HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: elkies@ramanujan.harvard.edu (Noam Elkies)
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
Subject: Saavedra: un peu d'histoire [Re: pawn promotion]
Date: 22 Nov 92 17:54:09 GMT
Organization: Harvard Math Department

In article <1992Nov20.162104.13253@cs.wright.edu>
dczarkow@valhalla.cs.wright.edu (Dariusz Czarkowski) writes:
>White: Kb6, pc6
>Black: Ka1, Rd5
>White to move and win.
>
>This is a beautiful and simple example of a weak promotion to a rook.
>I forgot the name of the composer. I think he was Spanish.

The _Oxford Companion to Chess_ confirms that Fernando Saavedra
(1847-1922), a monk who served in various countries from Australia
to Scotland, was born in Seville.  The _Companion_'s statement
that Saavedra's claim to fame is "based on a single move" is a tad
exaggerated, since he had to find not only 6.c8R!! but also the
continuation Ra4 7.Kb3!, but it is true that the above position
is not entirely due to Saavedra: a certain G.E.Barbier, identified
by the _Companion_ as "Scottish champion in 1886", published the
position after 1.c7 in 1895 as a drawing study for Black, seeing
only 5...Rd4! 6.c8Q(?) Rc4+! 7.Q:c4 stalemate.  Saavedra discovered
6.c8R!!, and the opening move 1.c7 was added later (I don't recall
by who, but it was neither Barbier nor Saavedra) to make it a
"White to move and win" study.  Note that there is a minor
dual right before the promotion: after 

>1. c7  Rd6+
>2.Kb5  Rd5+
>3.Kb4  Rd4+

White can also play 3.Kc3 Rd1! 4.Kc2!, when Black is again forced
to try Rd4!, reaching the same position as after

>4.Kb3  Rd3+
>5.Kc2  Rd4.

--Noam D. Elkies (elkies@zariski.harvard.edu)
  Dept. of Mathematics, Harvard University

P.S. I gather that "weak promotion" is the literal translation of
the Polish phrase used to describe promotion to a Knight, Rook or
Bishop.  The word used in English for this is "underpromotion".
From: achut@nairobi.Eng.Sun.COM (Achut Reddy)
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
Subject: Re: psychology
Date: 16 Nov 92 06:11:48 GMT
Organization: Sun Microsystems Inc., Mountain View, CA
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: nairobi

epstein@rene.ma.utexas.edu (Paul Epstein) writes:

>I wonder whether there are meaningful tests for assessing "chess talent",
>or indeed whether there is such a thing.  
>Are there any tests where the questions are ostensibly unrelated to chess,
>but where scores correlate very closely to ability at the game?
>(By "closely", I mean beyond what could be expected by social, economic
>and educational factors etc.)

The Soviets had a test they used on kindergarten-aged children to
determine GM potential.  The teacher explained to the children
(who presumably don't know anything about chess yet) how a knight
moves.  Then they were given a chessboard with a knight on a1 and
told to move it to b1 (this takes 3 moves), then c1, ..., h1, then
h2, g2, f2, etc, touching all 64 squares in this sequence, using
only legal knight moves.

A child that could do this in under a minute was considered to be
GM material.  Apparently they found this to be a strong correlator
of eventual high-level chess performance!

-achut
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
From: hyatt@cis.uab.edu (Robert Hyatt)
Subject: Re: Illegal moves during Tournament
Organization: University of Alabama at Birmingham
Date: Mon, 23 Nov 1992 14:10:57 GMT

In article <1992Nov23.050036.21040@raven.alaska.edu> fsmgs@camelot.acf-lab.alaska.edu (Michael Schmahl [Black-Robe Mage]) writes:
>Kenneth Sloan writes
>> In article <1576@tekgen.bv.tek.com> brucec@tekgen.bv.tek.com (Bruce Cheney)  
>writes:
>> As I said above, I concede your point.  Now...what do you do
>> when a player claims "I mated him on the board *before* my flag fell -
>> so the fact that the flag is down now is irrelevant".  Will you convene
>> a protest committee and ask for witnesses?  Does it make any difference
>> if this is a SD game or a normal time control?
>
>The mate on the board takes precedence whether the move happened before or after  
>the clock was punched, because the opponent has to make the claim before the game  
>is over.   The clock doesn't cause time forfeitures in itself.  The player has to  
>make the claim.
>
o

That is double-speak.  What do you do if player A makes a move, player B
says "you lose, your flag has fallen, and then player A notices that he
mated player B.  This is a loophole that was beat to death a couple of
months ago, and the majority would probably agree that it needs to be fixed.

I think the best solution is the one I proposed when this started earlier
this year:  "The clock is the overriding factor in deciding the outcome.
If, after making your move and punching the clock, your flag is down, then
you lose no matter what.  You can then eliminate the draws due to insufficient
material and all the other loopholes.  I believe that the TD's job is to run
tournaments, NOT to fill the holes where the USCF rules committee is unwilling
to make the rules precise.  Ambiguous rules are worse than none at all....."


-- 
!Robert Hyatt                    Computer and Information Sciences   !
!hyatt@cis.uab.edu               University of Alabama at Birmingham !
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
From: herbert@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Herbert Pohlai E185/1 +43158801/4464)
Subject: Re: Endgame databases
Organization: Technical University Vienna
Date: Tue, 17 Nov 1992 11:57:03 GMT

In article <1992Nov16.234338.2241@cs.cornell.edu>, chinch@cs.cornell.edu (Shirish Chinchalkar) writes:
|> Can someone tell me how much space is needed for the endgame databases
|> (for instance 6 piece endgames). If I understand correctly, an endgame
|> database is a table of "number of moves to mate" for each position involving
|> the given pieces (in case of pawns, promotion needs to be considered). If
|> that is indeed the case, for a 6 piece endgame (with no pawns), the number
|> of positions is approximately 2*10*64^5, exploiting symmetry in placing first
|> piece and considering W to move and B to move as two different positions.
|> Assuming 1 byte per position (some endgames require 200+ moves), we are
                                               ==================

You have to compute only up to the first capture, then switch to
another database. This way, only few positions require more than 40 moves.
(As far as I know, KRkn is an example. Anyone out here with exact figures ???

But the length of the endgame is not relevant at all;
only the positions are stored with pointers to other positions.
So you have only 2 pointers/position (white/black's optimal continuation);
the length of the pointer chains does not affect the memory usage.

|> talking of approximately 20 Gbytes of storage. Isn't this too much? How have
|> KRNknn databases been constructed?
|> 
|> Also, for 5 piece endgames, it would require approx 300 Mbytes of storage for
|> each endgame. Can these databases be compressed significantly? Can someone
|> give me a few numbers illustrating space requirements?
|> 
|> How many research/commercial computers use such databases? Are only

The program CheckCheck (sp?) for MSDOS PCs (commercial product) uses such databases. It was tested in the german magazine 'Computerschach und Spiele'
some time ago.

|> non-trivial endgame databases stored? (since several endgames have
|> a large material imbalance).
|> 
|> Thanks.
|> 
|> Shirish.

-- 
Herbert Pohlai     herbert@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
Subject: Re: Illegal moves during Tournament
From: nason@pa881a.inland.com
Date: 16 Nov 92 11:02:00 CDT
Organization: Inland Steel Company, East Chicago, IN
Nntp-Posting-User: solomon

> But I would take some slight exception to his interpretation of
> "over."  The game is over when one side has been checkmated, one
> side resigns, or a draw has been recognized or agreed to, or when
> a stalemate occurs, or when one side runs out of time.
> 
> "Signing" the scoresheet might not be relevant. Did you say "I resign"
> before then? Then I would argue that the game ended when you said it.
>
 
Sorry for the confusion, the TD did not say that.  I did.  I assumed that when
you sign the sheet, you are agreeing to the game being over and your
opportunity to complain ceases to exist.  I was check mated by the opponent. 
However, my question is, at that point, and before I signed the sheet, could I
have protested the illegal move.  

There is alot of criticism of TD's in general on the net.  You won't hear that
from me.  I think highly of my TD and IMHO these guys are great.  They give up
playing time to oversee matches, this is a sacrifice. 

No, my concern is:  When did my opportunity to protest the move cease to exist?  

Thanks

My opinions are my own and not those of my company.  
Free advice is worth its cost.  
--- John M. Nason - NA9U ---|--------------------------------------------|
Inland Steel Company        |  -- nason@pa881a.inland.com                |
Process Automation Dept.    |  -- Fax:   219-399-7856                    |
			    |  -- Voice: 219-399-2450                    |
----------------------------|--------------------------------------------|
From: kanderso@reed.edu (Karl Anderson)
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
Subject: where can I find ics servers?
Date: 23 Nov 92 04:59:47 GMT
Article-I.D.: reed.1992Nov23.045947.19521
Organization: Reed College, Portland, OR

Does anyone know where there is a list of ics servers?  Utah, the only
one that I know of, has been down for days.  I couldn't find this in
the faq.

k
From: sloan@cis.uab.edu (Kenneth Sloan)
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
Subject: Bizarre Promotional Gimmick
Date: 22 Nov 92 04:23:59 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: CIS, University of Alabama at Birmingham

Are there any veterans of Rochester, NY's Instant Insanity Opens?  12 (?)
rounds in 36(?)  hours - straight through with no breaks for meals, or
sleep.  Terrible chess - but great fun.  

Well...here's an equally silly idea:



		Sloan's Silly Simultaneous Simultaneous

RULES

0) each player must bring 2 sets, and 2 clocks.
1) group players into 5-player all-play-all sections.
2) each player plays 2 games with white, and 2 games with black.
3) all games are played SIMULTANEOUSLY!

Each player uses one of his sets, and one of his clocks, for the games
where he has Black.  This gives us 5 players playing on 20 boards!

Notice the advantageous features:

*No byes for the odd man.

*No worries about starting the next round on time.

*No waiting around between rounds.

*Time controls can be leisurely - 40/3, 20/1 suggested for an all day
 Saturday event.  Of course, you have to play 4 games in that time...

*For maximum entertainment value - G/5.  Award track shoes as prizes.

*Interesting opportunities for clock-management strategy - should you
 polish off the weaklings in the group first?  or leave them for last?
 Imagine trying to reach time control when you have 5 minutes and your
 opponent has 3 hours!

*Interesting opportunities to scout your opponents' plans *during the
game*.  You notice that one of your opponents is playing the same game
on another board - do you slow down and wait to see what the point is to
the sacrifice he just played on both boards?

*or...you and the top-rated player have the same position against a
common opponent - do you wait to see how to exploit the subtle
advantages in the position?

Disadvantages:

*three words: mutual time trouble.  If you routinely get yourself into
time trouble, imagine having to reach 4 time controls simultaneously!

This is obviously most fun "live" - but perhaps this is actually a
reasonable format for ICS tournaments?

Anyone out there silly enough to try this?  It might be a great thing to
do as an exhibition in a shopping mall - especially if you can arrange
for a demo board for every game!  Much more entertaining than a simul
where only 1 player is playing more than 1 game.  Why should visiting
GM's have all the fun?


Next:  Sloan's Silly Simultaneous Simultaneous Scheveningen System

Team play now includes the Harlem Globetrotters' patented weave pattern
as players move from board to board.  Double-team selected opponents.
And so it goes...


-- 
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
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
From: hyatt@cis.uab.edu (Robert Hyatt)
Subject: Re: Anybody want to play?
Organization: University of Alabama at Birmingham
Date: Wed, 18 Nov 1992 23:19:24 GMT

In article <9001786.1.722124822@sunvax.sun.ac.za> 9001786@sunvax.sun.ac.za (Fem) writes:
>In article <1e60o0INNb9e@moe.ksu.ksu.edu> breitweg@phys.ksu.edu (hates Dirac notation) writes:
>>From: breitweg@phys.ksu.edu (hates Dirac notation)
>>Subject: Anybody want to play?
>>Date: 15 Nov 92 17:17:52 GMT
>>Hi All,
>>
>>Does anybody out there want to play two games of chees (one with black and
>>one with white)?  I have not played in a while but my USCF rating is about
>>1550.  So I would like to play somebody of this strength or higher.
>>
>>So if anybody wants to play my first move is 1.d4.  Respond to me with your
>>answer and your first move as white and away we go.  Note the address below
>>that is the one that i prefer you use.  Hope to hear from somebody.
>>
>>Sincerely,
>>Jason Breitweg
>>jbreitwe@polar.bowdoin.edu
>>
>>--
>>breitweg@phys.ksu.edu
>
>I am new to the system so please excuse my roundabout way of doing things on 
>the network. Sorry about hte spelling, but since i live in South Africa 
>english is my second language.
>
>I would like to play you.
>
>White : 1. d4
>
>Black : 1. d4  d6
>
>If you cant get hold of me i will look you up in this space for the next 
>moves.
>This message by :
>
>SUNVAX.SUN.AC.ZA
>
>

Chess games are great, but a newsgroup is not the place to play them.
Make the initial contact, maybe; play the game, no.

-- 
!Robert Hyatt                    Computer and Information Sciences   !
!hyatt@cis.uab.edu               University of Alabama at Birmingham !
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
From: jcbokar@eos.ncsu.edu (JASON CHARLES BOKAR)
Subject: Re: pawn promotion
Originator: jcbokar@c00577-1403br.eos.ncsu.edu
Reply-To: jcbokar@eos.ncsu.edu (JASON CHARLES BOKAR)
Organization: North Carolina State University, Project Eos
Date: Fri, 20 Nov 1992 20:15:20 GMT


In article <19413@ucdavis.ucdavis.edu>, lim@toadflax.cs.ucdavis.edu
(Lloyd Lim) writes:

|> There are situations where you might want to promote to a knight.
|> Are there any reasons why you'd promote to a bishop or rook?
|> The obvious answer is no, but I wanted to check to make sure.
|> 
|> +++
|> Lloyd Lim                    Internet: lim@cs.ucdavis.edu
|> Lim Unlimited                America Online: LimUnltd
|> 330 W. Iris Ave.             AppleLink: LimUnltd
|> Stockton, CA  95210-3738     CompuServe: 72647,660
|> 
There are times when a rook promotion is the best.  This may occur in an
endgame when promoting to a queen would produce stalemate.
Jason Bokar
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
From: kees@cv.ruu.nl (Kees de Graaf)
Subject: Paul Keres banknote
Date: Tue, 17 Nov 1992 18:44:24 GMT
Organization: University of Utrecht, 3D Computer Vision Research Group

The Ests know how to honor their late chess heroes. The National Bank
of Estonia recently issued a new bill of 5 Krooni (5 crowns) with a
very neat portrait of Paul Keres.
From: cracraft@wheat-chex.ai.mit.edu (Stuart Cracraft)
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
Subject: Re: GnuChess 4.0 Test Speed
Date: 22 Nov 1992 15:18:21 GMT
Organization: MIT Artificial Intelligence Lab
NNTP-Posting-Host: wheat-chex.ai.mit.edu

In article <1992Nov20.125552.3747@crash> uzun@crash.cts.com (Roger Uzun) writes:
>Can anyone give me an idea on how fast GnuChess 4.0 
>....  On one machine here at crash it gets a 
>movelist speed of 200,000 nodes/sec and an eval speed of 
>7500 nodes/sec, is this decent?
>
I need to know what machine gets this result. The best I can
suggest for you on your PC question is to run it on the PC.
(If you have the right version, it has already been ported.)

--Stuart
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
From: pad8499a@ritvax.isc.rit.edu (Phil Dorsey)
Subject: Re: pawn promotion
Organization: Rochester Institute of Technology, Rochester, NY
Date: Fri, 20 Nov 1992 17:00:40 GMT

In article <1992Nov20.124517.6299@cs.ruu.nl> xawemmer@cs.ruu.nl (Xander 
Wemmers) writes:
> In <1992Nov20.031807.12035@galileo.cc.rochester.edu> 
doli@troi.cc.rochester.edu (David Oliver) writes:
> 
> >In article <19413@ucdavis.ucdavis.edu> lim@toadflax.cs.ucdavis.edu 
(Lloyd Lim) writes:
> >>There are situations where you might want to promote to a knight.
> >>Are there any reasons why you'd promote to a bishop or rook?
> >>The obvious answer is no, but I wanted to check to make sure.
> >>
> >
> >I would guess that you might want to promote to a rook or a bishop to 
avoid
> >a stalemate that might occur if you promoted to a queen.
> >
> >-David Oliver (doli@troi.cc.rochester.edu)
> >
> 
> A standard example of promotion to a rook is
> 
> White: Kf6 pawn f7    
> Black: Kh7
> 
> for f8Q is stalemate and f8R is the only way to mate black in two moves.
> 
> Promotion to a bishop looks very difficult to me, if the move has to be 
the 
> only or fastest way to win.
> 
> By the way, there are chess problems in which white has to promote to
> a *black* piece (even to a black king) in order to win.
> 
> White: Kh1 Ra1 pawn a7
> Black: Ka8 Rb8 pawn b7
> 
> Mate in 1 move: 1. a7xb8(Black rook)
> 
> Does anyone have more examples of this?
> 
> 
>                                                 Xander Wemmers

Here's an idea for a simple position where bishop promotion is the 
quickest win:

White:  Ka1, Qf6, pawn f7
Black:  Kh7

Promotion to a queen or rook stalemates and promotion to a knight takes 
longer.

Promotion to king sounds like fun but the last time I checked the rules it 
was an illegal move.  I've never had occasion to promote to an opposite 
colored piece nor have I ever bothered to check the rules to find out if 
it is legal.  I'm not up on my "fantasy chess", but I can assure you 
though that you'll get some strange looks from the other players if you 
try promoting to an opposite colored piece in a tournament game.

Phil Dorsey
Rochester Institute of Technology
American Video Institute
Interactive Media Laboratory
From: marcusc@acfcluster.nyu.edu
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
Subject: Graphic interface for the mac / ICS
Date: 23 Nov 92 04:17:41 GMT
Organization: New York University

Could anyone tell me if it is possible to get a graphics interface /client file
for the mac to use on the Valkyries Chess Server?
Thank you for for your time
C Marcus
NYU
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
From: benwood@carson.u.washington.edu (Ben Henwood)
Subject: Re: Fischer-Polgar NOT (yet)
Organization: University of Washington
Date: Mon, 16 Nov 1992 18:27:03 GMT

hau4@ellis.uchicago.edu (sven  hauptfeld) writes:

>Could it be that the negotiations broke down because Fischer required that
>Judith play nude?   :-)

>	Sven

I find this sexist and degrading to women in general and Judit in particular.
Putting the smiley at the end does not negate the negativism and the sexism 
to me; I find it is merely a '90s attempt to make a sexist remark.  

Judit is an extremely talented chessplayer.  I'm looking forward to many
more years of contributions from her.

Ben Henwood

Applied Physics Laboratory / University of Washington
benwood@u.washington.edu
From: ding@wheatena.berkeley.edu (Howard Ding)
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
Subject: Re: Tournament Report from Berkeley Quads last Saturday, 11/14...
Date: 20 Nov 1992 01:47:13 GMT
Organization: U.C. Berkeley Math. Department.
Distribution: usa
NNTP-Posting-Host: wheatena.berkeley.edu


>Based solely on your description of the facts, I claim that the TD
>screwed up again.  There is nothing in the rules that says "TD watches
>play and forms an opinion on the skill of the opponents, or the likely
>outcome given their skill levels".  The rule talks about *positions*
>that are clearly drawn - *not* adjudications with arguments offered by
>the players.
>
The rules for sudden death CERTAINLY permit you to ask for an
adjudication (without score sheet).  I believe that the USCF catch
phrase is something like "in a position that a C-player could be
expected to draw easily against a grandmaster."  I agree that the TD should
_not_ have checked to see if _I_ could force the draw but should 
have followed the guideline, but this is a relatively minor point,
as an E player would draw the position (following) against God:

8........
7...k....
6...P....
5...K....

(either to move)

With under 10 seconds on my clock, I did not feel like arguing about
the finer points of the rule with the TD.  Moreover, if he had chosen
not to adjudicate, which I believe he has the right to do under the 
rules, that would have been fine with me as well.

You are of course correct that USCF rules are idiotic, 
(especially SD rules), but unfortunately to play in USCF tournaments
one has to follow them, and if SD tournaments are the only game in
town..., well you're stuck.

Howard Ding
ding@math.berkeley.edu

Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
From: baljeual@uther.calvin.edu (Alan Baljeu)
Subject: Re: pawn promotion
Organization: Calvin College
Date: Mon, 23 Nov 1992 03:38:22 GMT

elkies@ramanujan.harvard.edu (Noam Elkies) writes:

>In article <1992Nov21.005248.7318@news2.cis.umn.edu>
>peskin@staff.tc.umn.edu (Yury Peskin) writes:

>:Hello.  Here is a position where promotion to bishop is the only winning
>:method:
>:
>:8 k . . . . . . .
>:7 b . . . N . . .
>:6 K . P . . . . .
>:5 . . . . . . . .
>:4 . . . . . . . .
>:3 . . . . . . . .
>:2 . . . . . . . .
>:1 . . . . . . . .
>:  a b c d e f g h
>:
>:p.s. According to the story White drew, overlooking 1 c7 Bb8 2 c8B!.

>The Bishop promotion is indeed the unique winning move after 1.c7 Bb8,
>but it seems to me that White also wins sans underpromotion with 1.Nd5:
>Kb8 2.c7+ Kc8 (now Ka8 3.c8Q+ is more than OK...) 3.K:a7, or 1...Bb8
>2.Nb6 mate (ouch!), or 1...Bc5(d4,...,g1) 2.c7 and the stalemate defense
>has disappeared.

Also Nc1 wins in a similar way.  Black can't save his bishop, stop Nb6 mate
and stop c7 with eventual c8=Q simultaneously.


--
	Alan Baljeu
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
From: chinch@cs.cornell.edu (Shirish Chinchalkar)
Subject: Endgame databases
Organization: Cornell Univ. CS Dept, Ithaca NY 14853
Date: Mon, 16 Nov 1992 23:43:38 GMT

Can someone tell me how much space is needed for the endgame databases
(for instance 6 piece endgames). If I understand correctly, an endgame
database is a table of "number of moves to mate" for each position involving
the given pieces (in case of pawns, promotion needs to be considered). If
that is indeed the case, for a 6 piece endgame (with no pawns), the number
of positions is approximately 2*10*64^5, exploiting symmetry in placing first
piece and considering W to move and B to move as two different positions.
Assuming 1 byte per position (some endgames require 200+ moves), we are
talking of approximately 20 Gbytes of storage. Isn't this too much? How have
KRNknn databases been constructed?

Also, for 5 piece endgames, it would require approx 300 Mbytes of storage for
each endgame. Can these databases be compressed significantly? Can someone
give me a few numbers illustrating space requirements?

How many research/commercial computers use such databases? Are only
non-trivial endgame databases stored? (since several endgames have
a large material imbalance).

Thanks.

Shirish.
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess