I have been in direct communication with Owen Williams, Kasparov's business manager who is here in Florida. I have reached two of the three people necessary to get the proposal in front of Fischer.

We are trying to move things along and get them to commit to a dollar amount.

The original plan was $5M to the loser and $10M to the winner, but it may take on a new form altogether.

Each start with $15M.

Each win, the loser hands the winner $1M from their own suitcase.

Each draw, white surrenders $250,000 and black surrenders $100,000.

A 13 game match is currently on the table.

Beren the 32nd: Kasparov vs. Fisher still may happen. I have been in touch with Owen Williams, the international business partner for Kasparov. As both Kasparov and Fischer have publicly denounced the desire to play chess anymore (Fischer being the advocate of FRC now), I asked Owen what it would take to have Garry play Bobby a match of Gothic Chess, which, of course, is not chess. He mentioned a dollar amount, I passed it on to an Atlantic City promoter, who is now looking to make it happen. Two of the three people necessary to get Fischer on board have been reached, no word from the third as of yet.

More details will be on http://www.GothicChess.org in upcoming weeks as we revamp the website.

I have some (weak) documentation about Morphy having actually played Steinitz. That is currently being discussed there as well. From some scrap of paper found in a chess book written by Lionel Kieseritzsky years ago, it appears we have a "signpost" indicating they did play, although the game itself is not yet found.

You should post your comments there George, they would be very much welcome.

Interesting talk of the new Zappa chess program, which went 10.5 out of 11, beating Shredder and all other programs except 1 draw to become the Computer World Champion, is now going on at:

http://s6.invisionfree.com/Free_FICS_Forum/

1. e4 c5 2. Nc3 gives Black several ways to get a comfortable game. As white in the Sicilian, you want to drive the play as often as you can, not limit yourself by giving the opponent a "trampoline bounce" in the early middlegame.

After 1. e4 c5 as white, I would smile and let the game proceed 2. Nf3 d6 (the most usual reply) at which time 3. d4 is expected. I just reply 3. d3 and watch my opponents' expressions change from happiness over heading into a well-known Sicilian system to one of mild concern, as white now has even more options at his disposal.

You can get into a very nice King's Indian Attack formation using 3. d3, and that opening is one that is "fluent" and very easy to understand, even better, it almost plays by itself, and white's attacks unfold almost without effort.

ChessCarpenter has drawn Game 1 in the World Open this evening in Philadelphia. He was up a pawn as Black in the Sicilian, but his opponent forced a repetition draw in less than 20 moves, a true rarity for that opening.

There is one problem with the "falling" system, and that is regarding multiple win matches. A 10 wins match counts as 1 game, and it could take a very, very long time to complete. If this is the only thing you have going, you could still be active and lose points.

In my own case, a good % of my tournament games end up in 3-wins matches. So many games are not even applied to my rating. I have 15 won tournaments, and most were 3-0 situations, so I have up to 30 games unaccounted for that look like inactivity. That is about 11% of all of my games dropping through the cracks.

What should happen is, after X days of no results for a particular game type, you just don't show on the "active" list. You are still there, no diminished rating, just not visible until you play again.

That way:

1. "Rating mongers" who just win a few games to get an inflated rating fall off the list.

2. Those who disappear due to a temporary leave of absence can re-appear when they start playing.

3. Those coddled into playing who are truly over-rated will rebalance the system by losing points once they become active again.

CindyInTN: I just checked, 3rd weekend in June is the next event in Knoxville, but I am scheduled to be in Harrisonburg at the James Madison Univeristy tournament that weekend. I can see if someone will switch with me, I will direct the tournament in Knoxville if they direct the one in Virginia.

CindyInTN: You were there? Why didn't you say hello! I think it was only a 10-board simul, those other 2 boards on the side I was going over a game with 2 people while I was doing part of the simul.

How long were you there? Will you be there next month for the June tournament??

Anyone who wants to play chess live is welcome to give it a try at the http://www.GothicChessLive.com website.

Gothic Chess, Chess, and Checkers rooms (checkers not 100% debugged yet)

well, take a look at this game.

http://brainking.com/en/ShowGame?g=415628

My opponent wishes to play on, you don't hear me complaining about it.

Let's have all those stone-throwers weigh in on this one. Let's hear you send some of your comments towards Reza.

Unless, of course, you are just biased against me, then I fully expect your silence.

For all of you who think you can lob such general comments as "this was a computer game", let me point out a few things.

1. Since so many people were making snide comments about the Double Muzio game posted on here, where there is a sacrifice of first a knight and then a bishop, I decided I would go after Alex and try to win a game using the same theme: offering the sacrifice of a knight and bishop, just to emphasize the point. I mentioned this to ChessCarpenter long ago.

2. Look at the position here:

http://brainking.com/en/ArchivedGame?g=532067&i=21

We can go back all the way to a Reshevsky game where the pawn push c4 is played (although much earlier in the game) to give white the slight edge in the opening. I studied the game, and elected not to do so, since a well timed ...d5 by black will equalize in the early stages and actually convey a slight advantage by the onset of the middlegame. So, the hunt was on not just for a "substitute move" but a new plan.

At this point in the game, move 11, I decided to play a non-traditional, strategic move, for the sole purpose of securing the queenside pawn structure (making it virtually bullet proof) and then tasking the knight to go on a long trip from the queenside to the kingside via d2 instead of c3.

3. The actual attack begins with a maneuver here:

http://brainking.com/en/ArchivedGame?g=532067&i=25

Inspiration came from the King's Indian Attack, another opening I like when playing as white. Three consecutive Knight moves get the Knight into position, and I thought at this point "clearly black sees what I am doing here", so I thought I would "give away" my plan.

4. white gives up a piece that is never recovered again, something computers usually do not do.

http://brainking.com/en/ArchivedGame?g=532067&i=31

5. I complete my earlier objective, now offering a Bishop as sacrifice after having already parted with a Knight.

http://brainking.com/en/ArchivedGame?g=532067&i=33

6. And now here, 33 plies after 10. Nbd2 is played, we are still in a position where white is down a Rook for 2 pawns.

http://brainking.com/en/ArchivedGame?g=532067&i=51

I would like all of you "computer experts" to tell me, how long would it take a program to search 33 plies from move 10 of the game? 1 day? 3 days? 10 days? How about 2 to the 12th days if there is a branching factor of 2 and you can complete a 21 ply search in 1 day.

4097 days of search would be required to play this line with a program starting from move 10.

After 17...Kh8 there is still a mate in 51 moves.

And, if chessmec would have gone over the game in more detail, he would have found this is a completely new handling of the Petroff from a strategic viewpoint, something beyond the capabilities of any computer.

I suppose when I won my game against the Deep Thought program in 1989 I was "praying to God" to whisper moves into my ear?

A player may move within the allotted time given for a game, no matter what.

Bad sportsmanship might be better defined as one player calling to the attention of others something along these lines.

My opponent has used inappropriate name-calling and taunting during the course of our play. This is how I elect to respond.

I did give him 2 pieces at the beginning of the game

http://brainking.com/game/ShowGame?g=415627&i=16

How much of a handicap did he thinks he needs?

And if this game was so "easy" why has he take a week or more to make moves on occasion? I was moving faster than him through much of this game.

Look at my game with Reza in the same tournament section, for example.

http://brainking.com/game/ShowGame?g=415628

I have an easy win against him in that game, and he has made fewer moves than my opponent (only 26).

You don't hear me crying about it.

I never broke 2100 in Correspondence Play, but I did just barely qualify for the 10th US Championship (minimum was 2000+ correspondence rating and 2100+ OTB rating)

I lost my shirt in that tournament!

It is shown here, I scored only 7 out of 12, and was downgraded to a 1750 player after the event

http://www.iccfus.com/crosstables/usccc_prelims/10p.htm

I was in section US10P07

I never broke 2300 from 1986-1990, I think 2283 was the highest. I left at 2207.

Does anyone know off hand what the longest win is for Rook + Pawn vs Rook? This is it in Gothic Chess, 85 moves:

http://www.gothicchess.org/krpkr/game.htm

I know red, my point was... things appear differently depending whose eyes are upon it. Where you saw unusual play, I saw a path I had taken 1000 times before.

Also, sometimes you have to make risky moves to win an otherwise drawn game. When in doubt, I complicate the position, and play for the most tactically ornate arrangement.

That is my definition of fun.

Just look at this position to see something really fun!

tactics galore

You also said the way I was playing the Sicilian against you was... how did you put it.... "making it easy for you" :)

For either side, there is no chance to win. That's what a draw is.

I always offer draws in completely lost positions? Last time I checked I had 0 in the loss column.

And here is the last draw I offered, which was accepted.

complex draw in checkers

Please explain to me how this is a win,

O mighty caissus!

Or perhaps you were mentioning this game:

Ed beats Caissus

Wasn't that the game your were trying to draw that I beat you?

I think you are not one to judge whether a game is a draw or not.

AlexII recently sent me a message to which I cannot reply since I am in his enemies list. So I guess I will reply here since his questions to me seemed sincere.

========

My name really is Ed Trice. In the past, I have defeated World Computer Champions in the game of chess (Deep Thought) and checkers (Chinook). I think I am the only human to have done so.

Ed Trice vs. Deep Thought

Wall of Honor against Chinook

For the Wall of Honor link, you have to scroll down a little to find my name.

I have also played against strong chess players, like the legendary GM Sammy Reshevsky (a game I lost in the Sicilian Defense in 1989, but if you search in Google, you will find this game too.) I drew Greg Shahade (2502) in a very interesting Smith-Morra Gambit line. I have had 3 other games published in Chess Life in the 1980's, but I cannot recall them at this point.

You can review my profile and see the games I have played against others. You will see I have scored wins against players at the top, not merely the "weak" players. I actively seek out the strongest of the strong in order to better myself.

I gave you two pieces at the start of this game in the very unusual Double Muzio line of the King's Gambit. In my analysis, white's line in the openin book was bad, but I found the draw, which is this position. I can force the swap of your Bishop for two pawns, and exchange off the rest.

You came close to winning at one point, but I have played this line 1,000 times, and the draw is rather straightforward.

If you wish to play on, that is OK too, but the end result will be a draw.

Best Regards,

Ed Trice