HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: versmiss@let.ruu.nl (Koen Versmissen)
Subject: Re: Budapest gambit
Organization: Faculty of Arts, Utrecht University, The Netherlands
Date:  5 Oct 92 13:52:56 GMT

mkukkone@klaava.Helsinki.FI (Mika Kukkonen) writes:

|>Is anybody willing to give any opinions on this rarer version of the
|>Budapest Gambit 1 d4 Nf6 2. c4 e5 3. de Ne4?  Otto Borik recently wrote
|>a book on the Budapest claiming that this opening is o.k.  
|>I'd be interested to hear what people think of it.
|
|From my experience (and few games I have seen) 4.a3! refutes whole line.
|I can dig up few games with this line, if you are interested.

I don't know about the 4. a3 line. 
However, I remember buying Borik's book a couple of years ago (it's not
that recent - unless the reference is to a translation from the German
original), and playing through his suggested continuation of this line
(i.e. 3...Ne4). He suggests that in the position of the last diagram he
gives, black has a satisfactory game. I didn't like the position, but
couldn't find an advantageous continuation for white. I decided to see
if my chess computer (a Sargon with a low rating, 1900 or so) would be
able to come up with interesting. After only a few minutes, the machine
actually found an immediately winning move! I don't recall the exact
position, but I think it was something like Ra1-e1+, winning black's
queen. So beware of Borik's own analyses, there may be more holes in
them.

Koen Versmissen

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
OTS, Universiteit Utrecht, Trans 10, 3512 JK  Utrecht, NL
E-mail: koen.versmissen@let.ruu.nl - Tel: (+31) 30-536057
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
From: sloan@cis.uab.edu (Kenneth Sloan)
Subject: reinserted (Re: How can we assess Fischer's strength?)
Organization: CIS, University of Alabama at Birmingham
Date: Tue, 29 Sep 1992 03:14:24 GMT

In article <717712154.9@mailbox.bison.mb> Kenneth.Sloan@mailbox.bison.mb.ca (Kenneth Sloan) writes:

...a replay of an article which I posted here a few days ago...

> * Origin: The Electronic Mailbox (1:348/7.0)
>

Please stop.  We are not amused.


-- 
Kenneth Sloan                   Computer and Information Sciences
sloan@cis.uab.edu               University of Alabama at Birmingham
(205) 934-2213                  115A Campbell Hall, UAB Station 
(205) 934-5473 FAX              Birmingham, AL 35294-1170
From: edward.m.hummel@mailbox.bison.mb.ca (edward.m.hummel)
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
Subject: Re: "Solvability" in Chess
Date: 25 Sep 92 07:40:35 GMT

Organization: AT&T

In article <lc47bsINNohc@yoakum.cs.utexas.edu> varvel@cs.utexas.edu (Donald A. Varvel) writes:
>1. I'll chime in with the people saying the requirement to *claim*
>   a draw by 50 move rule or 3-fold repetition is a red herring.
>   The example of both players shuffling knights back and forth and
>   neither claiming a draw is beside the point.  The question is
>   whether the opening position is a win, loss, or draw *with best
>   play*.  After enough knight-shuffling, it's at best and at worst
>   a draw, since either side *can* claim one.  These two rules
>   (and actually 3-fold repetition is sufficient) make the game finite.

I think this argument rest on the assumption that chess is a zero sum game.
How do you prove that?  Suppose the value of an infinite game is less than
a draw for each player (but more than a loss), then neither player
would choose a draw *with best play*.

 * Origin: The Electronic Mailbox (1:348/7.0)
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
From: ed@cbnewsl.cb.att.com (edward.m.hummel)
Subject: Re: Chess is not solvable
Organization: AT&T
Date: Mon, 28 Sep 1992 03:03:02 GMT

In article <Bv9MKK.3uL.1@cs.cmu.edu> jam+@cs.cmu.edu (Joe Mattis) writes:
>Note that I haven't proved that such games must end...indeed, they
>might not.  But I *have* proved that the only possible result from
>such positions (with best play) is a draw.  If it turns out that
>the initial position is such a position, that would be enough (in
>and of itself) to "solve" chess.  After all, if we determined that
>neither White nor Black could forcibly checkmate 
>the other (with best play), that would certainly answer the question that
>started this whole discussion, the intent of which was (paraphrasing):
>	Which is correct?  (a) White can forcibly win.
>			   (b) Black can forcibly win.
>			   (c) Neither can forcibly win.

Joe, you missed the turn.  I have never been challenging Z's result.
Instead, I have been adressing the question of "What is the outcome
(if any) of a game which proceeds with "best play" by both sides?" 
The answer could be:  (a) White wins,
                      (b) Black wins,
                      (c) The game is drawn, or
                      (d) None of the above, i.e., "best play"
                          leads to a game with no outcome.

The rules assign values for wins (1), losses (0) and draws (.5).
The analysis to answer this question is very similar to the
analysis to answer the question you mention, BUT it turns out
to require some additional information.  To many people, this is
somewhat bothersome.

>If you can't understand the proof or its consequences, you'll have
>to ask someone else for help.

I understand the proof you have laid out (I always did).  If you
don't understand the issue I have raised, please feel free to post
a followup or contact me by email.  I'll try to explain it more
clearly.

Ed Hummel
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
From: tho@tik.vtt.fi (Timo Honkela)
Subject: Progressive tournament
Organization: Technical Research Centre of Finland, Laboratory for Information
	Processing (VTT/TIK)
Date: Sat, 26 Sep 1992 23:03:19 GMT
Distribution: rec


An unofficial but international progressive chess e-mail
tournament is about to begin. If you would like to take
part please contact tho@tik.vtt.fi. The participants
will be divided into groups of 4-7 persons. One may use
two weeks for each turn (series of moves). Most of the games
are expected to end in 5-8 turns. Small surprise prizes
for the winner(s)! 

                             Timo Honkela

P.S. As a drill: how would you mate in:

     1. f4
     2. Nh6 d5
     3. e4 d4 Ke2 (free space for the king!)
     4. Mate in 4
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
From: ekw@world.std.com (Elliott C Winslow)
Subject: Re: Query on 6. Bc4 Najdorf
Summary: So much for the Velimirovic
Organization: The World Public Access UNIX, Brookline, MA
Date: Fri, 2 Oct 1992 04:00:53 GMT

In article <1992Oct1.094717.14055@jyu.fi>
ako@jyu.fi (Antti Koponen) writes:

	In article <cemVwFG2ATvuF1bUYt@pitt.edu>
	Teri A Meyers <tasst2+@pitt.edu> writes:

		Lastly, 7...Nbd7 has been revived in recent years; check recent
		issues of the Informant for its status.

	Certainly not. But best move for white is 7.0-0! to prevent the
	Nbd7-system.  After 7.Bb3 Nbd7 seems to give black a reasonable game.

This is a drastic over-simplication, yes?  There is still something to think
about.  Also, after 7.0-0 you can no longer play the lines involving 0-0-0,
which means that 7...Nc6 might be the best answer.

--Elliott
Organization: University of Illinois at Chicago
Date: Monday, 5 Oct 1992 00:13:14 CDT
From: David James Alexander Hanley <U55870@uicvm.uic.edu>
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
Subject: Re: Nimzovitch Defense
Distribution: world

  I played the nimzovich for years.  I don't play any more, so I don't mind
telling what to do againsi it now. ;)

  3. nc3 is IMHO the best move.  3 .. de 4. d5! nb8( ne5? ) leads to a
chaotic game in which white can slip up if he is careless.  However if he plays
carefully, he should be okay, and maintain a slight advantage.

  3. e5 is what many books say is best.  I always liked this move, because
it let be play bf5 and f6 with counterplay.

  2. nf3 allows ..e5 but black can stick to special defenses and get a good
game by ..d6!

  There is a whole book just on this defense.  If I ever take up chess again
I will buy it and go on to confuse and bewilder people.  hehe

dave!
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
     ....      | SEND MAIL TO : HANLEY1@EARTH.EECS.UIC.EDU   NOWHERE ELSE!!!
    " "" "     | "Christianity is stupid" -- Negativland
  @  @  @  @   | "None are as blind as those who have no eyes"
D   A    V   E | "Pay no attention to that mind behind the curtian" - OZ

The university of illinois at chicago is not responsible for my opinions.
However, the American martial arts association and the black dragon
fighting society will defend anything I say to the death.
From: gordons@CS.ColoState.EDU (vahl scott gordon)
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
Subject: looking for...
Date: 29 Sep 92 18:12:41 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: Colorado State University

Sorry to post this....

Bruce Kovalsky, your email isn't working.  I got your followup note,
but I still haven't been able to get a message to you.

                                                            Scott
Xref: sparky rec.games.chess:8089 comp.theory:2053
From: clong@remus.rutgers.edu (Chris Long)
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess,comp.theory
Subject: The Last Word on Chess Solvability
Date: 26 Sep 92 11:44:23 GMT
Followup-To: rec.games.chess
Organization: Rutgers Univ., New Brunswick, N.J.

No three-position draw rule or 50-move draw rule is needed to
show that it is solvable.  The only possible outcomes are Black
wins, infinite game, Black stalemates White, White stalemates
black, White wins; denote these by B, b, I, w, W and assume some
total ordering (for example W>w>i>b>B).  Starting with the initial
setup, generate the game tree recursively.  If one of the four
situations B, b, w, W is reached, mark that branch with the appropriate
value.  If all branches of a given position have been marked, take
the maximum of the value of the branches, assign that value to the
position, and prune.  If a position is repeated, mark with an i and
proceed as above.  Since there are only a finite number of game
positions, this procedure must terminate in a finite number of steps
(in fact, the number of steps is bounded by the number of different
positions).  The *only* assumptions are that the game must be
deterministic, there are a finite number of game positions, and there
is some total ordering among the possible outcomes.  For example, it
follows that shogi and go can be solved, also.

Of course, this is only a theoretical result, and it is unclear
if it is actually physically possible to solve chess.
-- 
Chris Long, 265 Old York Rd., Bridgewater, NJ  08807-2618
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
From: schiller@whorf(Eric Schiller)
Subject: Re: Fischer-Kasparov Dec 1993?
Reply-To: schiller@sapir.uchicago.edu
Organization: University of Chicago Computing Organizations
Date: Fri, 2 Oct 1992 19:29:46 GMT

In article <1992Oct2.153558.189@csghsg5a.bitnet> 86666815s@csghsg5a.bitnet  
writes:
> Re: Fischer - Kasparov match Dec 1993
> 
> Oct. 2, 1992
> 
> First time user, so sorry if something goes wrong.
> 
> Many thanks to all who spent their time providing us with information
> in this system about the Fischer-Spassky match.
> 
> Swiss newspaper today reports about a possible future match
> Fischer-Kasparov. The idea of Janos Kubat ("an director and
> an 'intermediaire' between the sponsors of Fischer's comeback
> and Fischer") is a match of 20 wins and 10 million US-dollars.
> The match would be played on 4 different places: Japan,
> Johannisburg, Chicago (or London, if Fischer can't play in the
> USA), and Belgrade. It would begin December 1993 right after
> the Wch match Kasparov-Short/Timman.
> 
> Kubat reports that Fischer is enthusiastic about this ideas.
> 
> Kasparov does not know yet about the ideas of Kubat, but said
> last week in an german magazin that he would play against
> Fischer "if the world wants this match".
> 
> Michael Haid

Kasparov's terms aren't as loose as all that.
Last week in New York we had lots of discussion about this
topic, and Kasparov will speak for himself on McLaughlin's
One-to-one show later this month.

But drawing my own conclusions from our talks (so this is
just my unofficial opinion), Kasparov is willing to play
Fischer a match provided that the sponsors and location are
"clean". No dirty money like the Serbian affair.

But Fischer has so many conditions on his play, can a deal
really be negotiated? I don't know. I suspect that depends on
just how much Kasparov is willing to concede on things like the
schedule, clock, media coverage.

But if the proposal involves Belgrade, forget it.

I am sure that London and Chicago or Las Vegas would be fine.

I can say this: money will not be an important factor for Kasparov.
It never has been. He has given away his prizes in the past, including
all of his 1986 championship money. 

But Fischer will have to play a lot better than this to make the
match respectable.
--
***** ** *** **** ***** ** *** **** ***** ** *** **** ***** ** *** ****
Eric Schiller                              schiller@sapir.uchicago.edu
Dept of Linguistics, Univ. of Chicago      schiller@whorf.uchicago.edu
                                  
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
From: kirk@alchemy.tn.cornell.edu (Kirk Gunsallus)
Subject: Re: The Last Word on Chess Solvability
Organization: Alchemy International
Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1992 12:46:03 GMT

In article <92279.224127RVESTERM@vma.cc.nd.edu> <RVESTERM@vma.cc.nd.edu> writes:
>"in fact, it would appear that there are an infinite number of values for
>the finite number of chess positions..."
>
> WHAT?
>
> care to share your wisdom with us?
>
please, please no, no, no, no.....

please take it to E-Mail.  we almost had the topic stopped.
>


Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
From: wellerd@ajpo.sei.cmu.edu (David Weller)
Subject: Looking for Alg Notation of fsII games....
Summary: Want an ftp site for fsII games
Organization: Software Engineering Institute
Date: Mon, 5 Oct 1992 10:47:22 GMT

I am looking for an ftp site that might have the notation for
all the FIscher-Spassky games (1-15 as of this posting).  I
have Chessmaster 3000 and can import several forms, actually,
but would prefer alg notation.

AdvTHANKSance.
dgw

Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
From: chris@barrister.ucs.uoknor.edu (Chris L Petroff	)
Subject: Re: EG study
Originator: news@midway.ecn.uoknor.edu
Date: Thu, 1 Oct 1992 17:25:16 GMT
Reply-To: chris@barrister.ucs.uoknor.edu
Organization: University of Oklahoma Cumputing Services

I wish to apologize  first of all for posting with incorrect return address information, this
is now corrected I think.  Secondly, for not saying "SPOILER" or maybe more appropriately
"maybe a possible fish-like spoiler..." in my solution attempt!

Chris
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
From: linb@ucs.orst.edu (Benjamin Lin)
Subject: Sadler??
Organization: University Computing Services - OSU
Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1992 00:52:34 GMT

Does anyone know what has become of the British prodigy M. Sadler?
Apparently he received a 20,000 pound sponsorship a few years ago
when he was 14 years old to buy chess computers and study in USSR.
From: onar@hsr.no (Onar Aam)
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
Subject: Fischers insanity
Date: 29 Sep 92 16:44:41 GMT
Organization: Rogaland University Centre

Many people have uttered that Fischers severe Paranoia makes him play bad.
I think his insanity is one of the reasons why he plays so good. (good is
relative). The only thing I can think of that is negative about his insanity in
playing is that he took a minor break (20 years) from chess. This has, no doubt,
stopped his progression. But apart from that there is nothing that suggests that
his mental cock-up has affected his play in a negative way, rather the opposite.


Onar.
From: doli@troi.cc.rochester.edu (David Oliver)
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
Subject: Re: The Last Word on Chess Solvability
Date: 6 Oct 92 05:53:54 GMT
Organization: University of Rochester (Rochester, NY)


No,not really.
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
From: mann@src.dec.com (Tim Mann)
Subject: Re: F-S II game 12 Spassky wins - moves
Reply-To: mann@src.dec.com
Organization: DEC Systems Research Center
Date: Wed, 30 Sep 92 23:38:18 GMT

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

The game score as posted had an ambiguous move (26. ... Rb7) which
made the game parser in my xboard unhappy.  (Note: I have an as-yet
unreleased version of xboard that detects and reports ambiguous moves
instead of disambiguating them arbitrarily, so your mileage may
vary....)  Here is a corrected game score.

>   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
>   11. Be2 Nh7
>   12. Nd3 f5
>   13. a4 Nf6
>   14. Nf2 a5
>   15. Qc2 c5
>   16. 0-0-0 b6
>   17. Rdg1 Nh7
>   18. Nb5 Kh8
>   19. g4 hxg4
>   20. fxg4 f4
>   21. Bd2 g5
>   22. hxg5 Ng6
>   23. Rh5 Rf7
>   24. Rgh1 Bf8
>   25. Qb3 Rb8
>   26. Qh3 Rbb7
>   27. Nd3 Kg8
>   28. Ne1 Rg7
>   29. Nf3 Rbf7
>   30. Rh6 Qd7
>   31. Qh5 Qxg4
>   32. Rxg6 Qxh5
>   33. Rxg7+ Rxg7
>   34. Rxh5 Bg4
>   35. Rh4 Bxf3
>   36. Bxf3 Nxg5
>   37. Bg4 Rh7
>   38. Rxh7 Kxh7
>   39. Kc2 Be7
>   40. Kd3 Kg6
>   41. Nc7 Kf7
>   42. Ne6 Nh7
>   43. Bh5+ Kg8
>   44. Be1 Nf6
>   45. Bh4 Kh7
>   46. Bf7 Nxd5
>   47. cxd5 Bxh4
>   48. Bh5 Kh6
>   49. Be2 Bf2
>   50. Kc4 Bd4
>   51. b3 Kg6
>   52. Kb5 Kf6
>   53. Kc6 Ke7
>   54. Ng7 resigns
Xref: sparky rec.games.chess:8305 rec.games.go:1997
From: jpxu1@fnalo.fnal.gov
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess,rec.games.go
Subject: Re: mirror, mirror on the board...
Date: 29 Sep 92 19:38:31 GMT
Article-I.D.: fnalo.1992Sep29.133831.1
Organization: Fermi National Accelerator Lab

In article <1992Sep29.134016.1649@ll.mit.edu>, nates@ll.mit.edu ( Nate Smith) writes:
> 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?
>>
>>(ps don't play the stonewall! :)
> 
> there is an old story from Go as told by O.Korschelt.  Long ago the best
> Go players were in china.  there was an arrangement of political cosmetics
> whereby the Crown Prince of Japan was invited to play against the reigning
> chimese champion.  the story goes that for years the chinese champion won.
> then one year the Japanese prince of the time hit upon the idea of playing
> his first Black stone in the exact center (K10) and then symmetrically made
> mirror moves of white's, reflected through that stone.  the story also goes
> that in this manner he actually won, by having the center stone link his
> armies together at the end.  comments were made that - although highly
> unlikely to be true - the level of play in china must not have been too
> strong yet (remember Go is 4000 years old and this was from way back in
> those early years, supposedly), for an easy strategem can be found to
> foil this mirror.
> 
> cheers,
> 
>  - nate

You are wrong nate.  There is no way to stop it. That's what the komi for.

And if you watched the very old chinese games, there were 4 stones before

the game starts.   That actually is  another way to break the symestry.

--jpx 
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
From: chandra@cs.cornell.edu (Tushar D Chandra)
Subject: FSII analysis by gnuan, games 7, 8, 9 & 11, available by ftp
Organization: Cornell University, CS Dept., Ithaca, NY
Date: Sun, 27 Sep 1992 20:50:27 GMT


Hi!

Games 7,8,9,11 have been gnuaned. The raw results are available by
anonymous ftp from "ftp.cs.cornell.edu" in pub/games/chess/fsII. I might
put more games there or increase analysis time (currently 10 or 30 minutes
a move). Enjoy.

Someone PLEEEEASE tell me where I can get Zarkov's analysis.

Cheers

-Tushar Chandra
From: ts@cup.portal.com (Tim W Smith)
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
Subject: Re: Theory of Bobby's Return
Date: Sat, 26 Sep 92 14:31:32 PDT
Organization: The Portal System (TM)
  <cass8806.284@elan.glassboro.edu> <19r23mINN3i2@overload.lbl.gov>
  <1992Sep24.185603.29273@midway.uchicago.edu>

> >I found his recent performance (spitting on the Treasury Dept. notice,
> >etc.) hilarious.   I find the behavior of supposedly sane people in the
> >mountains and valleys around Sarajevo to be "insane" and "dangerous."
> >
> First of all, your Fischer is supporting those people (I assume you meant the
> attackers, not the defenders). Second, they are both driven by the same 

(1) Which "those people" are you talking about?  Both sides have been
committing atrocities, although the Serbs seem to do more of them.

(2) How does Fischer playing there support them?  I would assume that the
U.N. boycott's purpose is to (a) put pressure on them by making life annoying,
and (b) prevent them from obtaining things that can help in the war.

Fischer and Spasky will be taking $5 million *out* of Yugoslavia (what
currency will they be paid in?).  Doesn't this help out with (b), since
that's $5 million that they can't use for war?  As for (a), Fischer's
presence helps make life annoying :-)

--Tim Smith
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
From: hwr@intercal.com (Hanon W. Russell)
Subject: Fischer/Encyclopaedia Correspondence
Organization: Chessnews list (chessnews-request@tssi.com)
Date: Wed, 30 Sep 1992 00:33:24 GMT


A reader has inquired whether the content of the correspondence 
exchanged between Bobby Fischer and the Encyclopaedia Judaica is 
available. There were two letters: One from Fischer and the 
reply thereto. Copies are in the Russell Collection. We 
reproduce both without any editing:

AN OPEN LETTER
FROM:
BOBBY FISCHER
THE WORLD CHESS CHAMPION
TO:
ENCYCLOPAEDIA JUDAICA

P.O. Box 50307
Pasadena, CA 91105
June 28, 1984

The Editors
Encyclopaedia Judaica Jerusalem
The Macmillan Company
866 Third Avenue
New York City, NY 10022

Gentlemen:

Knowing what I do about *Judaism,* [text between asterisks is 
underlined - HWR] I was naturally distressed to see that you 
have erroneously featured me as a *Jew* in *ENCYCLOPAEDIA 
JUDAICA.* Please do not make this mistake again in any future 
editions of your voluminous, pseudo-authoritative publication. 
*I am not today, nor have I ever been a Jew, and as a matter of 
fact, I am uncircumcised.*

I suggest rather than fraudulently misrepresenting me to be a 
Jew, and dishonestly abusing my name and reputation as a kind of 
advertising gimmick to improve the image of your religion 
(Judaism), you *try to promote your religion on its own merits 
-- if indeed it has any!*

In closing, I trust that I am not being unrealistically 
optimistic, in thanking you in advance for your anticipated 
cooperation in this matter.

Truly yours,

/s/ Bobby Fischer

Bobby Fischer,
The World Chess Champion

c:  Keter Publishing House
    Jerusalem Ltd.

         In response to this letter, the following was sent. The 
         letter is on Keter Publishing House Jerusalem Ltd. 
         letterhead:

Keter Publishing House Jerusalem Ltd.

Member of the Clal Group

Jerusalem, Givat Shaul B, Israel
P.O.B. 7145, Zip Code 91071

Mr. Bobby Fischer
P.O. Box 50307
Pasadena, CA 91105

Jerusalem, Sept. 24, 1984

Dear Mr. Fischer,

We are in receipt of your letter of June 28, 1984. We have taken 
note of your request and will act upon it in all future editions 
of our publication, the Encyclopaedia Judaica.

Sincerely yours,

/s/ Fern Seckbach

Fern Seckback