.  "The Russians Fix World Chess"

	You forgot to include the :-)  Or are you really paranoid
	enough to believe this?

					
						Bill Hyde
Department of Oceanography
Dalhousie University,
Halifax, Nova Scotia
hyde@Ice.ATM.Dal.Ca or hyde@dalac
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
From: ekw@world.std.com (Elliott C Winslow)
Subject: Re: fischer-spassky
Summary: Fischer was not a member of the Worlwide Church Of God
Organization: The World Public Access UNIX, Brookline, MA
Date: Fri, 11 Sep 1992 04:07:47 GMT

In article <1992Sep10.092043.15509@husc3.harvard.edu>
fry@zariski.harvard.edu (David Fry) writes:
> In article <1992Sep10.012725.12502@erg.sri.com>
> vlad@erg.sri.com (vlad) writes:
> > Well, why not? According to Fischer, htere is a world-wide
> > Zionist-Communist conspiracy against him. I recall his old complaints about
> > rooms being too hot, too cold, too light, too dark. If I am not mistaken,
> > he even pretended to be a religeous jew and demanded that he be excused
> > from playing on saturdays. Oh, those Zionist enemies of Fischer's... :-)
> > And the Commies...
>
> For the millionth time, Fischer observed the religious rituals of the
> Worldwide Church of God, a fundamentalist Christian church he belonged
> to, not Judiasm.

Jennie Simon, Publicity Director here at the USCF, and a member of the chuch
mentioned, notes that she has heard that in fact, Fischer never was a
member; he attended services for a while, and gave some money, but never
joined the church.  This is the sort of distinction to go the wayside
quickly.

And I hear that there was a letter to the editor from the church yesterday
(i.e. Wednesday) in the New York Times regarding this matter, and deploring
Fischer's statements and declaring that they in no way reflect church
opinion.  Please look it up (and if someone might post).

--Elliott
  Elliott Winslow IM
  ekw@world.std.com
  Assistant Editor
  Chess Life USCF
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
From: carolew@athena.mit.edu (Carole A Womeldorf)
Subject: F-S scheduling
Keywords: Fischer, schedule
Organization: Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Date: Mon, 14 Sep 1992 22:45:26 GMT

Does anyone know the tenative schedule for the remaining F/S games?  What time do
they usually start (east coast - US time)?

					Thanks,  
					
					CW
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
Subject: F-S II game 7 comments
From: fry@tara.harvard.edu (David Fry)
Date: 12 Sep 92 19:24:26 EDT
Distribution: world
Organization: Harvard Math Department


"I played pretty well." - Fischer

Fischer also said that Spassky's ...d5, opening up the position, was
a "very bad mistake, a blunder, a losing move."  Spassky said, "It
looked like losing a pawn. Maybe I could have played better, because I
had another way to get the compensation."  He mentioned 20...Qc4
instead of ...Ne4.

Andree Lilienthal said that at this moment "Fischer did not find the
best solution to press ahead with his advantage."

In the gossip category, Fischer has also demanded, starting with this
game, that Spassky not be allowed to sit at the chess table until
Fischer himself has already taken his seat.  Also, for the first time
in the match, he left his seat early in the game (after 9.d3)
to go to his private box to relax.


David Fry                                  fry@math.harvard.edu
Division of Applied Sciences               fry@huma1.bitnet
Harvard University                      ...!harvard!huma1!fry
Cambridge, MA  02138            
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
From: bwatkins@nyx.cs.du.edu (The God of all machines)
Subject: Re: Who are the seconds in the Fischer/Spassky match?
Organization: University of Denver, Dept. of Math & Comp. Sci.
Date: Sat, 5 Sep 92 01:09:06 GMT


Do they need seconds?  I suppose they can afford them, but there are not
adjournments....

Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
From: jhc@m2lll.uucp (James H. Coombs)
Subject: Re: stamina and aging
Reply-To: jhc@iris.brown.edu.UUCP (James H. Coombs)
Organization: IRIS - Brown University
Distribution: rec
Date: Mon, 14 Sep 1992 15:18:44 GMT

In article <1992Sep14.1528.6339@channel1> "dale smoak" <dale.smoak@channel1.com> writes:

>But I've seen no notice at all of the effects of aging on a
>chessplayer's stamina.  Our world champions are usually fairly young, 35
>or under.  In grandmaster play, older players seem to falter in the
>fifth hour of play; at least that's the explanation I've heard as to why
>you rarely see serious older challengers for the World Championship.
>Spassky, Smyslov and other players in their 40's, 50's, 60's and 70's
>must know as much or more chess than they did in their primes, but the
>stamina factor keeps them out of the highest echelon.

Elo surveys the likey effects of aging.  His discussion is very interesting.
In part:

	Chess performance depends, of course, on both organic capacity
	and experience....  The decline after age 40 is readily
	understandable when one considers the decline in basic organic
	capacities in humans due to ageing.  Recently, A. Leaf provided
	the results of various gerontological studies of these organic
	capacities, and those which might affect chess are given here.
	Using capacity at age 30 as a reference, the capacities at 65 will
	have declines as follows:

		Brain weight to 94%
		Nerve conduction velocity to 92%
		Metabolic rate to 88%
		Cardiac output to 72%
		Breathing capacity to 58%

Stamina seems to me a more general category than those given here:
reduced cardiac and breathing capacity would reduce stamina.  In any
case, the peak on the average occurs at the age of 36.  Chess can be
mastered by kids, and the accumulation of experience is less important
than speed of thought and decisiveness.  --Jim
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: Tue, 15 Sep 1992 16:33:41 GMT


                        THIS WEEK IN CHESS HISTORY
                           September 17-23, 1992

September 17
1903 - George Koltanowski born
1904 - Daniel Fiske died

September 18
1964 - Curt Hansen born
1980 - Frank Anderson died

September 19
1873 - Rudolph Charousek born
1987 - Mikhail Yudovich died

September 20
1896 - Friedrich Saemisch born

September 21
1815 - P.R. von Bilguer born
1915 - Martner Letelier born

September 22
1921 - Gia Nadareishvili born

September 23 
1912 - John Collins born


Copyright 1992 Hanon W. Russell
All Rights Reserved

Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
From: cpf@alchemy.TN.Cornell.EDU (Courtenay Footman)
Subject: Interesting endgame (GM Rohde vs Malpert)
Organization: Alchemy International, Ithaca, N.Y.
Date: Sat, 12 Sep 1992 03:48:45 GMT

Here is an interesting endgame, from the New York State Championship. 
The gamewas for second place.   (Joel Benjamin demolished everybody 
to win, going 6-0).
 
White: GM M. Rohde  Black R. Malpert
New York State Championship
Round 6 (Final round) Board 2
Saratoga Spings, 7 Sept 92
40/120,  S60
 
Position before blacks 24th move:
 
                8  r * - * - * r *
                7  p - * - k - * p
                6  R * - * p * - *
                5  * - * - * - * -   White: Kg1, Rd4, Ra6, f2, g2, h2
                4  - * - R - * - *   Black: ke7, ra8, rg8, a7, e6, h7
                3  * - * - * - * -
                2  - * - * - P P P
                1  * - * - * - K -
 
Here is how the game went:
(All punctuation is Rod Malpert's, except the !? on white's 27th 
move is my interpretation of Rohde's postgame stement that
g4 might be an error, and Rod's comment that it seems to be
the logical try.)
 
24	...	Rgd8
25	Rxd8	Kxd8!
26	f4!	Kc7!
27	g4!?	Kb7
28	Rxe6	a5
29	Re7+	Kc6
30	Rxh7	a4
31	Re7	a3
32	Re1	Kd5
33	Kg5	a2
34	Ra1	Ke4
35	f5	Kf4
36	h3	Kg5
37	Kf3	Ra3+
38	Ke4	Ra4+
39	Ke5	Ra5+
40	Kd4	Ra3

Moves 37-40 were played in about five seconds.
41	Kc4
 
                8  - * - * - * - *
                7  * - * - * - * -
                6  - * - * - * - *
                5  * - * - * P k -   White: Kc4, Ra1 f5, g4, h3
                4  - * K * - * P *   Black: kg5, ra3, a2
                3  r - * - * - * P
                2  p * - * - * - *
                1  R - * - * - * -

Black now thought for almost half an hour.
41	...	Kh4!
Now white thought for well over half an hour.
42	Kd4	Kxh3
43	f6	Kxg4
44	Ke5	Ra5+
45	Ke6	Ra6+
46	Ke7	Ra7+
47	Ke8	Kf5!
48	f7	Ra8+
49	Ke7	Ra7+
50	Ke8	Ra8+
51	Ke7	Ra7+
52	Kd6	Rxf7
53	Rxa2	Draw (Offered by black)

Was this position a draw?  Any comments or improvements (for either
side would be appreciated.)

Courtenay Footman (1615) for Rod Malpert (2350)
-- 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Courtenay Footman			I finally got back on the net.

cpf@alchemy.ithaca.ny.us		Now I will never get anything done
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
From: Rod Malpert <ram4@cornell.edu>
Subject: Re: Re Cancel "Interesting endgame"
X-Xxdate: Tue, 15 Sep 92 17: 31:37 GMT
Nntp-Posting-User: ram4@cornell.edu
Organization: Cornell University
X-Useragent: Nuntius v1.1.1d7
Date: Tue, 15 Sep 1992 21:26:51 GMT

Please excuse the error and see the original thread.
Organization: Penn State University
Date: Mon, 7 Sep 1992 11:27:00 EDT
From: <GUF@psuvm.psu.edu>
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
Subject: Chess Essays/Books

As a novice, I am looking for references to good essays (in prose,
please, not chess notation) about the joys and travails of the game at
all of its various levels.  I would like to read about the strategy and
tactics of the game, game development, etc.  The analysis should be in
prose for now, because chess notation and abstractions at this point
will turn me off.  I want to get into the theory and satisfactions
underlying the pasttime.  Any suggestions would be appreciated.
Gil Gall (guf@psuvm.psu.edu).
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
From: mox@vpnet.chi.il.us (William Moxley)
Subject: Re: Kasparov vs. Letterman 1990
Organization: Vpnet Public Access
Date: Sun, 13 Sep 1992 17:44:45 GMT

In article <1992Sep11.163538.15620@osf.org> ron@osf.org (Ron Birnbaum) writes:
>
>  Gosh folks - the game is a total waste of time! Letterman played like a 
>  600 (USCF or FIDE) player!! The game was BORING! Don't bother looking at the
>  game unless you want to see some horrible chess. Of course Kasparov didn't 
>  need a board to wipe out such a weak player. Neither did he need pieces!

Were you actually expecting Letterman to do well?  I mean come on, it
was a joke.  Wanting the game is purely for the joke of the whole thing.

		William Moxley
		mox@vpnet.chi.il.us

Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
From: bwatkins@nyx.cs.du.edu (The God of all machines)
Subject: Re: SD tournaments
Organization: University of Denver, Dept. of Math & Comp. Sci.
Date: Sat, 5 Sep 92 01:11:38 GMT


it's "help-mates."  In most sudden-death time control rules, I  remember
provisions that the player about to lose on time should stop the clocks
before the flag falls and contact the TD, if he is winning by an 
overwhelming margin, the TD should award a draw.
From: mox@vpnet.chi.il.us (William Moxley)
Subject: Question about posting game comments...
Organization: Vpnet Public Access
Date: Sun, 06 Sep 1992 02:04:51 GMT

Is it legal to post the move by move commentary from the Fischer/Spaasky
match given in other services like Prodigy or Compuserve?  In the case 
of Prodigy, how about their move by move graphics?  Would it be illegal
to pass on screen captures?

		William Moxley
		mox@vpnet.chi.il.us
  
Xref: sparky rec.games.chess:7301 rec.games.programmer:3769
From: fry@tara.harvard.edu (David Fry)
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
Subject: Re: fish question
Date: 16 Sep 92 01:50:36 GMT
Article-I.D.: husc3.1992Sep15.215037.15619
Organization: Harvard Math Department


Before this gets too far out of hand :-), TN stands for "theoretical
novelty," that is, a new piece of chess theory, not that is
theoretically new but no one knows for sure.  The people who said
"tournament novelty" and "truly new" had the right idea.

David Fry                                  fry@math.harvard.edu
Division of Applied Sciences               fry@huma1.bitnet
Harvard University                      ...!harvard!huma1!fry
Cambridge, MA  02138            
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
From: hyde@cs.dal.ca (Bill Hyde)
Subject: Re: fischer-spassky
Organization: Math, Stats & CS, Dalhousie University, Halifax, NS, Canada
Date: Thu, 10 Sep 1992 17:08:45 GMT

In article <1992Sep9.220047.24075@physics.ucla.edu>, reynolds@physics.ucla.edu (Reynolds) writes:
|> In article <BuBwxJ.1wv@cs.dal.ca> hyde@cs.dal.ca (Bill Hyde) writes:
|> >In article <1992Sep9.181559.28959@mnemosyne.cs.du.edu>, bwatkins@nyx.cs.du.edu (The God of all machines) writes:
|> >|> 
|> >|> Indeed, the USA has wonderfull policies of allowing several open
|> >|> tournaments' winners to play in its zonal.  I do not believe FIDE
|> >|> requires this.  An all draw record will not win anything for you, how
|> >|> ever.  It is certainly possible to fill up top spots so that a superior
|> >|> player will never have a chance to play in the championships through
|> >|> corrupt bargains with other players to throw games or play to draws.
|> >|> 
|> >|> Witness the USSR's players keeping fischer out of the championship
|> >|> in the 60's.  "The Russians Fix World Chess"
|> >
|> >	You forgot to include the :-)  Or are you really paranoid
|> >	enough to believe this?
|> >
|> >					
|> >						Bill Hyde
|> 
|> Actually, many of the Soviets involved admitted later on that
|> they did (were told to) draw with other Soviets to save their
|> strength and to concentrate on beating `foreigners'.  I don't
|> have any specific reference, but I'm sure someone on the net
|> does.


	All the games in the '62 tournament between the top three
	soviets were drawn, and generally fairly rapidly (average
	27 moves).  However, Petrosian was one of those players,
	and Keres at this point was trying to play more conservatively
	(he largely failed to qualify in 53 and 56 due to spurning
	draws with his nearest rivals).  This is the only substance to
	fischer's charge.  *However* it does not explain '64 or '67,
	and if you look at the 59 candidates tournament this pattern
	did not apply there, either (e.g. all four Tal-Keres games
	in '59 were decisive, and there is no evidence either of these
	gentlemen were punished for failing to draw).

	Anyway, if fischer had been offered an early draw by his
	opponents in '62 he would have rejected it.  If players much
	older than fischer wanted to rest themselves with an early
	draw against a strong player we have no right to complain about
	their tournament strategy.  The draw, after all, conceeds half
	a point.  This strategy worked well for (e.g.) Petrosian and
	Keres, while the reverse worked for Fischer and Larsen.

	If there was such a great conspiracy, why did the soviets agree
	to restrict the number of qualifiers from any one country
	(which cost Stein two shots at the world title) when even
	some westerners (e.g. Larsen) thought it to be a silly
	restriction in the era of candidates matches?

	



						Bill Hyde
Department of Oceanography
Dalhousie University,
Halifax, Nova Scotia
hyde@Ice.ATM.Dal.Ca or hyde@dalac
From: pmarko@bnr.ca (Peter Marko)
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
Subject: Fischer-Spassky Prediction
Date: 11 Sep 92 15:47:47 GMT
Organization: Northern Telecom Canada Ltd.
X-Useragent: Nuntius v1.1

I have not seen a serious attempt by anyone to predict the outcome of
this match, so here is my opinion.

When Fischer quit in 1972, he had a rating of 2780.  He was 29 years old,
probably not yet at his peak.  Had he played during the past twenty
years, we would have seen his rating go up to about 2820, and then slowly
dropping to around 2740 by this year (he is 49, well passed his
theoretical peak).  Because he had not played since 1972, his current
strength should be estimated by deducting another 40 points or so from
this, or at about 2700.

Spassky's current rating is about 2600 (I do not have the exact figure as
I have not been following chess closely for quite a while - could
somebody post his official rating?).

The rating difference is, therefore, about 100 points in favour of
Fischer, which is significant (this is half a class!).  Based on the
above, Fischer's performance is expected to be 64%, which - assuming that
half the games will be drawn - translates to a +10-3=13 (16.5-9.5) final
result.

The initial score of +1-2=3 does not seem to support this prediction, so
Fischer's rating might have deteriorated more than I suggested.  I guess
we will have to wait and see.

   ...Peter

-------------------------------------------------------
Peter Marko  .....  (613)763-5344  .....  pmarko@bnr.ca
Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
From: beascoea@colossus.cs.rpi.edu (Alex Beascoechea)
Subject: Question about Mchess Professional.
Summary: What are Mchess Professional main features?
Organization: Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Troy NY
Date: Sat, 12 Sep 1992 17:02:00 GMT

It seems that a new release of Mchess is available or is going to be available
soon, Mchess Professional. Does anybody know any of the improvements to the
regular Mchess that this realease will make?

Thanks.
-- 
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Alex Beascoechea			
	 	 alex@ecse.rpi.edu
         	 beascoea@cs.rpi.edu