Upgrade to Chess.com Premium!

Notation 2

  • ppd
  • | Nov 4, 2012 at 11:16 PM
  • | Posted in: ppd's Blog
  • | 490 reads
  • | 0 comments

I have been reading some chess stuff in algebraic and can now reasonably handle that.  I still prefer descriptive!  One way that descriptive shines over algebraic is in the use of concepts.  For example, in descriptive I can talk about the idea of developing the knights to B3 in one stroke, while in algebraic I would have to tediously list the four moves: Nc3, Nf3, Nc6, Nf6.  Another example is in talking about ranks.  If I talk about penetrating the seventh rank with a rook, it makes sense as a concept because in descriptive both players have a seventh rank, but in algebraic, only white does.  The use of ranks is also good for talking about passed pawns.  So if you know descriptive too, let's go ahead and use it!  It's better!  If you don't then I am probably capable of understanding and using algebraic. 

Post your reply: