Upgrade to Chess.com Premium!

How do you do old chess notation?


  • 3 years ago · Quote · #1

    blobby12

    How do you do old chess notation?

  • 3 years ago · Quote · #2

    goldendog

    Someone tell me all about Bobby Fischer. Was he good? What tournaments did he win? Who did he beat?

    Someone tell me.

  • 3 years ago · Quote · #3

    trysts

    Instead of say, e4, you would write P-K4. Instead of saying, Nf6, you would write N-KB6. I like the old notations. It's not easier, but it has a certain elegance about itSmile

  • 3 years ago · Quote · #4

    trysts

    paulgottlieb wrote:

    That's not exactly correct. In descriptive notation, both sides count the squares from their end of the board, so the Ruy Lopez (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 a6) would be written 1.P-K4 P-K4 2,N-KB3 N-QB3 3.B-N5 P-QR3


    No it's not. It's N-QB6.

  • 3 years ago · Quote · #5

    goldendog

    Paul has it right.

  • 3 years ago · Quote · #6

    trysts

    goldendog wrote:

    Paul has it right.


    You're smoking crack.

  • 3 years ago · Quote · #7

    GhostNight

    Trysts, do not embarrass me, after all the good things I say about you plus how intelligent and great you are! I grew up with the old chess notation, and the one we use now is better that is why we went that way. I am sure non usa countries adopted it first, so have to give them credit!

     

    By the way, how do you smoke a crack?

  • 3 years ago · Quote · #8

    Maxx_Dragon

    trysts wrote:

    Instead of say, e4, you would write P-K4. Instead of saying, Nf6, you would write N-KB6. I like the old notations. It's not easier, but it has a certain elegance about it


     

    We are loathe to say it but trysts is wrong. In descriptive notation the f6 square is white's KB6 square and black's KB3 square. So it depends on whose knight is occuping that square.  >:[

  • 3 years ago · Quote · #9

    trysts

    GhostNight wrote:

    Trysts, do not embarrass me, after all the good things I say about you plus how intelligent and great you are! I grew up with the old chess notation, and the one we use now is better that is why we went that way. I am sure non usa countries adopted it first, so have to give them credit!

     

    By the way, how do you smoke a crack?


    I smoked crack once and thought it was the dumbest drug ever invented.

    I apologize to Paul, goldendog, ghostnight, and maxx_dragon for my ignoranceEmbarassed

  • 3 years ago · Quote · #10

    yeres30

     Here's a description of the squares in Descriptive Notation: White letters are from White's perspective and Black letters are from Black's perspective

  • 3 years ago · Quote · #11

    arkledale

    The really confusing thing was when, for example, two rooks (or two knights) could move to the same square, then something like R-KB4 wouldn't be sufficient. You'd have to write KR-KB4 or QR-KB4 to define which rook is being moved, but the KR and QR designations stemmed from the starting position, not the current position, i.e. you had to keep track of which rook (or knight) was which throughout the entire game.
  • 3 years ago · Quote · #12

    trysts

    arkledale wrote:
    The really confusing thing was when, for example, two rooks (or two knights) could move to the same square, then something like R-KB4 wouldn't be sufficient. You'd have to write KR-KB4 or QR-KB4 to define which rook is being moved, but the KR and QR designations stemmed from the starting position, not the current position, i.e. you had to keep track of which rook (or knight) was which throughout the entire game.

    No. You'd have to say where the rook was at the time. So if you had a rook at c4, and a rook at f4, and you wanted to move the c4 rook to d4, you would write QBR-Q4.

  • 3 years ago · Quote · #13

    goldendog

    arkledale wrote:
    The really confusing thing was when, for example, two rooks (or two knights) could move to the same square, then something like R-KB4 wouldn't be sufficient. You'd have to write KR-KB4 or QR-KB4 to define which rook is being moved, but the KR and QR designations stemmed from the starting position, not the current position, i.e. you had to keep track of which rook (or knight) was which throughout the entire game.

    When a move is ambiguous like above, you would also use extra descriptors, such as R/1-K4 (Rook at 1st rank) or R/B-K4 (Rook on Bishop file). I spent my first bunch of years with Descriptive being my "first language" so it's not a problem for me to read the old books and record my games with it, if I ever wanted to.

    Someday when all the worthy books are available in algebraic Descriptive will be truly dead. Not much loss, as I see it.

  • 3 years ago · Quote · #14

    MyCowsCanFly

    trysts wrote:

    I apologize to Paul, goldendog, ghostnight, and maxx_dragon for my ignorance


    +1

    Nice. I would have blamed them for my ignorance then called them names like "poopy head."

  • 3 years ago · Quote · #15

    trysts

    MyCowsCanFly wrote:
    trysts wrote:

    I apologize to Paul, goldendog, ghostnight, and maxx_dragon for my ignorance


    +1

    Nice. I would have blamed them for my ignorance then called them names like "poopy head."


    I said to goldendog that he was smoking crack, then I thought about how dumb crack was and felt bad.

  • 3 years ago · Quote · #16

    MyCowsCanFly

    trysts wrote:
    MyCowsCanFly wrote:
    trysts wrote:

    I apologize to Paul, goldendog, ghostnight, and maxx_dragon for my ignorance


    +1

    Nice. I would have blamed them for my ignorance then called them names like "poopy head."


    I said to goldendog that he was smoking crack, then I thought about how dumb crack was and felt bad.


    So...you said "poppy-head" when you meant to say "poopy-head?"

    I was going to work in "puppy-head" but figured that would be overdoing it.

  • 3 years ago · Quote · #17

    trysts

    MyCowsCanFly wrote:
    trysts wrote:
    MyCowsCanFly wrote:
    trysts wrote:

    I apologize to Paul, goldendog, ghostnight, and maxx_dragon for my ignorance


    +1

    Nice. I would have blamed them for my ignorance then called them names like "poopy head."


    I said to goldendog that he was smoking crack, then I thought about how dumb crack was and felt bad.


    So...you said "poppy-head" when you meant to say "poopy-head?"

    I was going to work in "puppy-head" but figured that would be overdoing it.


    I meant crack-head, which was an error.

    I think poppy plants are beautiful! All plants, we, as free beings, have a right to grow and use however we wishSmile

    Goldendog is soooo cute, especially with his little shoe-bies, that I crossed the line. Poor little bow wowCry

  • 3 years ago · Quote · #18

    goldendog

    Not to worry. Once I see a squirrel all will be forgotten, and I mean everything.

  • 3 years ago · Quote · #19

    trysts

    goldendog wrote:

    Not to worry. Once I see a squirrel all will be forgotten, and I mean everything.


    Only because you'll be chasing itLaughing

  • 3 years ago · Quote · #20

    bigpoison

    trysts wrote:
    MyCowsCanFly wrote:
    trysts wrote:
    MyCowsCanFly wrote:
    trysts wrote:

    I apologize to Paul, goldendog, ghostnight, and maxx_dragon for my ignorance


    +1

    Nice. I would have blamed them for my ignorance then called them names like "poopy head."


    I said to goldendog that he was smoking crack, then I thought about how dumb crack was and felt bad.


    So...you said "poppy-head" when you meant to say "poopy-head?"

    I was going to work in "puppy-head" but figured that would be overdoing it.


    I meant crack-head, which was an error.

    I think poppy plants are beautiful! All plants, we, as free beings, have a right to grow and use however we wish

    Goldendog is soooo cute, especially with his little shoe-bies, that I crossed the line. Poor little bow wow


     How come plants aren't "free beings"?  I like trees better than most mammals.

    You sound like you pulled that quote out of the Bible, "...have a right to grow and use however we wish."

    In your world, we've still got dominion over the plants but not the animals, eh?


Back to Top

Post your reply: