HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: strom@watson.ibm.com (Rob Strom)
Subject: Re: Pronunciation guide from old _Chess Lifes_
Date: Tue, 15 Sep 1992 17:26:02 GMT
Disclaimer: This posting represents the poster's views, not necessarily those of IBM
Organization: IBM Research
Keywords: Hungarian

In article <23668@alice.att.com>, ark@alice.att.com (Andrew Koenig) writes:
|> In article <1992Sep14.232106.20803@midway.uchicago.edu> hau4@midway.uchicago.edu writes:
|> 
|> > Except for the stress, because it's MAR-otsy ('mar' is like 'car'). ALL 
|> > Hungarian words are stressed on the first syllable; no exceptions.
|> 
|> Hmmm... What about names written with an explicit accent mark (if that's
|> what it is), like Bela Barto'k (put the ' over the o, please)?
|> -- 
The "accent" marks convert short vowels into long vowels.

But the main stress is always on the first syllable regardless of
which syllables have long vowels and which short.

(I believe the composer's name is Be'la Ba'rto'k.)

-- 
Rob Strom, strom@watson.ibm.com, (914) 784-7641
IBM Research, 30 Saw Mill River Road, P.O. Box 704, Yorktown Heights, NY  10598
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
From: pope@gold.kpc.com (John Pope)
Subject: Re: FISCHER SPASSKY game 1 - comments
Organization: /nfs/gold/u/home/pope/.organization
Date: Mon, 7 Sep 1992 05:09:56 GMT


   >18.d5 c4 19.b4!?
   >

	   19 ...   cb
	   20. Bxb3 Nc5
	   21. Bc2  Nxa4

I don't this is the right idea here - most of black's compensation for
opening up the queen side is that he gets a good square at c4, but
this exchange gives away the square and develops white's game to boot.
21...Qd7 with the idea of 22...Reb8 seems more solid.


--
John Pope
pope@kpc.com
Kubota Pacific Computers, Inc.
(408) 987-3362
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
From: bwatkins@nyx.cs.du.edu (The God of all machines)
Subject: Re: Kasparov vs. Letterman 1989 Move List w/annotation
Organization: University of Denver, Dept. of Math & Comp. Sci.
Date: Tue, 15 Sep 92 23:40:04 GMT

pleroy@us.oracle.com writes:

>In article <1992Sep12.012655.11903@panix.com>, paul@panix.com (Paul Gatk
r) writes:
>> 12-04-89
>> 
>> Subj: Kasparov vs. Letterman   
>  Moves abd comments deleted

>> 
>> 23.  GK: You're in good company.  All of the grandmasters have been
>>           checkmated by me. 
>> -- 
>> *******************************************************************
>> paul@panix.com                                    COMPULITE GRAPHICS
>> Brooklyn NY usa                                Design & Consultation
>> ********************************************************************

>Actually, angel or devil, good or bad player, Bobby FISHER is still
>a Grand Master and I don't think Gary KASPAROV has ever played 
>against him. 

>True or false ?

>Patrick LEROY (NC)
FALSE:  There is not now and there has never been a grandmaster named
Bobby FISHER.

Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
From: jhc@m2lll.uucp (James H. Coombs)
Subject: Re: Spassky-Fischer #8, by Zarkov & me.
Reply-To: jhc@iris.brown.edu.UUCP (James H. Coombs)
Organization: IRIS - Brown University
Date: Wed, 16 Sep 1992 00:15:17 GMT

In article <1992Sep15.190707.15616@husc3.harvard.edu> fry@zariski.harvard.edu (David Fry) writes:
>In article <1992Sep15.201830.24418@cs.brown.edu> jhc@iris.brown.edu.UUCP (James H. Coombs) writes:
>>In article <1992Sep15.083113.15598@husc3.harvard.edu> fry@tara.harvard.edu (David Fry) writes:
>>>In article <1992Sep15.042354.3529@cs.brown.edu> jhc@iris.brown.edu.uucp (James H. Coombs) writes:

>>But does he address 17.Qd2?

>Again, I'm sorry for the typo. I meant 17.Qd2, not Qa2.

Drat!  And that's where a good chess player would have understood it
as 17.Qd2 instead of 17.Qa3.

>>>>Or let's take Zarkov's move: 33.Qc3.  Inferior would be 33...Rxc3,
>>>>which allows the equalizing 34.Rxc3 Nc5 35.b4 Qa7 36.bxc5 dxc5.  Now
>>>>37.d6 gives White an advanced passed pawn.  On the other hand, Black
>>>>has triple connected passed pawns.  Zarkov scores them about even.

>I'm not even sure that 36.bc is even the best move.  36.Rfc2 may be
>better, I don't know.

It's an interesting thought.  There doesn't seem to be any reason for
White to rush.

>In any case, this whole thing is started by the phrase "all the
>winning chances." In all the variations, I think the resulting
>positions certainly show that White has a better chance to *win*.

This helps.  I had the impression that it meant that White had chances
for an immediate win.  It means, if there are chances to win, then
White has them (blunders aside).

>I just think you're expecting some forced win in every
>variation from Byrne or at least a number like "+35" because these are
>things you get from Zarkov.

Well, a number like 200-300 leads me to the expectation that one side
should be able to start simplifying into a won ending.  Of course, you
probably mean not that I am expecting too much from small numbers but
that I am expecting too much from any number.

It's hard for me to judge.  I can't take a superior position and
convert it into a win against Zarkov, at least not without a lot of
takebacks.  And playing Zarkov against itself just leads to computer la
la that has nothing to do with what Fischer and Spassky might play
or that I would want to emulate.

>Sure, you should question Byrne, but just because Zarkov doesn't agree
>with him doesn't mean anything.  I'll take Byrne/DT over Zarkov any
>day.

I have to disagree with this.  If Byrne evaluates a position without
giving the demonstrating variation (which may well be impossible in
these positions), then I must either be able to find my way with
Zarkov's help, or I have to treat Byrne's evaluation as useless (to me
at this time).  Of course, that is the difference between analyzing the
game and trying to learn chess.

--Jim
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
From: jhc@m2lll.uucp (James H. Coombs)
Subject: Re: Question about Mchess Professional.
Reply-To: jhc@iris.brown.edu.UUCP (James H. Coombs)
Organization: IRIS - Brown University
Date: Sat, 12 Sep 1992 19:03:29 GMT

In article <b=8y6ml@rpi.edu> beascoea@colossus.cs.rpi.edu (Alex Beascoechea) writes:

>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?

This version is designed for 80386 with lots of RAM.  CCR says you
should have 2 Mb minimum.  (It will run on an 80286 with only 640 Kb,
but not "optimally.")  It will take several Mb of disk space.  CCR
actually recommends 12 Mb of RAM, of which MChess will use 10 Mb for
hash tables.

Book is 7x as large as amateur version and is programmable.  Improved
graphics.  Better endgame due to large hash tables.  Probably other
strength improvements.  Expected retail at about $150.

Subscribe to Computer Chess Reports, from I.C.D.  800-645-4710.  It's
only about $10.

--Jim
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
From: Rennan.Barkana@bbs.oit.unc.edu (Rennan Barkana)
Subject: fun chess problem
Organization: Extended Bulletin Board Service
Date: Sat, 12 Sep 1992 01:48:02 GMT

Here is a fun problem for all of you. If anyone is interested, I'll 
post the solution and source soon.

 ---------------
|r - - q - r - k| 
|- - - - - p p p| 
|p - b - - - - -| 
|- p p p P P b -|
|- - - - n - Q -|
|- N P - - R - -|
|P P B - - - P P|
|R - B - - - K -|
 ---------------
White to move and win

If you don't want to use the diagram:
White:a2,b2,c3,e5,f5,g2,h2,Ra1,Nb3,Bc1,Bc2,Rf3,Qg4,Kg1
Black:a6,b5,c5,d5,f7,g7,h7,Ra8,Bc6,Qd8,Ne4,Bg5,Rf8,Kh8

Rennan Bar-Kana
barkana@steinhardt.hep.upenn.edu

--
   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:  bbs.oit.unc.edu or 152.2.22.80
From: Amiga@cup.portal.com (Philip Barry Kirschner)
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
Subject: Re: ICS ???
Date: Sat,  5 Sep 92 09:28:10 PDT
Organization: The Portal System (TM)
Distribution: world

Wanted Individials to purchase and play modem chess games.For more informaTio
contact portal!!!
From: mapmef@gdr.bath.ac.uk (M E Fletcher)
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
Subject: Fischer's next opponent
Date: 8 Sep 92 13:57:55 GMT
Organization: School of Mathematics, University of Bath, UK


Assuming that Fischer beats Spassky then who would be suitable as a
next opponent for him? Ideally they would have to satisfy the
following criteria:

1) Able to raise plenty of $$$
2) Able to generate comparable publicity 
3) Strong enough to have a chance, but not *too* strong
4) Able to put Fischer under some pressure.

In my opinion there is a perfect candidate in  .... Judith Polgar!

Playing a young woman would subject Fischer to enormous psychological
pressure, as his views on women's chess are well known. Also Judith
broke Fischer's record as the youngest ever GM recently, what more
could you want? She also has a very sharp aggressive style which
would certainly give her plenty of chances against Fischer just
trying to play technically. 

I've been pretty disappointed with Fischer's play so far. He played
well in game 1; should have won game 2 but threw away the win;
had much the worse of a draw in game 3; and lost game 4. He has got
progressively worse every game. His opening repetoire hasn't been
exactly stunning either. Twenty years study produces 5 ... c5?! against
the Saemisch and a lack-lustre Queen's Gambit Accepted ... I bet
Kasparov is really quaking.

There is an amusing article by Nigel Short in the current issue
of the Spectator (a UK current affairs magazine). He discusses Bobby,
Boris and Kasparov and includes a bizarre anecdote about Spassky
"firmly grabbing Kasparov by the buttocks on stage in full view of
the audience" in order to knock him down a peg presumably. He also
reports Kasparov's pun when asked who he thought his challenger would
be next year, and what would the course of the match be: "It will be
Short. And it will be short!"  Short also reveals that he would like
a match with Fischer too.

I can't really see a Kasparov-Fischer match ever happening, Fischer
may be mad but he isn't stupid. It would be totally unfair with
Kasparov at his peak and Fischer well past his sell-by-date but
everyone would simply go by the result ( obviously a crushing win
for Garry ) and declare that Kasparov is the greatest not Fischer.
Does anyone seriously believe that Fischer would still be able to
stand up to Kasparov on his present showing!?

Matt
From: jb118@prism.gatech.EDU (Jeffrey N. Burch)
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
Subject: Re: fischer-spassky
Date: 10 Sep 92 13:33:54 GMT
Organization: Georgia Tech Research Institute -- EOL

In article <1992Sep9.232631.15840@cis.uab.edu> sloan@cis.uab.edu (Kenneth Sloan) writes:
>
>Now now...go back and find out how one R.J. Fischer got to play in a
>Interzonal without even competing in the qualifying Zonal tournament.
>
>When your team does this sort of thing, it's considered "making sure we
>are properly represented".  When the other side stoops to the same low
>tactics, it's called "cheating".

It was my understanding that Benko was asked to stand down in favor
of Fischer, and was paid for it (I've heard the sum was around $5000).
It was within USCF and FIDE rules to do this, so it's a little hard
to call it "cheating".  Benko could've said no, but even he realized
that Fischer stood a better chance in the candidates cycle than he
did.  If Karpov had been out of circulation for a while, and the
Soviet Federation had asked one of their candidates to step down (and
ASKED them, rather than TOLD them), the US would have no right to kick.

Telling your candidates to sacrifice their games in tournaments so that
one particular candidate would win is another matter.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
^  Dr. J(effrey Neil Burch)                 jb118@prism.gatech.edu    ^
^  Georgia Tech Research Institute                                    ^ 
^  Electro-Optics and Physical Sciences Laboratory                    ^
^  Atlanta, Georgia                                                   ^
^  30332                        When in peril, or in doubt,           ^
^  404-894-3628               Run in circles, scream and shout.       ^ 
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
From: karttu@mits.mdata.fi (Antti Karttunen)
Subject: Number of chess positions (was Re: complexity.....)
Organization: MITS, Helsinki, Finland
Date: Tue, 15 Sep 1992 22:21:52 GMT

In article <1992Sep8.035008.2707@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu> jpgraham@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (John P Graham) writes:
>In reference to the many postings giving very different estimates
>as to the number of LEGAL chess positions :
>There are 2x10E43 possible distinct legal positions in chess ..
>according to Fox and James (Complete Chess Addict).
>Also noteworthy is 2.5x10E116 possible 40 move games (sequences).
>
>there it is .... John.

Did they give any procedure how they had arrived to these values?
Especially I wonder how the latter value can be computed without
expanding the whole move tree (which certainly would take a looooong
time ;-), unless it's very rough estimate.

Hmm, log2(2x10E43) is 143.84, so in principle the board position
could be encoded with only 144 bits (mere 18 bytes), plus maybe
couple of bits for the castling & en-passant information, if such
'details' are not already taken into account in those 2x10E43
legal positions.

-- 
Antti Karttunen       --  $B%"%s%C%F%#!!%+%k%C%H%%%M%s(J  (et{ty|t|n)
karttu@mits.mdata.fi  --  Apatheist, although not particularly proud of it.
From: fry@tara.harvard.edu (David Fry)
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
Subject: F-S II game 5 comments
Date: 10 Sep 92 04:11:05 GMT
Article-I.D.: husc3.1992Sep10.001105.15505
Distribution: world
Organization: Harvard Math Department


   "I made a couple of oversights and missed a couple of things.
Especially, I didn't see f5 coming." 
               - Fischer

   "When you're losing with white, you know there's something wrong."
               - Stefan Djuric

   "Essentially, Bobby became a victim in a very unnatural way.
He played strong, logical moves and ended up in a bad position. He 
was playing very clear, good moves, but his opponent played better."  
               - Yasser Seirawan

David Fry                                  fry@math.harvard.edu
Division of Applied Sciences               fry@huma1.bitnet
Harvard University                      ...!harvard!huma1!fry
Cambridge, MA  02138
From: tab@qt.IPA.FhG.de (Thomas Bantel)
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
Subject: Re: ICS ???
Date: 5 Sep 92 09:48:30
Organization: /users/tab/.organization
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: fanny.qt.ipa.fhg.de
In-reply-to: stud02@cc4.kuleuven.ac.be's message of Wednesday, 2 Sep 1992 21:39:41 +02

In article <1992Sep2.213607@cc4.kuleuven.ac.be> stud02@cc4.kuleuven.ac.be (Kris Van Hees) writes:

   Hello,
   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?
   Regards,
   Kris.
   ------
   stud02@cc4.kuleuven.ac.be
   GUTEST6@cc1.kuleuven.ac.be
	  @BLEKUL11.BITNET


I think eve has been shutdown too, at least I could not connect the last
few weeks. But you can try the new server 

valkyries.andrew.cmu.edu

Regards

Thomas
From: pope@walnut.kpc.com (John Pope)
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
Subject: Re: F-S II (Game 5) - analysis
Date: 10 Sep 92 21:52:06 GMT
Organization: Kubota Pacific Computer, Inc.

(Bruce Harper) writes:
>   The right continuation for Fischer would appear to have been either 21.h4!? or
>   21.a3!?, which both offer a positional sacrifice of the exchange on a1.
>   [...]
>   If Black accepts the sacrifice, he comes under a very heavy attack.  If he
>   doesn't, White avoids all the problems he had in the game.  Probably 21.a3!? is
>   the better move, so if 21...Qf6 22.Rb1, followed by 23.Nh2-g4 or 23.h4.

I dunno, 21.a3 seems like a weak move to me. It accomplishes nothing
positive and weakens squares on the Q-side, while the compensation
after 21...Ba1 22.Qa1 appears nebulous at best. For example, 22...Qe7
23.Bc3 a5 (...f5 is not black's only means of counterplay!) and now
24.Bh8 Qf8 just helps black, while 24.e5 doesn't lead to anything.

>   Fischer is playing very passively, in contrast to Spassky.

I think the problem with Fischer's play in this game was not
passivity, but, surprisingly, lack of a solid plan out of the opening
(which used to be his hallmark). After moves 19-22 he was probably
already worse. In particular, 19.Ba5 in combination with 20.b3 just
weakens the dark squares and strands the B on a5.  Maybe 19.Qc1 Kh7
20.Ba5 Nfd7 21.a4 would have been an improvement.
--
John Pope
pope@kpc.com
Kubota Pacific Computers, Inc.
(408) 987-3362
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess,rec.games.programmer
From: nates@ll.mit.edu ( Nate Smith)
Subject: Re: <None>
Organization: MIT Lincoln Laboratory
Date: Thu, 10 Sep 92 15:07:29 GMT

In article <1992Sep9.122058.3990@desire.wright.edu> jbatka@desire.wright.edu writes:
>
>Rather than storing what piece is in square, store each piece with its
>coordinates and (for pawns) whether it can be taken en passante, can
>castle (for Kings and Rooks).  There are only 32 pieces (1/2 the number
>of squares) and this decreases as time goes by so you can eliminate them
>as they are taken.  Each piece should be storable as an 8 (maybe 12) bits
>and should be reduced as pieces are captured.
>
>   Jim Batka  | Always remember ...                        | Buckaroo

what about storing each occupied square & its contents, then end it with a
blank byte:

    each square that has something in it        what it is

      |<-----------6 bits------------->|      |<--3 bits-->|

there are 8 kinds of pieces in chess:  king, queen, bishop, knight,
                                       castle-able rook, uncastle-able rook
                                       en-passantable pawn, unenpassantable

at the beginning, 32x9 = 288 bits.

oops, no way to end it with a blank --> have first 5 bits indicate how many
occupied/contents pairs follow:

     answer = 5 + 9n  =  293 at beginning, less & less as time goes on....

- nate
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
From: jhc@m2lll.uucp (James H. Coombs)
Subject: Re: F-S II Game 8 (analysis)
Reply-To: jhc@iris.brown.edu.UUCP (James H. Coombs)
Organization: IRIS - Brown University
Date: Tue, 15 Sep 1992 18:25:52 GMT

In article <15138@mindlink.bc.ca> Bruce_Harper@mindlink.bc.ca (Bruce Harper) writes:

>My point was that 33.Qc3 is the type of move that's difficult to see during a
>game, especially late in a session in time pressure (because it isn't "natural"
>to put the Queen on a square where it can be taken by a Rook), although it's
>easy to see once it has been pointed out - and it is easier to see for a
>computer because to a computer everything (or nothing) is "natural".  Computers

I have worked through a bunch of tactics books, and I find it hard to
believe that a GM would find it "unnatural" to offer a Queen sacrifice
that would win the game and would at least save material.  It is
certainly not obvious to us beginners, but what is "natural" to us is
naive to them, and what is "natural" to them is mystifying to us.

--Jim
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
From: pleroy@us.oracle.com
Subject: Re: Kasparov vs. Letterman 1989 Move List w/annotation
Organization: Oracle Corporation, USA
Date: Tue, 15 Sep 1992 02:19:51 GMT
X-Disclaimer: This message was written by an unauthenticated user
              at Oracle Corporation.  The opinions expressed are those
              of the user and not necessarily those of Oracle.

In article <1992Sep12.012655.11903@panix.com>, paul@panix.com (Paul Gatker) writes:
> 12-04-89
> 
> Subj: Kasparov vs. Letterman   
  Moves abd comments deleted

> 
> 23.  GK: You're in good company.  All of the grandmasters have been
>           checkmated by me. 
> -- 
> *******************************************************************
> paul@panix.com                                    COMPULITE GRAPHICS
> Brooklyn NY usa                                Design & Consultation
> ********************************************************************

Actually, angel or devil, good or bad player, Bobby FISHER is still
a Grand Master and I don't think Gary KASPAROV has ever played 
against him. 

True or false ?

Patrick LEROY (NC)
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
From: perlman@qso.Colorado.EDU (Eric S. Perlman)
Subject: Re: ICS Blitz Tourney Results
Organization: University of Colorado, Boulder
Date: Mon, 14 Sep 1992 16:16:44 GMT

In article <QegeOtK00iU4EZ=24e@andrew.cmu.edu> jc79+@andrew.cmu.edu (John Anthony Chanak) writes:
>
>The Internet Chess Server on valkyries.andrew.cmu.edu held its first blitz
>tournament yesterday (Friday, Sept 11).  A short description of the tourney 
>follows:
>
>The swiss system tournament was held between 6:00 and 8:45 EDT, with 5 rounds.
>The turnout was impressive-- we were expecting about 15 - 20 people to drop
>by and take part.  We were pleasantly surprised when 32 people asked to play.
>In fact, more than 32 wanted to join, but, due to time constraints and lack
>of materials, we limited the tourney to 5 rounds and enforced a maximum of
>32 people.
>
>The ratings of those in the tournament varied greatly-- from unrated, 803, to
>1936.  (This is ICS Blitz rating, not USCF rating.  USCF ratings are probably
>100 - 300 points higher)  

Actually, based on the ratings of those I know on ICS, the difference is
more like 300-500 points.  There was a rgc posting on this some time
ago.

-- 
"How sad to see/A model of decorum and tranquillity/become like any other sport
A battleground for rival ideologies to slug it out with glee." -Tim Rice,"Chess"
     Eric S. Perlman 				 <perlman@qso.colorado.edu> 
  Center for Astrophysics and Space Astronomy, University of Colorado, Boulder
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
From: hau4@ellis.uchicago.edu (sven  hauptfeld)
Subject: Re: F-S II gossip
Reply-To: hau4@midway.uchicago.edu
Organization: University of Chicago Computing Organizations
Date: Thu, 10 Sep 1992 15:01:37 GMT

In article <1992Sep8.211224.15478@husc3.harvard.edu> fry@tara.harvard.edu (David Fry) writes:
>
>He also said he would never play in Serbia under the present political
>climate. "My opinions would forbid me to play in that country."
>Kasparov was glad the match was drawing attention to chess, but he was
>afraid it would backfire if Fischer's outbursts continued.
>

Kasparov also boycotted the Belgrade tournament last November (or December),
along with Korchnoi. The chess world can be proud to have such a champion.

	Sven

Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
From: palane@iastate.edu (Paul A. Lane)
Subject: Re: Question about posting game comments...
Organization: Iowa State University, Ames IA
Date: Sun, 6 Sep 1992 18:43:41 GMT

In <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?

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

Move by move should be legal. This is equivalent to showing box scores.
Commentary by individuals should also be permitted. Including the pre-
vious message in a post (as above) is entirely equivalent. CIS and AOL
do not copyright individual's messages.

However, posting commentary from API or published reports in newspapers
would require permission from the source.

Paul Lane