HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: jarmo@ae.tut.fi (Jarmo Sorvari)
Subject: Re: F-S II game 12 Spassky wins - moves
Organization: Tampere Univ. of Technology, Finland.
Date: 1 Oct 92 11:04:08


In article <JARMO.92Oct1105633@ae.ae.tut.fi> jarmo@ae.tut.fi (That's me) writes:

> In article <1992Sep30.173624.15979@husc3.harvard.edu> fry@zariski.harvard.edu (David Fry) writes:

> >    Spassky Fischer
> >    White Black
> >    1. d4 Nf6
> >    2. c4 g6
> >    3. Nc3 Bg7
> >    4. e4 d6
> >    5. f3 O-O
> >    6. Be3 Nc6
> >    7. Nge2 a6
> >    8. h4 h5
> >    9. Nc1 e5
> >    10. d5 Ne7

> I wonder what the current evaluation is for the line where Black
> sacrifices a pawn here with 10.- Nd4 11. Nb3 c5 12. dc6 bc6 13. Nd4
> ed4 14. Bd4?  The Finnish GM Heikki Westerinen used to play this way a
> lot in the 70's (although I think he played 7.- Rb8 instead of 7.-
> a6).

A small addition:  however, I think 8. h4 h5 had not happened in the
lines Westerinen played.

This is all from the top of my head, I'll check when I get home.
--
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
! Jarmo Sorvari                         Control Engineering Laboratory      !
! jarmo@ae.tut.fi                       Tampere University of Technology    !
--------------------------------------- BOX 527, 33101 Tampere, Finland -----
From: cayley@plains.NoDak.edu (Michele Cayley)
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
Subject: well, after a quick check, i have concluded that our system must be goofy, or i am just incompetent at posting news and using jove sorry to take up space and bug everyone
Date: 28 Sep 92 02:12:42 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: North Dakota Higher Education Computing Network


Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
From: davidc@rapnet.sanders.lockheed.com
Subject: Re: E-Mail Chess Game	
Organization: Lockheed Sanders, Inc.
Date: Sun, 27 Sep 92 15:18:09 GMT

In article <Bv54v6.rK@undergrad.math.waterloo.edu>, jclemmen@napier.uwaterloo.ca (Jeff Clemmensen) writes:
> 
> If anyone is interested in playing a game of E-Mail Chess with an average player
> please let me know.
> 
> Jeff.

Why not.

Do you already have another player?
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
From: herbison@manage.enet.dec.com (B.J.)
Subject: Re: Computer vs. Human
Reply-To: herbison@erlang.enet.dec.com
Organization: Digital Equipment Corporation, Littleton, MA
Date: Tue, 29 Sep 1992 16:33:12 GMT


In article <Sep.24.05.48.19.1992.21959@remus.rutgers.edu>, clong@remus.rutgers.edu (Chris Long) writes:

>In article <23SEP199222472348@summa.tamu.edu>, Keith Schaub writes:
>
>> 	Since humans only use, (on average), 10% of their brain, while
>> a computer uses 100% of his so called brain.
>
>The 10% figure is complete bunk.  Perhaps we only understood what
>10% does, but I suspect the true usage figure is close to 100%.

An not only is the 10% figure for humans complete bunk, the 100%
figure for computers is also bunk.

For simplicity, consider a non-microcoded, non-pipelined, single
instruction at a time CPU.  The CPU has transistors for multiply,
for add, for logical operations, for floating point, for registers,
for memory and bus access, and other stuff.  When the computer
adds two registers, the computer isn't using most of the registers,
the multiply logic, the floating point logic, the logical operations
logic, the memory access logic.  That's far from 100% usage.  If
a CPU that supports floating point is used to play chess, I wouldn't
be surprised if the average usage was under 1%.

For more complicated CPUs it becomes much harder to analyize, but
most of the data paths for a CPU are not relevent at any particular
time.  Cache misses, memory and bus waits, and pipeline stalls also
reduce the amount of the available CPU that is actually used.

						B.J.
From: kvdoel@cs.ubc.ca (Kees van den Doel)
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
Subject: Re: chess may be solved?
Date: 1 Oct 1992 09:25:56 -0700
Organization: Computer Science, University of B.C., Vancouver, B.C., Canada
NNTP-Posting-Host: cascade.cs.ubc.ca

In article <12646@sail.LABS.TEK.COM> tcmaint@sail.LABS.TEK.COM (-Broadband Network Maintenance) writes:
>
>I hope chess is never solved, but for those who want to solve chess
>I will give you a hint. There are 18 solutions, one for each possible 
>opening move. Just trying to help.
>
>--bruce

The following is logically true:

If there are 18 opening moves we will surely see the poisoned pawn variation
of the Najdorf with Spassky playing black.

--Kees
Organization: University of Maine System
Date: Tuesday, 6 Oct 1992 10:16:23 EDT
From: <IO11412@MAINE.MAINE.EDU>
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
Subject: Re: Anand-Ivanchuk 3-1!

Anand, next world champion?
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
From: gilmozzi@stsci.edu (Roberto Gilmozzi)
Subject: F-S II game 13 moves 16-26
Originator: gilmozzi@lucifer.stsci.edu
Organization: Space Telescope Science Institute
Date: Thu, 1 Oct 1992 22:03:16 GMT

To give a break to David Fry, here are moves 16-26 of game 13. 
(I got them on the phone, so any typos are mine) 

Roberto

>   Fischer Spassky
>   (White) (Black)
>   1. e4 c5
>   2. Nf3 Nc6
>   3. Bb5 g6
>   4. Bxc6 bxc6
>   5. O-O Bg7
>   6. Re1 f6
>   7. c3 Nh6
>   8. d4 cxd4
>   9. cxd4 O-O
>   10. Nc3 d6
>   11. Qa4 Qb6
>   12. Nd2 Nf7
>   13. Nc4 Qa6
>   14. Be3 Qxa4
>   15. Nxa4 f5

    16. exf5 Bxf5
    17. Rac1 Rfc8
    18. Na5 Bd7
    19. b3 Rab8
    20. Nc3 Kf8
    21. a3 h6
    22. b4 Nf5
    23. Red1 Ke8
    24. Ne4 Rb5
    25. h3 h5
    26. Rd2 a6
From: Bruce_Harper@mindlink.bc.ca (Bruce Harper)
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
Subject: Re: How can we assess Fischer's strength
Date: 26 Sep 92 14:56:49 GMT
Organization: MIND LINK! - British Columbia, Canada
Distribution: world

Easiest answer: wait.
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
From: mzabel@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (Mark A Zabel)
Subject: O'Kelley and L. Day Books
Organization: The Ohio State University
Date: Sun, 27 Sep 1992 23:20:44 GMT

     Helllooooooo!  Are there any chess players left here, or
has everybody just quit playing and decided that it's more
interesting to discuss whether chess is *solvable*?

     Anyway, I was wondering if anybody out there had any
info on the following books.

1. The O'Kelley series that was published by Batsford ~1980.
   I think the books were called "Assess Your Chess Fast" and
   "Improve Your Chess Fast."  Would anyone have any ideas as
   to how one would obtain them?

2. The L. Day ( and others maybe ) series called "Big Clamp."
   I believe it was based on 1.e4 systems where White eventually
   plays f4 against the French, Sicilian, Pirc, ...etc.

I would greatly appreciate any info that I obtain!

-Mark
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
From: tho@tik.vtt.fi (Timo Honkela)
Subject: Re: Progressive tournament
	<1992Sep26.223427.15877@husc3.harvard.edu>
Organization: Technical Research Centre of Finland, Laboratory for Information
	Processing (VTT/TIK)
Date: Sun, 27 Sep 1992 10:15:34 GMT
Distribution: rec

In article <1992Sep26.223427.15877@husc3.harvard.edu>
Noam D. Elkies (elkies@zariski.harvard.edu) writes:
>In article <THO.92Sep26230319@hemuli.tik.vtt.fi>
>tho@tik.vtt.fi (Timo Honkela) writes:
>>     1. f4
>>     2. Nh6 d5
>>     3. e4 d4 Ke2 (free space for the king!)
>>     4. Mate in 4
>
>dxe4 Ng4 Qxd4 Qf2#.  Evidently White's Ke2 didn't work.
>More interesting question: why did Black play Nh6 as opposed to Nf6?

It's a precaution. Square f7 (and accordingly f2 - Qf2#!)
is one of the weakest and Nh6 protects it against certain
mating threats (not there in white's third move, though).
It's possible - of course - that in this particular
case Nh6 is only a mannerism and it wouldn't have been
necessary after f4.

I've heard that there is a publication on progressive chess
openings. Anybody with more specific information?

                            Timo Honkela
From: mazzarel@spam.berkeley.edu (Ariel Mazzarelli)
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
Subject: The weenieness around here
Date: 30 Sep 1992 03:01:29 GMT
Organization: U.C. Berkeley Math. Department.
NNTP-Posting-Host: spam.berkeley.edu

It has got to stop.  I am deleting 80% of the posts just by their titles.
Another 10% would go if I knew what they were about beforehand.

Please stop.

Please.

Make it a rule of thumb:  if you must post a weenie post,  post a good one
to compensate.  Steal something from a book,  delight us with your latest
OTB gem (though if (your rating) + (opponent's rating) > 4000,  it would
be nice :) ),  or tell a joke. 

Anything.  Do anything,  but please,  when you feel your weenieness coming
out and posting (yes we all suffer from this from time to time),  please
count to 10,  and wait for it to go away.

Ariel
PS:  I saw Tal reading r.g.c. last night.  He muttered something while hitting
the "k" key over and over again.  That's why I had to post.  He might
unsubscribe if we don't remedy this situation.
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
From: pope@walnut.kpc.com (John Pope)
Subject: EG study
Organization: Kubota Pacific Computer, Inc.
Date: Wed, 30 Sep 1992 18:55:39 GMT

For those few, mostly silent chessplayers who still read this group:

	White to play and draw

         8 - - - - - - - -
         7 - - - - - - - -
         6 - - p - - - - -
         5 p k p - - - R -
         4 - - - - - - - B
         3 P - - - - - - -
         2 - - p - - - K -
         1 - - - - - - - -
           a b c d e f g h

The solution will be posted in a few days.

--
John Pope
pope@kpc.com
Kubota Pacific Computers, Inc.
(408) 987-3362
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
From: juffi@ai.univie.ac.at (Johannes Fuernkranz)
Subject: Re: F-S Match, ratio wins/draws. WHY?
Organization: Dept.Medical Cybernetics&Artificial Intelligence,Univ.Vienna,Austria,Europe
Date: Fri, 2 Oct 1992 14:04:40 GMT

In article <15884@mindlink.bc.ca> Bruce_Harper@mindlink.bc.ca (Bruce Harper) writes:
>A good question.  I think there are two possible answers:
>
>1. The format of ten wins being required (draws not counting) means that
>treading water by playing for draws is unlikely to produce results.

Definitely not. Think of the endless championships played for 6 wins with Karpov
in it. Especially the one against Kasparov which had to be stopped because of too
many draws. No, it's not the mode of play of the championship, it's the style of
play of both players. Especially Fischer is always out for the kill (I didn't like
him trading queens that early though). And Spassky doesn't seem to choose drawish
openings either. 
>
>2. The match is not being played at a particularly high level, so blunders
>are occurring on both sides.
I agree with the blunders, but I think part of it is that in the kind of positions
they are getting after saccing the exchange or stuff it's quite easy to overlook
something, even for Grandmasters. Remember Karpov's blunders?
>
>3. If you get over $1.5 m if you lose, it makes it a bit easier to take
>chances.
This may be true for Spassky, but it's good for the games in any case.

					--- Juffi (2139 USCF, 1981 Austrian)
-- 
					--- Juffi

Johannes Fuernkranz                                    +43-1-5336112(Tel)
Austrian Research Inst. for Artificial Intelligence    +43-1-5320652(Fax)
From: mab@wdl39.wdl.loral.com (Mark A Biggar)
Subject: Re: A different variant of chess
Organization: Loral Western Development Labs
Date: Tue, 29 Sep 1992 21:54:24 GMT

In article <1992Sep29.085753.25111@ucsu.Colorado.EDU> cuffell@spot.Colorado.EDU (CUFFELL TIMOTHY MICH) writes:
>In article <CONVERSE.92Sep27001834@sloth.uchicago.edu> converse@cs.uchicago.edu (timoshenko) writes:
>Interesting idea.  I think you need more rules.  Otherwise it is very drawish.
>K+B+N, K+B+B, K+R, and K+Q v. K are all draws.  You need at least K+R+R to con-
>struct a mating position, and that might not be forcable.  (One rook simulates
>the edge of the board to get the standard K+R v. R, right?  Except the king
>has infinity to run sideways to.  I don't know if opposition can be forced.)
>An ordinary chess can be decided by a single pawn, and most certainly by a
>piece.  How competitive is a game where a queen isn't decisive?

To force the K+R+R vs K mate note that the 2 rooks when mutually supporting
each other form an open ended box that the opposing king can not escape.
This box can easily be made narrow enough so that your king can block the
open end.  So move both your rooks to the other side of the opposing king
from your king.  Close the box down being carefull to prevent escape out the
open end with your king  Then it is easy to move into the following position:
                 K
R 
          k
R

If the opposing king ever moves in to the same verticle file with your king
then moving the upper rook down one square is mate.  To force the mate just
move your king to the left until you force the killing move.

--
Mark Biggar
mab@wdl1.wdl.loral.com
From: mrosen@csd4.csd.uwm.edu (Michael David Rosen)
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
Subject: Strategy and Tactics
Date: 4 Oct 1992 09:03:16 GMT
Organization: Computing Services Division, University of Wisconsin - Milwaukee
Distribution: usa
NNTP-Posting-Host: 129.89.7.4
Originator: mrosen@csd4.csd.uwm.edu

I'm not sure what the problem is here defining the difference between Strategy
and Tactics.  Chess has a few tactical weapons available to the player:
Capture, Pin, Fork, Check, Double Check, Discovered Check, and Pawn Promotion.
I've probably omitted some here but there are really not that many tactical
elements.

Positional elements have to do with weak and strong squares, ranks, and files.
It also includes development of plans based on openings and pawn structures;
considerations of space and tempo.

Tactics may be employed to achieve Strategic goals. When those goals are 
achieved, if the plan was good, there should be better tactical resources
available to you than to your hapless (strategically outplayed) opponent.

As far as what you should study (S or T), at the outset go with what you
enjoy. When you feel that you need to add to your knowledge then look to
other elements of the game.

When I started out I played Q-pawn openings because they tended to "let me
live" longer than the seemingly sharper K-pawn openings. After a while, I 
felt the need to improve my tactical play and, in doing so, began playing
K-pawn openings with more open positions.

It really boils down to *your* goals. Do you want to be a master? Do you 
want to beat your buddy who's getting a little too arrogant?
If you're serious then study seriously; if you're in it for fun then 
relax and enjoy the game at your own pace and in your own sweet time.

MOST OF ALL, BELIEVE EACH AND EVERY WORD WRITTEN IN EACH AND EVERY 
CHESSBOOK!!  THOSE GUYS ARE *ALL* GENIUSES* AND THE REST OF US ARE MERELY
"MONKEYS PLAYING WITH WATCHES!" ;^)

Seriously, take all advise, professional or otherwise, with a grain of salt.

mrosen

Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
From: sharring@cs.tamu.edu (Steven L Harrington)
Subject: needed: sites for tal and misc games
Organization: Computer Science Department, Texas A&M University
Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1992 17:34:50 GMT


Could someone please direct me to the site for Tal games via ftp.
There was some talk of such games several months ago, but I lost
the address. Also, any info on other ascii games available via ftp
would be _greatly_ appreciated.

-thanks, 

Steve Harrington
Texas A&M University
From: soloway@midniteoil.Eng.Sun.COM (Mark Soloway)
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
Subject: Re: ChessMaster 3000 for MAC?
Date: 5 Oct 1992 23:57:54 GMT
Organization: Sun Microsystems, Inc.
Distribution: world
Reply-To: soloway@midniteoil.Eng.Sun.COM
NNTP-Posting-Host: midniteoil

In article Qeo7NfK00iVgA1wZNa@andrew.cmu.edu, "John O. Kim" <jk5x+@andrew.cmu.edu> () writes:
>	I was wondering if ChessMaster 3000 is available on the Mac yet ot if
>it will be....If not...What chess program do you know of that can play
>over 2100 AND is System 7 compatible

CheckMate! for the Mac by Interplay is supposed to be stronger then
ChessMaster 2100.  I run it on my PowerBook 100 running System 7.0.1...

						- Mark
__________________________________________
\_Mark Soloway (mark.soloway@Eng.Sun.COM)_\
/_Distributed Systems Services (ToolTalk)_/
\__SunSoft (A Sun Microsystems Company)___\


Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
From: jeff@econ.Berkeley.EDU (Jeffrey C. Ely)
Subject: re: F-S II game 12 (?): comments
Organization: Chessnews list (chessnews-request@tssi.com)
Date: Thu, 1 Oct 1992 03:50:06 GMT



I think Spassky deserves credit for this win.  He won it with excellent 
opening preparation and sheer out-manouvering.

Going over the pawn sacrifice in my previous post, I think white has a
clear extra pawn and a good grip on the position after 11 Qxb3 c5
12. dxc6 bxc6 13. o-o-o Qe7 14. c5 d5 15. exd5 cxd5 16. Nxd5 Nxd5 17. Qxd5
Rb8 and now 18. Bg5!  (note this is another advantage of Spassky's early h4
since by responding ...h5 Fischer cannot easily drive this bishop away).

I don't think Fischer will return to the KID in this match unless he comes up
with a great improvement.  (One other note:  Anyone who is familiar with
John Watson will know that he often very conveniently gives a favorable 
evaluation of critical lines such as this one.)  :(
--Jeff
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess,sci.math
From: winkels@lri.jur.uva.nl (Radboud Winkels)
Subject: Re: A proposal for a variant of chess
Organization: Social Science Informatics
Date: Fri, 2 Oct 1992 11:27:08 GMT

You state the only thing that changes is having the two palyers move
at the same time. I see some problems with the rules though:

What happens when the two players move pieces that will occupy the same field?
Who captures whom?
What with "check", "mate" and "stale mate" if the king can move simultaneously...

Radboud
--

    \\//    _    ____  _     Radboud Winkels
    //\\   | |  |  _ \| |    Dept. of Computer Science & Law
    \\//   | |  | |_| | |    University of Amsterdam
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
From: kbs4580@summa.tamu.edu (SCHAUB, KEITH BRADLEY)
Subject: Please stop
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41    
Organization: Texas A&M University, Academic Computing Services
Date: Wed, 30 Sep 1992 14:43:00 GMT

	Enough already again from a different person. We are tired of
having to read your solvability crap. E-mail to each other so we can
read something interesting. Besides, I don't see any of you writing the
program to do it. That's like saying, "We can travel at the speed of light.
We just have't got the engine to do it yet." 

Give me a break. Go Fischer!

Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
From: schiller@whorf(Eric Schiller)
Subject: Re: Converting Fide algebraic to Computer algebraic
Reply-To: schiller@sapir.uchicago.edu
Organization: University of Chicago Computing Organizations
Date: Sat, 3 Oct 1992 20:15:03 GMT

In article <28809@life.ai.mit.edu> cracraft@rice-chex.ai.mit.edu (Stuart  
Cracraft) writes:
> 
> Hi,
> 
> I have several megabytes of Fide algebraic moves I want to convert
> to computer algebraic (e.g. Nf3 => g1f3).
> 
> Does anyone have some software that can do this?
> 
> The purpose is simply to enlarge an opening book for a non-commercial
> ratings test against net players, the result of which will be announced
> on info-gnu-chess@prep.
> 
> Thanks,
> Stuart
Good thing it is non-commercial. The USCF passed a rule last year,
at my instigation, requiring support for legal notation in all
chess programs which will compete in USCF events.

Why don't you just add a parser for algebraic, like everyone else?
--
***** ** *** **** ***** ** *** **** ***** ** *** **** ***** ** *** ****
Eric Schiller                              schiller@sapir.uchicago.edu
Dept of Linguistics, Univ. of Chicago      schiller@whorf.uchicago.edu
                                  
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
From: chinch@cs.cornell.edu (Shirish Chinchalkar)
Subject: xics 2.0 available by anonymous ftp from valkyries
Organization: Cornell Univ. CS Dept, Ithaca NY 14853
Date: Sun, 4 Oct 1992 22:33:26 GMT

  Version 2.0 of xics is available by anonymous ftp from
valkyries.andrew.cmu.edu. In pub/chess/ics-clients. File: xics-2.0.tar.Z
Older versions of the program are also available (files: xics-0.0.tar.Z
and xics-1.0.tar.Z). It can handle board style 8 and now comes in 3 sizes.
The README file is appended below. As usual, there is also a man page in
the tar file. To extract its contents, type

  uncompress xics-2.0.tar.Z
  tar xvf xics-2.0.tar

  Enjoy,

  Shirish.

----------------------------------------------------------------------
                              XICS

  To build xics, you need to type one of the following:

 (1) make big
 (2) make medium
 (3) make small

 The only difference between the three is the size of the board. 
 If you first make a big xics and then decide to build a small one, you need
 to type "make clean" before typing "make small".

 If some include files or libraries are missing, edit the makefile and
change the following lines:

LDIR = /usr/local/lib
IDIR = /usr/local/include
INSTALL_DIR = $(HOME)/bin/

suitably. If you don't know anything about UNIX and don't know how to locate
the X-windows include files and libraries (assuming they are located in
non-standard places), ask the system administrator (NOT me!).

**********************************************************************
  If for some reason, telnet.c does not compile, does not link, or if the
mouse does not work, copy "telnet.c.orig" to telnet.c and recompile.
**********************************************************************

  VERY IMPORTANT: YOU MUST USE BOARD STYLE 1 OR 8 FOR THIS PROGRAM TO WORK.
WHEN LOGGED ON TO ICS TYPE "help style" FOR INFORMATION ON DIFFERENT BOARD
STYLES.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

  To run the program, type

  xics valkyries.andrew.cmu.edu 5000
    or
  xics 128.2.232.4 5000

  To look at the man page, type

  nroff -man xics.man
    or
  more xics.man.formatted

  Note: the server location and port number may change; read the FAQ in
the newsgroup rec.games.chess for up-to-date information.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

  Send comments, suggestions, bug reports, bug fixes to chinch@cs.cornell.edu

  If you had to modify xics in order to make it work, please tell me what
machine you use (name of manufacturer and type of UNIX) and exactly what
modifications you made.

  This program has been tested (successfully) on the following systems:
  Sun-3, Sun-4, IBM RS-6000, Decstation 5000, HP-9000, and IBM RT. If you
have succeeded in running this program on any other platform, please let
me know.

----------------------------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
From: taylor@dominy.enet.dec.com (Bruce J. Taylor)
Subject: Standard piece pattern?
Organization: Digital Equipment Corporation
Date: Wed, 30 Sep 1992 17:24:51 GMT


This isn't really a question about chess as a game, but rather about chess sets.

I'm a wood turner searching for new challenges, and would like to turn a nice
chess set for a friend of mine who really does play. So I've been keeping my
eye on sets, looking for a pattern that I liked. What I've noticed is that
there seems to be exactly one very handsome standard pattern, and many, many
really ugly ones (including all those Civil War sets - ecch).

Is it true? Is there a "standard" for piece height, profile, and weight? If
so, where can I get a copy.? I could reproduce the pieces from examples if
I had to, but I'd have to keep them a long time, and it's a lot easier to
work from profile diagrams.

While I'm here, is there a standard for the wood? I've been planning to 
do the white pieces in boxwood, and the black in either ebony or rosewood,
because all three take detail very well. Any other candidates spring to mind?

I always hate it when people ask for advice and then say "please reply by
e-mail, as I never read this conference," so I won't say that. However, I
really don't check in here every day, so an e-mail copy would be appreciated.
I'll promise to summarize all responses, and report on whatever I find.

				- bruce taylor
			          a mediocre player, but a great turner