HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: kevin@eye.com (Kevin Stokker)
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
Subject: Nimzovitch Defense
Date: Mon, 28 Sep 92 19:01:29 GMT
Distribution: world
Organization: 3D/EYE, Inc.  Ithaca, NY

I had the honor of playing my first chess celebrity, Alex Dunne, in tournament
this past weekend in Corning, NY.  I was white, and after my 1. e4, Dunne
replied with 1. ...Nc6.  I guess my basic question is: according to people's
experience, what is the best way for white to obtain an advantage here?  After
the game, Dunne showed me the following gambit:

2. d4  d5
3. Nc3 ed
4. d5  Ne5
5. Bf4 Ng6
6. Bg3 f5

Ok, so, what now?  Are there people out there with experience in these lines?
Or perpaps in other lines where you have found a solid advantage with white?

In the actual game I tried:

2. d4  d5
3. ed  Qxd5
4. Nf3 Bg4
5. Be2 O-O-O
6. Nc3 Qa5
7. Be3 Nf6
8. O-O?

This was the mistake.  After 8. ...e5, I lost two pieces for the rook, and lost
the endgame.  Dunne showed me where I needed to play 8. Nd2, after which follows
8. ...Bxe2 9. Qxe2 (not 8. ...Nxd4?? 9. Bxd4 Rxd4 10. Nb3, winning).  But it
definately would seem that Black has easily achieved equality now.  So, back to
the original question, how have people achieved an advantage with white against
the Nimzo?

Thanks,
Kevin (~1700 USCF)
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
From: twg9323@tamsun.tamu.edu (Todd Gruben)
Subject: Looking for Suggestions
Organization: Texas A&M University, College Station
Date: Tue, 29 Sep 1992 16:22:36 GMT


As part of my senior design project, our group has decided to write
an graphical chess database program that will possibly run under
mac, windows, and X.  We are looking for functions that you would consider 
a must for such a program.  We are also considering any sort of bells
and whistles that might tickle your fancy. 

Thanks for any response

Todd Gruben
Unix Help Desk
Texas A&M University
gruben@batman.tamu.edu
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
From: linb@ucs.orst.edu (Benjamin Lin)
Subject: Re: Standardized Notations for Siamese + Xiangqi
Organization: University Computing Services - OSU
Date: Wed, 30 Sep 1992 15:57:31 GMT

In article <1992Sep29.213545.23135@news.vanderbilt.edu> LIPSCOJA@ctrvax.vanderbilt.edu () writes:
>Actually, coordinates are not used in xiangqi notation. A move is generally
>indicated by: piece letter, file of departure, +/-/=, and file of arrival.
>In numbering the files, 1 is at the far right of the player whose piece is
>moving.  Since a piece moving vertically can move to many squares on its own
>file, its notation is letter, file, +/-, and distance moved.
>Examples (from the opening position):
>left elephant to center          E7+5
>right elephant to center         E3+5
>right cannon to central file     C2=5
>right cannon forward as far 
>     as possible                 C2+4
>center soldier forward           S5+1

>center soldier left              S5=6

This is an illegal move right? just checking...
BTW, does anyone know the english term for (gwi jow ma) -funny legged horse?

>> What about notation for Siamese (bughouse) chess?

>But for a server, It would be sufficient for each player to send in moves in
>any of the normal notations, with provisions for drops.
>In algebraic, one could simply give the move normally, with a $ used as x
>is for captures, e. g. R$e2 means rook drops on e2. For pawns, either $e2
>or P$e2 would do.

>Andy Lipscomb
>lipscoja@ctrvax.vanderbilt.edu

Good stuff! will someone volunteer to create a siamese chess server?
I think Michael Moore's ICS already does most of the functions.
I am no programmer, but I would be glad to test beta versions :-)
Here are some features I would like to see.  like the currect ICS,
a command kibitz (of course shorted to 'k') would allow you to tell
your partner AND both your opponents what pieces you want.  Normally,
you would only see your board. If you really wanted to, you could
refresh your partner's game with 'refresh p' I guess players could
avoid telling the other side what pieces they want by simply using
tell.  Maybe it isn't that important for them to know???
when your opponent captures a piece and you type 'refresh', a piece
should appear on the side of the board.  Likewise, you would be able
to see your opponents stock of pieces.  Instead of having to redraw
the whole board and messing up a players view everytime a piece is
captured, a simple message saying 'you just received a knight' would
be adequate.  To see all the pieces you have, you would use 'refresh'
The function to check for legal placement moves is pretty simple.
1 check if piece used is available   
2 check if target square is empty
3 if piece used is a pawn, make sure target rank is not 1 or 8

It would be interesting to take out the code disallowing moves
leaving a player in check.  This way, kings could be captured just
like in real siamese.  I think there is quite a bit of interest in
a siamese server!
From: fry@tara.harvard.edu (David Fry)
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
Subject: Re: Fischer-Spassky game 15:  bewilderment
Date: 5 Oct 92 07:22:16 GMT
Organization: Harvard Math Department

In article <9210042343.AA22309@econ.berkeley.edu> jeff@econ.Berkeley.EDU (Jeffrey C. Ely) writes:
>   Could Fischer have played Rxe3 instead of taking the bishop on
>f3 ?  ( I can't remember the move number right now, but the game went
>Qa3 Bxf3 and Fischer took the bishop with his f-pawn.)

You mean e-pawn.  Yes, Fischer could have played 24.Rxe3 but 24...Be4
keeps Black alive, at least for a little while (I don't see any
obvious piece-winning White replies, and I think Black can free
himself from the pin).   I suppose Fischer played 24.exf3 because he
thought he could eat the free Bishop catch the paused pawn.  I think
he could have if he had played 23.Qa4 instead of Qa3, which is what I
understand Deep Thought recommended.  With the White Q on a4 instead
of a3, doesn't it look like Black has to lose after 24...e2 25. Re1?
                                         

David Fry                                  fry@math.harvard.edu
Division of Applied Sciences               fry@huma1.bitnet
Harvard University                      ...!harvard!huma1!fry
Cambridge, MA  02138
From: tcmaint@sail.LABS.TEK.COM (-Broadband Network Maintenance)
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
Subject: Re: chess may be solved?
Date: 1 Oct 92 23:42:30 GMT
Organization: Tektronix, Inc., Beaverton,  OR.


Group,

In a post I referred to 18 opening moves, there are twenty. (Foot-in-the-mouth)

--Bruce
From: mginsbur@rnd.GBA.NYU.EDU (Mark Ginsburg)
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
Subject: Re: Book Review: The Leningrad Dutch
Date: 29 Sep 92 16:28:20 GMT
Article-I.D.: rnd.30313
Organization: NYU Stern School of Business

I have a strong sense that the Leningrad Dutch is rather poor for black.
In the example game that Mr. Russell gives, after 7...Nc6, I
firmly believe that 8. d5! leads to white advantage.  In my opinion,
8...Na5?! leads to a bad Panno and 8...Ne5, as played in the
sample game, can be met by either 9. Nxe5 dxe5 10. Qb3 or by the
immediate 9. Qb3.  The only wrong way for white to go is the way he
went in the sample game, which is 9. Nxe5 dxe5 10. e4?! f4! which is
giving black obvious counterplay.

After my suggestion 9. Qb3, numerous opponents of mine, such as IM Rizzitano
and SM Gregg Small, could not resolve the positional difficulties.

Now, I move to the more interesting point:  what happens after 
Malaniuk's favorite, 7...Qe8!?.  This question I believe white can
solve with:  8. Nd5! Nxd5 9. cxd5 Qb5 10. e4!, an invention of mine
which found its way into A. Martin's "Trends..." series (MG - Bareev,
Naestved '88).  I don't know if this new book covers 10. e4 at all,
but it has been more or less ignored since.  Now, though, I have had
the chance to test it versus Deep Thought 2, on the Internet
Chess Server.  I am pleased to report it has passed the chip test:

but details must wait till the next _Chess Chow_ magazine appears.

DT-2 has reverted to the older line, which is 9...c6, but 
prevailing theory holds this to be bad after 10. Qb3 cxd5 
11. Qxd5+ Kh8.  I couldn't prove this, though, in the test games!
Sure looks bad...but how to keep up the pressure.  

Summary:  I think the Leningrad Dutch is a system which incurs too
many positional weaknesses.  I think therefore that White should
have an appreciable edge in all lines.  I welcome comments as to
how Black should play in any of the lines I have discussed.

--IM Mark Ginsburg

p.s.  there already has been some discussion of 7...Qe8!? in
Khalifman-Piskov, Bundesliga 1992, as given in _Chess Chow_, where I
point out the similarities of Khalifman's treatment and my game vs.
Bareev.  What is missing there is the deeper analysis made possible
by the DT-2 test games.  I will try to get hold of the book
Mr. Russell is reviewing, but here I am taking a shot in the dark
and making the blanket statement that white is better.  This view
is a combination of positional intuition and personal record vs. the
system (the latter is much less important, but always creeps into
a player's opinion).
From: goldfarb@ocf.berkeley.edu (David Goldfarb)
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
Subject: Re: "My System" by Nimzovich - explanation
Date: 27 Sep 1992 06:36:09 GMT
Organization: The Sinister Icy Black Hand of Death Club
Distribution: world
Reply-To: goldfarb@ocf.berkeley.edu (David Goldfarb)
NNTP-Posting-Host: whirlwind.berkeley.edu
Originator: goldfarb@whirlwind.berkeley.edu

	So what you're saying is that if we *must* read _My System_, we 
should read _The Life and Games of Mikhail Tal_ at about the same time, yes?
(Another book that greatly influenced my play, though at the time not wholly
for the better.)

-- 
   David Goldfarb          | "Think of the ragged poverty of a language that 
goldfarb@ocf.berkeley.edu  | has to make one word do the work of six, and a
goldfarb@UCBOCF.BITNET     | poor weak thing of three letters at that."
                           |  -- Mark Twain, "The Awful German Language"
From: onar@hsr.no (Onar Aam)
Subject: F-S?
Organization: Rogaland University Centre
Date: Wed, 30 Sep 1992 11:59:00 GMT

When does the game start?

Onar.
From: elkies@ramanujan.harvard.edu (Noam Elkies)
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
Subject: Re: mirror, mirror on the board...
Date: 27 Sep 92 02:39:44 GMT
Article-I.D.: husc3.1992Sep26.223945.15878
Organization: Harvard Math Department

In article <Sep.26.18.30.11.1992.2404@thorogood.rutgers.edu>
miklas@thorogood.rutgers.edu (Keith Miklas) writes:
>suppose that you are playing a novice who is quite an inexperienced
>chessplayer.  He knows that you are a superior player, and decides to
>mirror each and every one of your moves.  What's the best strategy to
>play against this person?

Is this opponent inexperienced enough to fall for 1.c4 c5 2.Qa4?! Qa5??
3.Qc6??? Qc3????? 4.Qxc8# :-?

The symmetrical Petroff would produce a more plausible game, requiring
no outright blunders from either side until 5...Qxe5??

--Noam D. Elkies (elkies@zariski.harvard.edu)
  Dept. of Mathematics, Harvard University
From: tennis@ziff.com
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
Subject: Re: the mother of all chess variants
Date: 27 Sep 92 00:34:44 EDT
Organization: Ziff-Davis, Medford MA

In article <9209231751.AA20500@econ.berkeley.edu>, jeff@econ.Berkeley.EDU (Jeffrey C. Ely) writes:
> 
> 
> 
> Suppose you eliminate every piece from the board.  Then you paint every other 
> black square red and set the upper right corner of the board on fire.  Now
> see if you can juggle two black rooks and a white queen while trying to 
> pick up all 16 pawns with your feet and arrange them in the shape of a
> star.  Do this with the flaming board spinning around on your head and say
> three times quickly "Boy I sure hope the Fischer match starts up again soon so
> we can have some real chess to discuss."
> 
> 
> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++|+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> Jeff Ely                         |    "He said the Sun's not yellow...  
> Department of Economics          |     It's Chicken!" 
> UC Berkeley        

That needed to be done. Thank you. :)
Tony Ennis

Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
From: lizn@uts.amdahl.com (Elizabeth Neely)
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
Subject: can someone send me game13
Date: 5 Oct 92 19:29:15 GMT
Reply-To: lizn@amdahl.uts.amdahl.com (Elizabeth Neely)
Organization: Amdahl Corporation, Sunnyvale CA

I never saw the moves for game13 posted, although I've got all the games
besides that up to #15. Can someone mail me game 13?

			thanks, Liz Neely
			lizn@uts.amdahl.com
Xref: sparky rec.games.chess:8227 sci.math:12363
From: loeb@greco-prog.fr (Daniel LOEB)
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess,sci.math
Subject: Re: A proposal for a variant of chess
Date: 25 Sep 92 10:04:55 GMT
Reply-To: loeb@geocub.UUCP (Daniel LOEB)
Organization: Greco Programmation du CNRS

In article <1992Sep21.152035.12341@newstand.syr.edu> hgraber@lynx.cat.syr.edu (Harry Graber) writes:
>Suppose chess were played with three people
>instead of two. The two who actually play the game decide upon the moves
>they wish to make and submit them to the third person, who moves both
>white's and black's men simultaneously. That is the only difference
>between this game and the way chess is played now: white does not go
>first.
>     There are two questions that come to mind right away, although we
>certainly welcome all your input on other aspects as well. Our first question
>is: can it be argued from symmetry alone that optimal play by both white and
>black must lead to a draw?

No such argument can be made.  
Consider a simpler example: the game Rock-Paper-Scissors. 
With perfect play, the "second" player always wins.
However, when players are forced to play "simultaneously" the best
either can do is to play randomly. Each then has 1 chance in 3 of
winning, of losing, and of drawing.

I expect that in your game, White and Black would each have some
probability p of winning and losing, and some probability 1-2p of
drawing under ideal play. 
  
>The second is: given that the day is approaching
>on which the best chess computers will be able to compete with the best 
>human players, will this variant of chess prevent the computers from obtaining
>an overwhelming advantage based on an ability to perform a very deep search
>of the future game space? The reason we think it might is that playing this
>new way means that the value of a move is much harder to assess than in the
>present game.

This variant would be more difficult for a computer to play than
normal chess, but on the other hand, it would also be more difficult
for a human to play.

It sounds like a fascinating variant. I'd like to hear a more detailed
explanation of the rules, and then hit the chess board!

 
-- 

Yours, Daniel Loeb				loeb@geocub.greco-prog.fr
HOME 	150, cours Victor-Hugo; Appt D45; 33000 Bordeaux France
WORK	LABRI; Universite de Bordeaux I; 33405 Talence Cedex France
From: edward.m.hummel@mailbox.bison.mb.ca (edward.m.hummel)
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
Subject: Re: Chess is not solvable
Date: 25 Sep 92 01:24:16 CST

Organization: AT&T

In article <1992Sep24.155805.21139@cis.uab.edu> hyatt@cis.uab.edu (Robert Hyatt) writes:
>1.  the game of chess *IS* solvable.  That is, from the opening move, either
>white wins, black wins (unlikely) or the perfect game is a draw.  

OR the game has an "undetermined" result because the game never
ends.  As long as we are talking nuances, I still see some hand-waving
in the arguments that an "optimal" player can be theoretically
developed.  If the result of "solving" the game is that the game
has either a solution of "white draws or it is undetermined" then
I think it is not strictly solved.  In any case, I don't see that
an "optimal" solution can be found.  It will depend upon the choice
of the value of "undetermined" loops.

 * Origin: The Electronic Mailbox (1:348/7.0)
From: wchang@phage.cshl.org (William Chang at Cold Spring Harbor Lab)
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
Subject: Re: Standardized Notations for Xiangqi
Date: 30 Sep 92 18:53:13 GMT
Article-I.D.: phage.BvEn4p.9DE
Organization: Cold Spring Harbor Lab, Long Is New York

In article <1992Sep29.045938.7057@nuscc.nus.sg> engp2063@nusunix1.nus.sg 
(NG CHEE MUN SIDNEY) writes:
>
>Xiangqi games to the group, let me briefly explain the notations I will be
>using.
>

[Suggestion: RACER instead of rook]

Please give some more detail, since CHARGES +-= can't describe some moves
unambiguously.  

There's a very nice book, Chinese Chess by H.T. Lau, that uses 

  P P P P P
   C     C

  RNMSKSMNR     [I prefer RNBAKABNR]

and f (forward) b (backward) h (horizontally) [I prefer s for sideways]
Also if two pieces of the same type are on the same file, they are
denoted f (forward) and r (rear), as in fRf2.  

I'd rather use a system based on pinyin and +-_ ; and I'd guess that
non-Chinese-speakers would prefer a system that's closer to chess
and uses f b s instead of +-= (for pronouncibility).  CHARGES seems
unnatural to me--I will have to translate H back to "ma", and I suspect 
others will have to translate it to "knight".  Everybody will have to
learn a new system.

Is this a big deal?

-- Bill Chang (wchang@cshl.org)
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
From: tho@tik.vtt.fi (Timo Honkela)
Subject: Re: Progressive chess (mate in 5?!)
	<1992Sep24.211835.2453@craycos.com>
Organization: Technical Research Centre of Finland, Laboratory for Information
	Processing (VTT/TIK)
Date: Sat, 26 Sep 1992 17:17:44 GMT
Distribution: rec

jrbd@craycos.com (James Davies) writes:
>In article <Sep23.031051.84792@yuma.ACNS.ColoState.EDU> gordons@CS.ColoState.EDU (vahl scott gordon) writes:
>>jrbd@craycos.com (James Davies) tries to negate my analysis via:
>>>In article <Sep20.195726.83424@yuma.ACNS.ColoState.EDU> gordons@CS.ColoState.EDU (vahl scott gordon) writes:
>>>>tho@tik.vtt.fi (Timo Honkela) writes:
>>>>>jtol (white) - tho (black), 18th of September, 1992
>>>>>
>>>>>1. d3
>>>>>2. f6 d6
>>>>>3. f3 e4 Be2
>>>>>4. e5 Ke7 Nh6 g5
>>>>>5. d4 dxe5 Bxg5 Nc3 exf6+
>>>>>6. Kf7 Qxf6 Qxg5 Qc1 Qxa1 Qxd1+
>>>>>7. Bxd1 e5 exd6 d7 dxc8Q Ke2 Qxc7+
>>                            ***             NOTICE!  ATTENTION!
>>>>>8. How does black mate?
>>>>8. Kg6 Bc5 Nc6 Rad8 Rxd1 Rhd8 R8d2++ (doesn't even require all moves).
>>>Rxd1 is check, so this isn't legal.
>>
>>I think my original line stands.  The king is not in check if it's on e2.
>
>Right you are...sorry about that!

In the original game:
8. Nd7 Rg8 Rg3 Rxf3 Bb4 Bxc3 Nf5 Nd4++

But what about this: (from jtol-tho)

1. d3
2. Nf6 d5
3. f3 Bg5 Kd2
4. h6 hxg5 Rxh2 Rxh1
5. Mate in five (or less) moves?? (It's possible!)

--
P.S. Progressive chess is serious intellectual activity. Not all
the tactics and intuitions from "normal chess" are valid, but
one must (at least should) take into account the changes in the
real life, too. And it seems that you and me are better in
progressive chess than any program is :-) (Please inform if you
know a program for progressive chess!)
From: drchip@cup.portal.com (MYRON A LIEBERMAN)
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
Subject: Re: Youngest GM/IGM?
Date: Sat,  3 Oct 92 10:45:58 PDT
Organization: The Portal System (TM)

> very fine line between GM and IGM

It is a very fine line indeed. It is no line at all. The correct abbreviation
for the International Grandmaster title is IGM but GM is used as a shorter
way of referring to it. They are one and the same. Fischer was indeed the
youngest player to achieve the IGM (GM) title but it was most assuredly
not in 1970 - try 1958. The only other possible argument for the youngest
player is Judit Polgar (1992), who earned the title at essentially the same
age as Fischer. Since Fischer received his title 12 years before 1970 and
Polgar 12 years after 1970, the average is...... Perhaps that is where 1970
came from.  :-)
Xref: sparky rec.games.chess:8231 sci.math:12370
From: hrubin@mentor.cc.purdue.edu (Herman Rubin)
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess,sci.math
Subject: Re: A different variant of chess (infinite board)
Date: 29 Sep 92 00:46:24 GMT
Organization: Purdue University Statistics Department

In article <1992Sep28.212539.20447@wdl.loral.com> mab@wdl39.wdl.loral.com (Mark A Biggar) writes:
>Chess on an infinte board is a very uninteresting game, because checkmates
>are virtually impossible.  Most checkmates work by crowding the opposing
>king into a real or virtual corner (a virtual corner is formed using
>an edge and other pieces in place of the other edge).  On an infinite
>board there are no edges so producing the necessary corner in almost
>impossible.  In fact the only mate I can think of is the obvious
>mate involving 2 rooks and the queen:

>R
> Q     K
>  R

It is not nearly so difficult.  Remember that the king can act as an "edge."
It is not difficult to mate with queen and rook.  I do not know how much
weaker one can go.
-- 
Herman Rubin, Dept. of Statistics, Purdue Univ., West Lafayette IN47907-1399
Phone: (317)494-6054
hrubin@snap.stat.purdue.edu (Internet, bitnet)  
{purdue,pur-ee}!snap.stat!hrubin(UUCP)
From: eb11@quads.uchicago.edu (Ernest Barreto)
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
Subject: What is this notation? Smythescript?
Keywords: Smythescript
Date: 1 Oct 92 16:10:47 GMT
Reply-To: eb11@midway.uchicago.edu
Organization: University of Chicago Computing Organizations

In article <1992Oct1.022807.28789@cbnewsh.cb.att.com> gls@windmill.ATT.COM (The Ace and Deuce of Programming) writes:
>Paul Morphy might still be alive today ... if he had known SMYTHESCRIPT!
>
>  Game 7       Game 8       Game 9       Game 10      Game 11      Game 12    
>Bobby Boris  Boris Bobby  Bobby Boris  Boris Bobby  Bobby Boris  Boris Bobby  
>F     F      A     7XXI   F     F      A     7XXI   F     N      A     7XXI
>7XXU  7XS    N     S-     7XXU  7XS    N     F-     7XXU  7XS    N     S-
>34    T-     7XN   31     34    T-     7XN   34     34    S-     7XN   31

Would somebody post a note briefly explaining this notation?

E
From: u855ops12@ucsvc.ucs.unimelb.edu.au (Patrick Blanchard)
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
Subject: Re: What is this notation? Smythescript?
Date: 2 Oct 92 03:23:29 GMT
Organization: The University of Melbourne

In article <1992Oct1.161047.16934@midway.uchicago.edu>, eb11@quads.uchicago.edu (Ernest Barreto) writes:
> In article <1992Oct1.022807.28789@cbnewsh.cb.att.com> gls@windmill.ATT.COM (The Ace and Deuce of Programming) writes:
>>Paul Morphy might still be alive today ... if he had known SMYTHESCRIPT!
>>
>>  Game 7       Game 8       Game 9       Game 10      Game 11      Game 12    
>>Bobby Boris  Boris Bobby  Bobby Boris  Boris Bobby  Bobby Boris  Boris Bobby  
>>F     F      A     7XXI   F     F      A     7XXI   F     N      A     7XXI
>>7XXU  7XS    N     S-     7XXU  7XS    N     F-     7XXU  7XS    N     S-
>>34    T-     7XN   31     34    T-     7XN   34     34    S-     7XN   31
> 
> Would somebody post a note briefly explaining this notation?
> 
> E


   I was hoping someone would ask!! :->



Patrick Blanchard,
Information Technology Services,
University of Melbourne,
Melbourne, Australia.
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
From: mann@src.dec.com (Tim Mann)
Subject: Re: Gnuchess for Mac
Organization: DEC Systems Research Center
Date: Thu, 1 Oct 92 07:37:26 GMT


3.0 is a very old version.  3.1 is much better, and there is a 4.0
that is still evolving and recently seems to have surpassed 3.1 in
playing strength as well as having fewer bugs.

Unfortunately, the Free Software Foundation is currently boycotting
Apple because of Apple's notorious "look and feel" copyright lawsuits.
This means that people working with FSF are requested not to port any
FSF software to Apple machines.  The GNU Chess developers have been
honoring this request.  Of course, you could get the 4.0 sources and
port them yourself, but the FSF asks that you don't. 

(I'm just reporting my understanding; my ties with the FSF are very
tenuous.)

	--Tim