HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: met48546@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (Marc E. Talbot)
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
Subject: Re: K-K games rigged?
Date: 4 Sep 92 20:38:19 GMT
Article-I.D.: news.Bu2Mnx.Jpv
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana

jmk@cbnews.cb.att.com (joseph.m.knapp) writes:

>In a New York Times article, it was mentioned that Spassky also believes
>that the Karpov/Kasparov match was rigged. Does this lend credence to 
>Fischer's claim? They did say that such allegations are common in
>the "paranoid" world of high-level chess though.

>---
>Joe Knapp   jmk@cbvox.att.com

I read that article too.  I got the impression that Spassky was just going
along with Fischer in order not to cause trouble.  Although I can't remember
his exact comments, they seemed to be a remark along the lines of "Yeah, Game
19 of the 3rd match was kind of strange."

I think that after the match is over, Spassky will distance himself from 
Fischer's tirades.

Marc
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
From: alopez-o@neumann.uwaterloo.ca (Alex Lopez-Ortiz)
Subject: Re: computers that intentionally slip up (was Re: chinook)
Keywords: update
Organization: University of Waterloo
Date: Fri, 28 Aug 1992 16:41:36 GMT

In article <1992Aug28.064606.22271@ists.ists.ca>, os9ug@gkcl.ists.ca (OS-9 User Group) writes:
> 
> I have to say I have always strongly opposed the argument that says the
> superior players should intentionally make a mistake on the presumption
> that the inferior player won't catch them.  
> 
> Perhaps my argument doesn't apply to computers so readily, since the
> main thrust is to claim it is a bad habit, and leads to careless play.
> However, something still bothers me about the whole idea of this.  I
> would rather play my best possible game, and lose; than make a move I
> know is wrong and win.  I get no satisfaction out of such "victories".

Sometimes it is not so clear cut. A common practice is to play the "coyote"
move.

"Coyote" moves are non-opitmal moves which are nevertheless not wrong,
and have only ONE non-trivial reasonable reply. So you move away from
optimality in the hope that the other player won't find the only good
reply, and if he/she does finds it, nothing really bad has happened.

Say, loosing a little bit of initiative against Kasparov is the worst thing
you can do, because he'll hang on to any advantage he gets from your 
non-optimal moves, until he has accumulated enough strength to blast
you --all in less than 20 moves.

But if you're certain that the player is a 1800, a non-optimal move is
not going to affect you. After all most of his/her moves are non-optimal
too!


Alex

p.s. I'm a highly non-optimal player, and a "coyote" player too!


-- 
Alex Lopez-Ortiz                              alopez-o@maytag.UWaterloo.ca
Deparment of Computer Science                       University of Waterloo
Waterloo, Ontario                                                   Canada
From: ralf@ark.abg.sub.org (Ralf Stephan)
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
Subject: Re: Fidelity "dying"
Date: 02 Sep 92 10:08
Organization: Private Coherent 4.0.1 site Augsburg/Bavaria/Germany

jhc@ivan.uucp (James H. Coombs) writes:
> The recent CCR reports that Fidelity Electronics lost $3 million in
> 1991.  The owners canceled manufacturing of new machines in the U.S.
> and laid off most of the employees.  It looks as though Fidelity will
> become U.S. sales for Mephisto.  Two of the top people at Fidelity
> formed Excalibur Electronics, which is importing Sphinx computers.
> 
> If you want a Fidelity, it looks as though you will have to buy from
> the current stock, but then better machines are coming from Mephisto,
> etc.

I thought Fidelity was already owned by Mephisto.

--ralf, 1700 ELO (non-USCF)
From: vadim@ohstpy.mps.ohio-state.edu
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
Subject: What defense (on e2-e4)Fischer would dislike most?
Date: 4 Sep 92 19:24:16 GMT


 I think that the most "unconvinient" defense against Fischer's e4
would be 1)...e6 .  I remember that young Fischer alwais told that
the position after 2)d4 d5 3)Nc3 Bb4 4)e5 c5 5)a3 Bc3 is WON for whites,
though he (Fischer) frequently had some difficulties in this line.
 But Spassky does not play French usually. Interesting to see what
Spassky play in the 3rd game. Breyer's sistem is not the line to
repeat against Fischer.
-V.
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
From: schiller@tira.uchicago.edu (Eric Schiller)
Subject: Re: FISCHER SPASSKY game 1 - comments
Organization: Center for Information and Language Studies / University of
	Chicago
Date: Thu, 3 Sep 1992 21:24:48 GMT

Wrong! 19.b4 was the novelty.
Eric Schiller
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
From: ron@osf.org (Ron Birnbaum)
Subject: Re: fischer match coverage
Organization: Open Software Foundation
Date: Mon, 31 Aug 1992 14:20:07 GMT

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

In article <1992Aug31.104702.10607@cbnewsl.cb.att.com>, ed@cbnewsl.cb.att.com (edward.m.hummel) writes:
|> Telechess has an advertisement in the August issue of
|> Inside Chess.
|> 
|> Phone number: 1-900-988-0078
|> The info line: Ext 664, "round by round updates on all the action"
|> The game line: Ext 565, "Don't miss a single move"
|> 
|> Average call two minutes.  $2.00 per minute.  Touch tone phone.
|> Under 18 requires parental consent.

  Doesn't this violate the U.S./U.N. trade embargo against Yugoslavia? After
all, they are making money on an event taking place in the restricted area. As
I understood it - NO money can be exchanged based on anything in the restricted
area. Anyway, on principal I am personally boycotting this match, as I dis-approve
of anything in violation of the embargo. This match is illegal according to
U.S. officials, so I won't support or follow it. I urge all to avoid posting
any information about it, and to ingore all information that does get posted
on this perfidious match.

-Ron

PS - OF course, if they move to Belgrade or anywhere else outside of Yugoslavia,
     then there's no problem!

|> 
|> ------------
|> 
|> I'm not in any way associated with Telechess.
From: v5875bza@ubvmsd.cc.buffalo.edu (Michael M Gorman Jr)
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
Subject: bobby's fillings
Date: 3 Sep 92 13:51:00 GMT
Organization: University at Buffalo
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41

Did Bobby  r e a l l y  have his fillings taken out to foil Soviet
attempts to beam in radio waves?  

More importantly, perhaps, did he really think they were trying to
do this, regardless of what countermeasures he might have taken?

I ask because this--far more than merely erratic or self-defeating
behavior--would be a pretty good indication of pretty serious
mental illness.

MG
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
From: hau4@ellis.uchicago.edu (sven  hauptfeld)
Subject: Re: Marshall - ask Fischer
Reply-To: hau4@midway.uchicago.edu
Organization: University of Chicago Computing Organizations
Date: Fri, 4 Sep 1992 01:48:27 GMT

In article <1992Sep3.210043.1132@osf.org> ron@osf.org (Ron Birnbaum) writes:
>In article <1992Sep3.193254.26279@newshost.lanl.gov>, mwj@beta.lanl.gov (William Johnson) writes:
>|> 
>|> This is the more puzzling in that I can't figure out why *anybody* would want
>|> to play the Breyer Variation against Fischer.  It basically concedes White a
>|> slight but lasting advantage through superior control of space and lack of
>|> satisfactory Black counterplay.  There are probably some top-flight GMs that
>|> can be conceded this kind of advantage without any more ill effects than any
>|> other failure to equalize as Black in the opening.  Fischer is, or at least
>|> was, not one of them.  His efficiency in turning that kind of position into a
>|> full point probably is unsurpassed in chess history.  Surely Spassky knew
>|> that; after all, he was a victim of Fischer's technique against the Breyer in
>|> the 10th game of the 1972 match.  So what was going on in his head when he
>|> chose that opening?  Any Spassky seconds on the net? :-)
>|> 
>
>  I know the answer - the match is fixed!!! No doubt about it!! This is all
>  a publicity ploy to sell the new chess clocks.  The match is FIXED!!
>
>
>
>
>-Ron "not as strong a player as Fischer but just as crazy" Birnbaum
>

It would be very un-Fischer-like to play a fixed match. Spassky is weak now.

Sven

Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
From: huie@netcom.com (John Huie)
Subject: Fischer/Spassky Prodigy???
Date: Wed, 02 Sep 92 04:13:39 GMT
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services  (408 241-9760 guest) 
Distribution: Rec.games.chess

Hello
	This is my first post so please bare with me. 
I recall someone on Rec.games.chess asking weather a person who has
prodigy access to post the match on Rec.games.chess.  I do have Prodigy
access, if its ok with everybody I can post the match, but I will post
it only after the match ends probably.  I know that when the match begins
it will be morning in the USA. Does anyone know the exact time (EST)?
Thanks in advance.



John Huie
huie@netcom.com
jhuie@mary.fordham.edu

Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
From: morphy@cco.caltech.edu (Jones Maxime Murphy)
Subject: Fischer Spassky Game 1 Tidbits
Organization: California Institute of Technology, Pasadena
Date: Wed, 2 Sep 1992 22:06:04 GMT

Luis Busquets tells me that Fischer got into an altercation with the organizers
and referee which delayed the game 5 minutes and had the spectators holding
their breath. He sat down at the board and didn't make a move for 10 minutes.
When he played 1.e4 there was a collective sigh of relief and some high-fiving
going on.:)

After the game Fischer was ebullient, analyzing for a while with the always-
polite Spassky. (IM) John Grefe was very impressed with Fischer's play, although
I suppose the analysts in this group will have lots to say...
Jones
-- 
Jones M Murphy Jr                                        (212) 602-4375
NatWest Investment Bancorp, National Westminster Bank PLC
100 Wall Street, New York, NY10005                   FAX (212) 269-0113
From: tasst2+@pitt.edu (Teri A Sobolik)
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
Subject: Posting to rec.games.chess
Date: 3 Sep 92 13:56:00 GMT
Article-I.D.: pitt.kedVZka2ATvuECd0Qm
Organization: Chessnews list (chessnews-request@tssi.com)


I am new to internet, and would like to know if I can post to rec.games.chess by sending E-mail to this address.  I would appreciate a reply. Thanks.
From: mikeehli@cie.uoregon.edu (Mike Ehli)
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
Subject: Fischer cartoon
Date: 4 Sep 92 00:14:26 GMT
Organization: University of Oregon Campus Information Exchange

Jack Ohman of the (Portland) Oregonian drew a cartoon on the subject of
the current match, which appeared on today's (Sept. 3) editorial page:

BOBBY FISCHER INVENTS A NEW CHESS CLOCK
(picture of Bobby at the board with the clock)
 
Clock: BZZT!
 
Bobby: Hmmm.  Time to say something crazy...

--Mike Ehli
  (mikeehli@cie.uoregon.edu)
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
From: rcs@cs.arizona.edu (Richard Schroeppel)
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
Subject: Re: CJA Awards
Date: 27 Aug 92 20:04:48 GMT
Organization: U of Arizona, CS Dept, Tucson

When an author presents an opening system, there are *sometimes*
perfectly legitimate reasons for omitting his losses with the
system.  For example, he may have simply blundered; there's not
a lot of point in including such a game.  He might feel that he
didn't handle the system exactly right, and now advocates a
different treatment.  He might have been experimenting.  His
opponent might have been vastly superior, and the result isn't
a reflection on the system but rather the disparity in skills.
The loss may be irrelevant from a teaching or explanation
viewpoint.

Then of course, there are the less legitimate reasons:  The system
might be bad.  The author may not have the stomach to recognize
the significance of his losses.  Or the author may simply be
too disorganized, or unskilled, to evaluate the games.

Without seeing the losses, it's hard for another player to decide
if the omissions make sense.  But column inches are dear, and
including irrelevant games simply to prove the author's honesty
is very dear.

In the case under discussion, I think the suggestion of an
opposing view article, perhaps discussing the omitted games,
is the right one.

Rich Schroeppel  rcs@cs.arizona.edu

Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
From: prabhak@atto.cs.umn.edu (Satya Prabhakar)
Subject: Request for Info: Chess computers (any used ones out there?)
Organization: University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, CSci dept.
Date: Wed, 2 Sep 1992 11:30:30 GMT

I recently bought a $160 chess computer from Radio Shack (max
rating 2150). I just love it. But the price is daunting. I
am wondering if there are any better computers out there that
can be procured via mail order for less. Or, even better, does any of
you have a used one that you are willing to sell? 

So, please let me know if there is an FAQ on this (if so, how to get it)
or if you are interested in selling yours (rating not less
than 2100).

Thanks in advance and best regards,

Satya Prabhakar 
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
From: wbralick@afit.af.mil (Will Bralick)
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
Subject: Re: Boycott
Date: 2 Sep 92 15:55:00 GMT
Organization: Self-similar

In article <1992Sep2.152702.20641@afit.af.mil> wbralick@afit.af.mil (Will Bralick) writes:
>
>My introduction of the "in my house" analogy wasn't so much a non sequitur 
>as it was ridicule of the extremism of your first response.  The first word 
>out of libertarians' mouths always seems to be ``totalitarian'' and this
>renders discourse with them .
>
Duh ... ``renders discourse with them'' ... uninteresting.

Regards,
-- 
Will Bralick                          |  If we desire to defeat the enemy,
             wbralick@afit.af.mil     |  we must proportion our efforts to 
             bralick@cs.psu.edu       |  his powers of resistance.
with disclaimer;  use disclaimer;     |               - Carl von Clauswitz
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
From: dheyser@dazixco.ingr.com (Doak Heyser)
Subject: Chess via modem between two people?
Organization: Dazixco
Date: Thu, 3 Sep 1992 22:01:12 GMT


   Is there any program out there that will allow two people to play
chess with each other via modem?  Any help greatly appreciated.  Thanks.


- Doak Heyser
From: hagerp@moose.cs.indiana.edu (Paul Hager)
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
Subject: Re: FISCHER/SPASSKY...PREDICTIONS
Date: 1 Sep 92 19:01:49 GMT
Organization: Computer Science, Indiana University

dweddin@uoft02.utoledo.edu writes:



>Predictions:
>append your predictions underneath......


>______________________________________________________

>Fischer  10
>Spassky   2

>The match will be over in under 40 games.

>This prediction is based on the fact that Bobby has done 
>nothing but play chess since 1972 while Borris went skiing.

>Donald Wedding
>Toledo, OH

>______________________________________________________

Fischer -- forfeit
Spassky -- the winner by default

Fischer does not receive the 1.65 million looser's share and
is therefore not jailed upon his return to the U.S.  Fischer
does, however, have new fillings put in his teeth to replace
the ones removed years back when the Russians were beaming
interference into his brain via the old fillings.
-------------------------------------------------------
-- 
paul hager		hagerp@moose.cs.indiana.edu

"I would give the Devil benefit of the law for my own safety's sake."
                       --from _A_Man_for_All_Seasons_ by Robert Bolt
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
From: Ron_Kownacki@transarc.com
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
Subject: Re: fischer match coverage
Date: 1 Sep 92 01:51:08 GMT
Organization: Carnegie Mellon, Pittsburgh, PA


>>restricted area. Anyway, on principal I am personally boycotting this match,
>>as I dis-approve of anything in violation of the embargo. This match is
>>illegal according to U.S. officials, so I won't support or follow it. I urge
>>all to avoid posting any information about it, and to ingore all information
>>that does get posted on this perfidious match.
>>
>>
>>
>> -Ron

Laudable to take a stand on your convictions, especially when any chessplayer
would love to watch a Fischer-Spassky rematch.  But lets remember, we are far
from a collective agreement on this issue.

Individuals may choose to boycott, so lets give them the choice.  We can all
skip past things we aren't comfortable reading.  I'm just not comfortable with
my government telling me what I should read.

Ron Kownacki
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
From: stein@tellabs.com (stein)
Subject: Fischer, who else ?
Keywords: controversy redux
Organization: Tellabs, Inc.
Date: Thu, 3 Sep 1992 23:33:45 GMT

I'm puzzled why so many people are getting bent out of shape by Bobby's
comments. As said by other posters this is not at all inconsistent with
his antics of the early '70s. Fischer's Monty Pythonesque moves could
propel us to hitherto unknown heights of hilarity. I enjoy observing
Bobby "stirring up the ants". :-)

On the issue of representing the game Bobby is just fine by me. I've
always felt that far too much emphasis has been placed on the correctness
of those who are supposedly representing the game. In striving to make
chess activities palatable for the public we seem to have forgotten that
brilliant people tend to have idiosynchrasies. Is it in the game's best
interest to attract people who think it's hip or those who have a
genuine interest in the game ? I contend that the latter will not allow
distractions to interfere with their pursuit of the game. The comparison
of Spassky vs. Fischer on representing the game is a comparison of apples
vs. oranges. Boris certainly is the ultimate sportsman, but Bobby is a
character and as such adds color. BTW, the German "sympatisch" does not
translate directly to "sympathic". In describing Boris I think the 
intended term was "personable".

Although I thought I didn't care if Fischer returned, now that he has,
chess seems to have a special charm long forgotten. A certain mystique
akin to the "try 'em again for the first time" slogan of that Kelloggs
commercial. Perhaps in me like others who learned the game in the early
seventies, Bobby's return may be triggering fond memories. Yasser
Seirawan does a great job of expressing the feelings which many of us
may share in his "Inside Chess". I for one am glad that Bobby is back.

Vom Land der unbegrennzten Moeglichkeiten,
					       Pete Stein



   "The errors of great men are more fruitful than the truths of little men"

				   ---  Friedrich Nietzsche
From: Bruce_Harper@mindlink.bc.ca (Bruce Harper)
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
Subject: Re: Spassky/Marshall
Date: 3 Sep 92 20:24:31 GMT
Organization: MIND LINK! - British Columbia, Canada
Distribution: world

I told you I might be wrong.  I always avoided the Marshall by playing 9.d4
instead of 9.h3, so I never had to look at any of Spassky's games in the
Marshall.

But apart from revealing my ignorance, that's good news, isn't it?  We might
actually see a Marshall - but there weren't any in 1972, as I recall.
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
From: LIPSCOJA@ctrvax.vanderbilt.edu ()
Subject: Re: The 179th Demand...
Organization: Vanderbilt University 
Date: Thu, 3 Sep 1992 04:51:34 GMT
X-News-Reader: VMS NEWS 1.21

In <1992Sep3.015318.7322@oswego.Oswego.EDU> kinne@oswego.Oswego.EDU writes:

> Hello Folks:
> 	History is being made again, whether you agree with it or not.
> I'd like to ask on some related, but ancient history.  According to
> reports I have Fisher refused to defend his title because FIDE would
> only agree to 178 out of 179 demands Bobby made.  What was the demand
> Bobby made that FIDE would not agree to?

I believe it was that there be no limit on the match (in other words, that
draws not count). Either that or a tie-match clause at 9-all. In the first
case, that was THE mos important of all.
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
From: loon@underdog.ee.wits.ac.za (LOON M J)
Subject: Re: Opening Help!!!!!!
Organization: Wits Electrical Engineering (Undergrads).
Date: Fri, 28 Aug 1992 11:54:10 GMT

Dear Sir,

I don't know much theory but:

>The Latvian Gambit and the Jaenisch agaisnt white's e4 and e4 followed by 
>nf3 
I love the Latvian - don't know much theory though. I got smashed once 
in a tournement (me = black). But it was me, not the opening! What is the 
Jaenisch?

>e5 if white plays the English or anything else that gives me the center
1. c5  e5
2. Nc3 Nf6     
3. Nf3 e4    g3 c3 
4. Ng5 b5    etc...
5. Nb5 c3    
6. Nc3 d5

>The King's Gambit as white agaisnt e4. The King's Indian Attack agaisnt
>half-closed openings such as the Caro, French, Sicilian.
My favourite line (Kieseritsky attack, I think):
1. e4  e5
2. f4  ef
3. Nf3 g5 
4. h4  g4 
5. Nd5 h5

Also what about the (I think its called) the Two Bishops:
1. e4  e5
2. d4  ed
3. c3  dc
4. Bc4 cb
5. Bb2
I'm not sure if the B on b2 is strong/useful enough to justify the extra 
pawn. But what great games it produces!

What is the King's Indian Attack??

>Your comments are more than welcome!
Hope so: doubt I was of help, though. 
Your replies will be as welcome!
--
Marc Loon <loon@underdog.ee.wits.ac.za>
Student No: 8807871/X (just thought you'd want to know)
University of the Witwatersrand
Johannesburg

Conversation: a voice competition between two people
in which the one taking a breath is called the listener.
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
From: 11432918@eng2.eng.monash.edu.au (AMIR SHIRAZIRAD)
Subject: American University of Cairo
Organization: Faculty of Engineering, Monash University 
Date: Fri, 4 Sep 1992 14:06:01 GMT

Hi, I know that this doesn't belong here, but I don't know where to put
it, so it might as well be here!

Does anybody know the eletronic (e-mail) address the 
American University of Cairo?

Please Reply via email to 11432918@eng2.eng.monash.edu.au

Ta Muchly dudes
From: simon1@bass.bu.edu (Simon Streltsov)
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
Subject: Re: Time controls
Date: 3 Sep 92 19:39:50 GMT
Article-I.D.: bu.95312
Reply-To: simon1@bass.bu.edu (Simon Streltsov)
Followup-To: rec.games.chess
Organization: Boston University

In article <1992Sep3.182606.3747@mnemosyne.cs.du.edu> bwatkins@nyx.cs.du.edu (The God of all machines) writes:
>
>Karpov says he tried to meet with Fischer for a match after 1975, and they
>did arrange all the details and a plan.  He also explains that when the 
>Brass at the Russki Chess Fed. got wind of the arrangements, they balked
>and would not allow Karpov to play.
Bullshit, he can explain, whatever he wants, but he himself was a prominent
political figure over there.

Let's forget about him, and enjoy Fisher playing.

Simon Streltsov			    	! Disclaimer :
PhD Student,				! I can not speak for the
Dept. of Manufacturing Engineering	! Engineering Dept, ONLY because
Boston University			! I claim to be a mathematician..
From: winders@aux.support.apple.com (Scott Winders)
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
Subject: Re: Chinook-Tinsley results as of Saturday
Date: 25 Aug 92 17:59:08 GMT
Followup-To: rec.games.chess
Organization: Apple Computer, Inc.

In article <1992Aug25.022355.16150@tamsun.tamu.edu>, sharring@cs.tamu.edu
(Steven L Harrington) wrote:
> 
> In article <winders-240892150303@macwinders.support.apple.com> winders@aux.support.apple.com (Scott Winders) writes:
> >In article <1992Aug24.193627.11005@cs.UAlberta.CA>, duane@cs.UAlberta.CA
> >(Duane Szafron) wrote:
> >
> >Let's keep this Checkers stuff off of rec.games.chess....
> >
> >Scott Winders
> >winders@aux.support.apple.com
> >
> >"My opinions are my own, not my employer's"
> 
> 
> *********************
> 
> Let's not. Many of us are interested in it. Thanks...
> 
> -steve harrington
> 

Hey, let's startup a thread on Othello.....

Scott Winders
winders@aux.support.apple.com

"My opinions are my own, not my employer's"
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess