Help with Chess jargon (an opening explanation)

JPSterling

I'm reading the book, 'Logical Chess - Move by Move, Every Move Explained'. When explaining the opening for the 1899 game: Zeissl-Walthoffen, the following quote is provided by Franklin K. Young--

 

"Always deploy [e4] so that the right oblique may be readily established in case the objective plane remains open or becomes permanently located on the centre or on the king's wing, or that the crochet aligned may readily be established if the objective plane becomes permanently located otherwise than at the extremity of the strategic front."

 

- What does this mean?

- More specifically, what is the "objective plane", "crochet aligned", and  "strategic front" ?

 

I greatly appreciate any help with these terms and what the quote is actually saying with regards to an e4 opening. 

 

Thank you

 

 

batgirl

Franklin Knowles Young, a member of Boston's Mandarins of the Yellow Button group, was a chess player with very eccentric ideas.  He completely equated chess with the art of war and wrote several books expounding on military concepts as they could be applied to chess.  It's all rather bizarre and probably not worth much other than as an interesting footnote.

Here are two pages showing the minor and major crochets and his limited explanation (he's great at manufacturing jargons, but rather limited in explaining them).  You can easily google his books, as several are online. 


null
null

batgirl

null

JPSterling

Thank you for that! Your comment about keeping it as a footnote is a huge relief.  Your attachments bring up another thought...is there a site or app that will translate older notations into modern ones. I believe they're called algebraic notations, right?

batgirl

I don't know of any program that converts descriptive notation to algebraic (but that doesn't mean there are none).  With minimal effort you can simply learn to read both.  Or, if you find a game in a book that employs descriptive notation, you can usually find that game in a database by searching the players.  e.g., In looking for the game you mentioned in the first post,  searched for Zeissl and Walthoffen, at chessgames.com and here's the game:

 

JPSterling

Man...you've been a huge huge help.  Thank you! !

batgirl

Well, not many people call me man, but you're welcome.

tmkroll

I thought these were major crotchets: 

 

21-032b-Bass-Clef-C-Major-Chord-Quarter-Notes.jpg

And these were minor ones:

 

TriadsOnMajorScalesTwoThreeSix.gif

(joke)

Strangemover

Interesting and weird. What the chuff is he going on about? Were Mr Young's writings well received at the time or was he laughed out of the chess club?

batgirl

Young or his publisher put this in his then latest book "Chess Generalship" (1913).

null

Strangemover

High praise indeed! 

batgirl

I don't use chess software,  other than Winboard for viewing games, and Scid as a database.  I really have little idea how to use Scid. Sometimes I can get it to do what I want but mostly not.   But I'm surprised, and maybe even amazed, that with all the different ways of expressing descriptive, that it can be converted automatically.   On the other hand, it seems a lot easier just to follow the descriptive moves on a viewer, then extracting the pgn than to type in the descriptive notation manually (I'm assuming Chessbase doesn't scan an image and that the moves must be typed out.- that's really tedious).

Thanks for the info.

melvinbluestone

batgirl:

 

      Read your article of 1/28/14 on the Mandarins of the Yellow Button. A fascinating read. Apparently, Young and his fellow 'buttons' were decent players. But even though, as chessgames puts it, "His books have been the subject of ridicule from the time they were published until the present day", he might not be remembered at all if not for his bizarre writings. In the games of his I reviewed, I saw little evidence he actually used the strange ideas in his books in actual play. Maybe he was just having fun with the reading public.......

Dubious-Duck

What does this mean?

It means you seriously need a new chess book.

Avoid chessbooks which require a working knowledge of Latin or Greek.

Rather ask yourself : Has the author ever smoked dope?

Jeremy Silman is your answer.

imitheleisanghaoth

How To Cheat At Chess by Bill Hartston got me to a 2000 ELO rating.

JPSterling
batgirl wrote:

Well, not many people call me man, but you're welcome.

Yeah, sorry. No disrespect. It's a generalized term in california

JPSterling
Strangemover wrote:

Interesting and weird. What the chuff is he going on about? Were Mr Young's writings well received at the time or was he laughed out of the chess club?

Right!?!?

JPSterling
JamesColeman wrote:

Chessbase will convert notation (that's already inputted) very easily, you can have a game in algebraic notation and click an option and immediately display the same game in descriptive or vice-versa.

 

Of course, that's not going to be too much help if you're staring at 1.P-Q4 N-KB3 and have no idea what it means, but as Batgirl says, it's minimal effort to become conversant in both, even if you retain a preference for one or the other (as most people do). You're welcome to send me any game in descriptive via chess.com message and I will send it straight back in algebraic.

 

As for aligning your crochets, you're on your own... 

 

 

haha! Thank you!!

JPSterling
Dubious-Duck wrote:

What does this mean?

It means you seriously need a new chess book.

Avoid chessbooks which require a working knowledge of Latin or Greek.

Rather ask yourself : Has the author ever smoked dope?

Jeremy Silman is your answer.

HAHAA...noted. thank you

JPSterling
mickynj wrote:

What Franklin Young used was in no way "chess jargon." He tried to use the vocabulary of Napoleonic-era military text books to describe chess. He failed horribly!  

that makes more sense now.  i've read a couple chess books and never came across those terms so I thought something was off about it.