HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
Date: Monday, 9 Nov 1992 22:57:22 EST
From: <RVESTERM@vma.cc.nd.edu>
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
Subject: crazy fun to be had by all...

hi there.  want to try another one of those neato "guess the players'
ratings" things?  well here's your chance.  plus, a ten point bonus
question: name the opening.  any analysis would be welcomed, too.

1.   e4    c5     p-k4    p-qb4         tuna fish 7xx + !
2.   f4    e6     p-kb4   p-k3          (i.e. work out your own
3.  Nc3   Nc6     n-qb3   n-qb3         smythescript.)
4.  Bb5   Nf6     b-qn5   n-kb3
5.  Bc6   dc6     bxn     p(q)xb
6.  Nf3   Bd6     n-kb3   b-q3
7.   d3   Bc7     p-q3    b-qb2
8.  0-0   0-0     0-0     0-0
9.  Na4   Qe7     n-qr4   q-k2
10. Ne5   Qd6     n-k5    q-q3
11. Nc4   Qe7     n-qb4   q-k2
12. Be3   Nd7     b-k3    n-q2
13. Qh5    b6     q-kr5   p-qn3
14. Rf3   Nf6     r-kb3   n-kb3
15. Qh4   Bd7     q-kr4   b-q2
16. Rh3  Rae8     r-kr3   r(qr)-k1
17.  e5    h6     p-k5    p-kr3
18.  f6   Qf6     pxn     qxp
19. Qf6    f6     qxq     pxq
20. Nc3   Kg7     n-qb3   k-kn2
21. Rf1   Rh8     r-kb1   r-kr1
22.  f5    f5     p-kb5   pxp
23. Bf4   Bf4     b-kb4   bxb
24. Rf4  Re1+     rxb     r-k8+
25. Kf2   Re7     k-kb2   r-k2
26. Nd6   Re5     n-q6    r-k4
27. Ne2   Be6     n-k2    b-k3
28. Ng3   Ba2     n-kn3   bxp(qr)
29. Nh5+  Kg6     n-kr5+  k-kn3
30. Nc4   Bc4     n-qb4   bxn
31. c4   Rhe8     pxb     r(kr)-k1
32. Ng3   Kg5     n-kn3   k-kn4
33. Nh5    a6     n-kr5   p-qr3
34. Rff3 Re2+     r(kb)-kb3  r-k7+
35. Kg3   Rc2     k-kn3   rxp(qb)
36. Ng7   f4+     n-kn7   p-kb5+
37. Rf4  Re3+     rxp     r-k6+
38. Rf3  Rf3+     r-kb3   rxr+
39. Kf3   Rb2     kxr     rxp(qn)
40. Rg3+  Kh4     r-kn3+  k-kr5
41. Rg4 mate      r-kn4 mate

there you go.  if you recognize the game, don't spoil it.  but analysis
is still welcome.

bob vesterman.

Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
From: ajpierce@med.unc.edu (Andrew Pierce)
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
Subject: Fixing the ICS rating system
Summary: _really_ fixing the ratings
Date: 13 Nov 92 19:24:51 GMT
Article-I.D.: samba.1992Nov13.192451.25796
Organization: UNC-CH School of Medicine


   I am glad to see that the rounding off drain on the ICS ratings has
been fixed.  That doesn't solve the overall problem though that ICS
ratings as a whole will not be reflective of USCF or other ratings with
time as your rating will change with the changing strength of the the
active player pool as a whole.
   Ideally the ICS ratings need to be calibrated against a player who will
neither increase nor decrease in strength.  Who is such a player?  A
computer program!
   The solution:
   Pick a computer program that will not be up/downgraded with time and
which does not "learn" how to play better with time.  Then peg its rating
at a fixed value and have it always available to be played.  When you play
this computer standard, your rating will change as it normally would,
but the computer standard's rating does not.  This will make everyone's
rating be relative to a known standard -- the strength of the computer.  If
you improve or slump, this will be reflected in your rating and you will
not have to worry about 5 new IM's joining up and hurting your rating.
   As a rating is supposed to reflect your strength and since a computer's
strength does not change, it doesn't make sense for a computer's rating to
change anyway.
     -Andy
ajpierce@med.unc.edu
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
From: Bruce_Harper@mindlink.bc.ca (Bruce Harper)
Subject: Re: Should women's tournaments exist?
Organization: MIND LINK! - British Columbia, Canada
Date: Fri, 13 Nov 1992 15:56:41 GMT

I agree that women's tournaments have no point and do more harm than good.
More to the point, I think idiotic "jokes" like "should Judit Polgar play
nude" are the reason why many women do not play chess - they don't want to be
associated with males who think that way.

I am interested to see the reaction of net readers to that sort of comment,
which does considerable harm.  I'm especially interested to hear from any
female players out there.

If anything deserves flaming, that would be it (although I'm too mellow to
come out and say that such a remark is tasteless, insulting, and an insult to
a great player and potential world champion, as well as to all other women
players, and that it makes one wonder whether the chess-subculture is a haven
for primitive thinking).

After all, one wouldn't want to over-react, so I'll leave it to others to
make negative comments should they wish to do so.
From: ronb@cc.usu.edu
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
Subject: Email game.
Date: 9 Nov 92 12:33:11 MDT
Organization: Utah State University

	This is probably an over-asked question here, but is someone here
interested in a game of e-mail chess?  I am not rated, so I'm more looking for
someone who's interested in a game with an average player.

	thanx.

	 "Time well spent is a waste indeed."
		 sniggerfardimungus
	     	in%"ronb@cc.usu.edu"
	 The usual disclaimers apply anywhere 
              you can find a sticky spot.

Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
From: alacron!adb@uunet.UU.NET (alan brunelle)
Subject: Re: 1. d4 c5?!; 2. d5
Organization: Chessnews list (chessnews-request@tssi.com)
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 1992 21:49:40 GMT



hsieh@math.toronto.edu (Paul Hsieh) Says:

> ...
> 
> A little more seriously though, what am I really supposed to do in the
> event of 1. d4 c5 ?  I played 2. dc but against other people (who do not
> bring their queens out early) black usually ends up having no trouble.
> I suspect the better move is 2. d5 but I haven't had a chance to test it
> out.  BCO (which sadly is my only openings reference) does not list c5
> as a response to d4, so I was wondering if any of the authorities out
> there could verify whether or not 2. d5 is the right thing to do, or
> otherwise tell me what the right move IS.
> 
> Paul Hsieh (1700 CFC)
> 

The "reason" why 2. d5 is best is that white has not played Pc2-c4, and 
thus receives three major advantages:

1. The c4 square is available for a white N: typically Ng1-f3-d2-c4 is
   very useful to blockade the black Pc5, and to attack/control e5, d6,
   b6 and a5. (White sometimes plays Pa2-a4-a5, clamping down on the
   freeing Pb7-b5 by black. With white not having played c2-c4, s/he also
   has the option of using the Pc2 for defense of the often weak squares
   b4 & d4.)

2. The d3 square is not weakened, as white is expected to play Pe2-e4. Thus
   typical black attacks which utilize a Ne5(b4)-d3 maneuver are no longer
   practical.

3. White is one move up in development, as he has no need to play Pc2-c4, and
   can use the tempo for, eg., Nb1c3. (This is in comparison with typical
   Benoni play.)

If you are more familiar with normal Benoni positions, there is no reason
why you *coulnd't* play 3. c2-c4. However, the Schmidt(sp?) Benoni, as
1. ... c5 is called, is certainly nothing to avoid.

--

Of course, the best move is probably 2. e2-e4!, when black has nothing
better than 2. ... d5xc4; 3. c2-c3! and white is winning! 

		  ###             ##
		  ###               #
				     #
		  ###    #####       #
		  ###                #
		   #                #
		  #               ##

---
Alan D. Brunelle, M.Sc.
Principal Software Engineer
ALACRON, INC.
71 Spitbrook Road, Suite 204
Nashua, NH 03060
Phone: (603) 891-2750		FAX: (603) 891-2745

adb@alacron.com

---

"Hey, question marks are punctuations, and I have nothing against 
 question marks, so don't call me an anti-punctuationalist, ok?"


---


Who said: 
	"I want to thank the American people for electing me President 
	 for the past 12 years ... well, um, I want to thank the American
	 people for re-electing George Bush for 4 more years, ... well, um,
	 I would like to congratulate Michael Dukakis on winning the ...
	 What? Bill who? ... Was he involved in Iran-Contra?..."
From: jgd@csd4.csd.uwm.edu (John G Dobnick)
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
Subject: Arpad E. Elo
Date: 9 Nov 1992 05:31:51 GMT
Organization: University of Wisconsin - Milwaukee
Reply-To: jgd@csd4.csd.uwm.edu
NNTP-Posting-Host: 129.89.7.4
Originator: jgd@csd4.csd.uwm.edu

Obituary from _The Milwaukee Journal_, dated November 6, 1992:

Arpad E. Elo
Chess enthusiast

Arpad E. Elo, who gained international fame for himself and Milwaukee
when he perfected a system for rating chess players three decades ago,
died of a heart attack Thursday at his Brookfield apartment.  He was
89.

Elo's system, which bears his name and was adopted by the US Chess
Federation and the International Chess Federation around 1960, assigns
a numerical assessment of each player's strength.

The assessment was based on the player's win-loss record and the
relative skills of his opponents.

"What he did was improve a system so it was accepted worldwide," said a
friend, Henry Meifert, a director of the Milwaukee Municipal Chess
Association that Elo helped found.  "There were other systems, but they
weren't working."

A longtime chess fan, Elo has played Bobby Fischer and other chess
greats and "held his own" in the early 1940s, Meifert said.

He quit chess in the later 1960s because he felt he couldn't give it the
attention it required, friends said.

Elo was a physics and astronomy professor at Marquette University for
more than 30 years, until he retired around 1965, Meifert said.

"He spent a great time traveling all over the world for the
International Chess Federation," as its ratings statistician, Meifert
said.

Elo also enjoyed gardening -- especially flowers -- winemaking,
beekeeping, and grinding his own telescope lenses for stargazing.  His
wife, Henrietta, died in 1989.

Survivors include a son, Arpad E. Elo Jr. of St. Johnsbury, Vt.; and a
sister, Bertha Papp, of Arlington Heights, Ill.

Visitation will be from 4 to 8 p.m. Monday at Becker-Ritter funeral
home, 14075 W. North Ave., Brookfield.  A private burial will be in
Wisconsin Memorial Park, 13235 W. Capitol Drive, Brookfield.

 ----

Also, from the published "death notice" (same source), the following:

     Co-founder and official of the U.S. Chess Federation.
     Arpad developed the Elo Rating System used worldwide
     for numerically rating strength of chess players.
     Many time chess champion and retired professor of 
     Physics with Marquette university.

     Memorials to the University of Chicago, Cerebral
     Palsy or the National Multiple Sclerosis Society
     both of Southeastern Wisconsin.


-- 
John G Dobnick                          ATTnet: (414) 229-5727
Computing Services Division             INTERNET: jgd@uwm.edu
University of Wisconsin - Milwaukee     UUCP: uunet!uwm!jgd

"Knowing how things work is the basis for appreciation,
and is thus a source of civilized delight."  -- William Safire
From: brucec@tekgen.bv.tek.com (Bruce Cheney)
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
Subject: Re: Illegal moves during Tournament
Date: 11 Nov 92 21:13:20 GMT
Organization: Tektronix, Inc.

In article <1992Nov10.043802.7866@cis.uab.edu> sloan@cis.uab.edu (Kenneth Sloan) writes:
>>
>>"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.
>
>Stretching very very far to make a point.  

I disagree. This is one of the most common ways a game ends and is
perfectly unambiguous. Announce that you resign, and then sign a
scoresheet to that effect.

>The USCF rules explicitly
>mention several ways of resigning without saying "I resign".  

And of course, those would have been valid in the above postulated
scenario also. The key point is which valid mechanism of resigning
occurred first.

>It would take a lot of fancy talking to
>convince me that someone who signed a scoresheet with a 1-0 written on
>it did not "resign".  Signing the scoresheet is never done until *after*
>the game is over.  So...if the scoresheet is signed, the signer cannot
>reasonably claim that "the game isn't over, yet".
>

This situation was never postulated (at least not in my posting) or
asserted.  I can only assume that the respondant didn't read or understand
the original discussion as this is a non-sequitor.

Bruce Cheney
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
Subject: Re: once rated, always rated?
From: nason@pa621a.inland.com
Date: 12 Nov 92 08:40:27 CDT
Distribution: rec
Organization: Inland Steel Company, East Chicago, IN
Nntp-Posting-User: wayman

In article <27232@oasys.dt.navy.mil>, science@oasys.dt.navy.mil 
(Mark Zimmermann) writes:

> Speaking of postal chess, I've just gathered together a group of four
> folks (including me) who are going to try to play a rated double round
> robin class-like tourney via e-mail on Prodigy, under postal rules ...
> is anybody playing USCF *rated* correspondence chess via Internet
> already (other than individual matches?)?  ... I presume that the
> medium for exchanging moves isn't a very significant factor, as long
> as everybody follows all the correspondence rules ... will write a
> letter to DuBois this weekend and send her the checks for each of us,
> and see if she approves this experiment....  ^z

I know its being done over Compuserve.  I think the problem is paying the
tournament fee.  On Compuserve, the fee would be paid by credit card from your
Compuserve Account (I think).  Over Internet, or Prodigy as you are proposing,
the fee collection is more cumbersome.  I for one, would love to see some type
of USCF *rated* competition on the net.  Outside of Compuserve, I don't know of
anyone who is doing it.   
    
-- 
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: jeff@econBerkeley.EDU (Jeffrey C. Ely)
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
Subject: Re: novice question
Date: 12 Nov 92 23:23:37 GMT
Organization: Econometrics Laboratory, U. C. Berkeley
NNTP-Posting-Host: emily3.berkeley.edu

In article <1992Nov12.203931.26326@pony.Ingres.COM>, jrb@Ingres.COM (John Black) writes:
|> In article <1992Nov12.172450.1690@dartvax.dartmouth.edu> J.Theodore.Schuerzinger@dartmouth.edu (J. Theodore Schuerzinger) writes:
|> >Joe Micozzi writes about the following opening:
|> >
|> >1. e4 e5 2. f3 c6 3. b5 (??!)
|> >
|> I assume his notation was messed up; he probably means 1. e4 e5  2. Nf3 Nc6
|> 3. Bb5 a6 (i.e. a Ruy Lopez).
|> 
|> >I'm not a very high-rated player, but isn't this move illegal?  And is
|> >it really that good anyhow?  :-)
|> >
|> >4. a4 f6(?)
|> >
|> This is Ba4 and Nf6.
|> 
|> >Why?  I don't think I can recall a single e4 opening in which the
|> >f-pawn gets pushed like this so early.  You'd think more masters would
|> >play 1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 f6, for example, if it were a sound opening.
|> >
|> This is the Damiano Gambit, I believe.  The usual next move is 3. Nxe5 (and if
|> 3. ... fxe5 then 4. Qh5+ with an attack for the piece).
|> 
|> >5. 0-0 Nxe4
|> >
|> This is the Open Ruy Lopez (5. ... Be7 is the closed version); as Micozzi said,
|> most masters play the closed variation, but Kortchnoi and others have used the
|> open in Grandmaster play.  The usual reply here is neither Rd1 nor c3, but
|> instead 6. d4.  Now 6. ... ed is the Riga variation (which a friend of mine
|> was just showing me the other day!), and the main line goes 6. ... b5  7. Bb3
|> d5  8. dxe5 Be6  9. c3 etc.
|> 
|> john//
|> jrb@ingres.com

Speaking of the Riga Variation, can anyone post some analysis of it?  I remember
seeing the game Reshevsky-Ed. Lasker posted here once.  Anyone got that game?
From: qazqaz@Muir.Stanford.EDU (Mike Perkins)
Subject: 1.e4 c5 miniature
Originator: qazqaz@Muir.Stanford.EDU
Organization: Ye Olde Pawn Shoppe
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 1992 02:07:02 GMT


I just played another fun miniature with Psion as black:

1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 e6 3.Bb5 Nf6 4.o-o Nxe4 5.Re1 f5? 6.d3 Qb6? 7.Bxd7+ Bxd7
8.de4 Be7 9.ef5 ef5 10.Bg5 Be6 11.Bxe7 Kxe7 12.Ng5 Qxb2? 13.Rxe6+ Kf8 14.Qd8++

It's probably obvious I don't usually play 1.e4 in real games. Was the pawn
sac 4.o-o sound?

Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
From: sloan@cis.uab.edu (Kenneth Sloan)
Subject: Re: funky pairings
Organization: CIS, University of Alabama at Birmingham
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 1992 00:28:26 GMT

In article <palane.721514387@pv7412.vincent.iastate.edu> palane@iastate.edu (Paul A. Lane) writes:
>In <1992Nov11.191906.411@cis.uab.edu> sloan@cis.uab.edu (Kenneth Sloan) writes:
>
>...
>
>What would be interesting is to have a tournament with standard pairings
>up until the last round and match the contenders in each class against each
>other.

And...it's provided for: see the current USCF rulebook, page 59-60.  The
secton on "Class Pairings, Variations" offers several different methods,
some more complicated than others.  Announcing such pairing variations
(before the *first* round) is either required, or (IMO) strongly
recommended.

As usual where money is involved, extreme care should be taken to
properly announce, and scrupulously administer, any variation from the
most vanilla pairing algorithm.

Personally, I prefer to view any prize money awarded to players in the
middle (or bottom!) of a Swiss field as a lottery.  It should be large
enough to be "interesting", but small enough not to generate hard
feelings, or off-the-board machinations.




-- 
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: vlad@erg.sri.com (vlad)
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
Subject: Arpad E. Elo vs. Fischer
Date: 10 Nov 92 01:02:34 GMT
Organization: SRI International, Menlo Park, CA

Just could not resist making this joke at the expence of an otherwise
wonderful article:

In article <1dkt47INNgac@uwm.edu> jgd@csd4.csd.uwm.edu writes:
>Obituary from _The Milwaukee Journal_, dated November 6, 1992:
>
>Arpad E. Elo
>Chess enthusiast

>A longtime chess fan, Elo has played Bobby Fischer and other chess
>greats and "held his own" in the early 1940s, Meifert said.

The fact that he "held his own" is not surprising 
because Fischer was a small child in 1940s. :-):-):-):-):-):-):-)

Vlad

Employer may disagree
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
From: gilmozzi@stsci.edu (Roberto Gilmozzi)
Subject: Re: Gaprindashvilli's strength (was re: Fishcer with odds)
Organization: Space Telescope Science Institute
Date: Fri, 13 Nov 1992 14:25:32 GMT

For anybody interested in Gaprindaschvili's style, I have found a game
she played in 1957, when she was about 15, against one of the strongest
women players of that time. This game is used by Panov to illustrate
the Vienna Game in his "Theory of Openings" (he shows a few games at
the end of the most important chapters). If there is any interest, i
can also report on Panov's and Romanovsky's analysis (i have left in
Panov's annotations). [Since i am reporting from a spanish translation
of a russian book, some names may be spelled differently]

Roberto
_______________________________________________________________________

Vienna Game
Tikomirova-Gaprindaschvili
Vilha, 1957
1.e4 e5 2.Bc4 Nf6 3.Nc3 Nxe4 4.Qh5 Nd6 5.Bb3 Nc6 6.Nb5 g6 7.Qf3 Nf5 8.Qd5?
Nh6 9.d3 d6 10.Bxh6 Be6 11.Qf3 Bxh6 12.Bxe6 fxe6 13.Qh3 Bg5 14.Qxe6+ Be7 
15.Nf3 a6 16.Nc3 Qd7 17.Qc4 Rf8 18.Nd5 0-0-0 19.0-0 Kb8 20.b4 Rxf3! 
21.gxf3 Nd4 22.Kg2 Qf5 23.h3? Qxf3+ 24.Kh2 Bh4 25.c3 c6! 26.cxd4 Bxf2!
27.Rxf2 Qxf2+ 28.Kh1 Qf3+ 29.Kh2 cxd5 30.Qc2 Rc8 31.Qd2 e4 32.dxe4 Rc3!! 
0-1
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
From: rjm@cs.brown.edu (Ralph Marshall)
Subject: Re: piece sacrifices
Organization: Brown University Department of Computer Science
Distribution: rec
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 1992 15:50:00 GMT

In article <1992Nov6.062817.7368@math.utexas.edu> epstein@rene.ma.utexas.edu (Paul Epstein) writes:
>I know of exactly three openings which are sometimes played at international
>level which involve a piece sacrifice.  They are as follows:
>Muzio Gambit:  1. e4 e5 2.f4 ef 3. Nf3 g5 4.Bc4 g4 5.0-0 gXf3 6.Qxf3.

Does anybody have any on-line games involving this opening?  As a
complete neophyte I'm sticking to a single opening (King's Gambit)
based on the advice that it will get the game moving from the outset
and thus teach me tactics.  Anyway, while reading a few pages I saw a
mention of this, and while it looks pretty clever, I wasn't sure it
would really work against a competent Black player.  Can Masters force
a quick win here?

Ralph Marshall
rjm@cs.brown.edu



Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
From: eb11@quads.uchicago.edu (Ernest Barreto)
Subject: please explain the "Fischer clock"
Summary: what is the fischer clock?
Keywords: fischer, clock, what
Reply-To: eb11@midway.uchicago.edu
Organization: University of Chicago Computing Organizations
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 1992 19:17:44 GMT

I can't seem to get a straight answer on this--

would someone please explain just what is meant by
"the Fischer Clock"?

thanks in advance

Ernie
From: jeff@econBerkeley.EDU (Jeffrey C. Ely)
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
Subject: Taimanov Question
Date: 11 Nov 1992 22:40:35 GMT
Organization: Econometrics Laboratory, U. C. Berkeley
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: emily9.berkeley.edu


	I just recently started playing the Taimanov Sicilian.
One line is really bugging me though.  After 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 e6 
3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nc6 5.Nc3 a6 6.Bf4 the usual move is 6. ...d6.
White usually responds 7.Bg3 getting out of the way of ...e5.  But
what if white plays 7.Nxc6 bxc6 8.e5!?  It seems like 8. ...d5 is
forced, when white gets an excellent game after 9. Bd3.  White has
three pieces developed to black's none, the pawn structure is like
a French only there is no d4 pawn to organize play against and Black
will have difficulty developing his kingside harmoniously (i.e. 
9. ...Bb4(c5) 10.Qg4 

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++|+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Jeff Ely                         |    "He said the Sun's not yellow...  
Department of Economics          |     It's Chicken!" 
UC Berkeley        

Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
From: fry@tara.harvard.edu (David Fry)
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
Subject: Fischer - Polgar/Kasparov update
Date: 11 Nov 92 06:31:23 GMT
Article-I.D.: husc3.1992Nov11.013124.17339
Distribution: world
Organization: Harvard Math Department


Janos Kubat, who arranged the Fischer - Spassky rematch, reports that
the negotiations for the match with Judith Polgar have stalled.  He
did say, however, that Fischer will be staying in Yugoslavia for at
least a few months.

This past weekend, Kasparov had some more comments on Fischer, and
they were suprisingly generous.  "The quality of the game by both
participants picked up somewhat as the match went on. In some games,
at some stretches, it approached what I call modern chess.  But to my
mind, most games lacked the elements of truly modern chess, the
intensity and resilience of the two sides."  Kasparov said Fischer
needs to adjust to the new developments in chess in the last 20 years.
"He won the match convincingly by scoring twice as many wins as
Spassky. But in most cases he won because the quality of Spassky's
game fluctuates wildly from game to game.  Will Fischer, given time,
manage to adjust himself to the dramatically changed world? My feeling
is that he won't. But surely, the way he played in this match was not
the best he is capable of."

David Fry                                  fry@math.harvard.edu
Division of Applied Sciences               fry@huma1.bitnet
Harvard University                      ...!harvard!huma1!fry
Cambridge, MA  02138            
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess