Algebraic vs Descriptive Notation...

Fun Fact: "Outdated" is a meaningless word. An attempt to BS people into thinking that their opinions and preferences are somehow objective facts. There's no inherent virtue in trendiness, it just is.

The real fact is that you can't be a serious player in the English-speaking world without knowing Descriptive. Too many books and magazines are available no other way, and are unlikely to be re-issued. You don't have to know it if you're a beginner, but eventually you will. If you find it too difficult, you're probably going to find chess itself to be too difficult.

https://www.chess.com/club/war-on-d4-branch-of-e4-lovers/join

OMG! Where does one even begin? The word 'outdated' is meaningless? Is that in a general sense or just how you feel it applies to the issue at hand? You can't be a serious player in the English-speaking world without knowing DN? Literally hundreds of thousands of English-speaking chess players who consider themselves serious players vehemently disagree with you. In fact there are hundreds of young chess masters and expert-level chess enthusiasts who were brought up on AN and barely care that DN even exists! Finally, with respect to written chess instruction, literally ALL of the most popular instructional chess classics have been reissued using AN. And the mere fact that you are seemingly unaware that the computer has rendered the vast majority if vintage chess publications moot demonstrates your lack of understanding. In short, you are incorrect on all three of your assertions. But, at least you are consistent!

Are some of you saying that if I go enter a tournament and use descriptive when I write down my moves that I will be disqualified? I want to enjoy the game and would not even right anything down if that was allowed. To me this whole argument seems absurd. it is like telling someone that you have to speak English to your opponent while playing (necessary conversation only not interrupting the game) instead of another language. We are here to enjoy the game, why take away anyone's enjoyment over technicalities? What if your native language is not English and does not use the latin alphabet? Your use of letters or symbols would obviously be different. This whole issue seems to be turning an anthill in to Olympus Mons!

I believe that is correct. I remember a few years ago, (like when Reagan was president, I think), and FIDE stopped accepting players writing down descriptive notation, we used to joke that when Fischer comes back, he'll be disqualified because he won't know the new rules!

At any rate, I believe algebraic notation in other alphabets, such as Cyrillic, obviously, for the Soviets, was explicitly permitted.

https://www.chess.com/club/war-on-d4-branch-of-e4-lovers/join

Article 8: The recording of the moves

8.1 How the moves shall be recorded:

8.1.1 In the course of play each player is required to record his/her own moves and those of his/her opponent in the correct manner, move after move, as clearly and legibly as possible, in one of the following ways:

8.1.1.1 by writing in the algebraic notation (Appendix C), on the paper ‘scoresheet’ prescribed for the competition.

8.1.1.2 by entering moves on the FIDE certified ‘electronic scoresheet’ prescribed for the competition.

I keep finding a need to dip into Averbakh’s eight volume series on the endgame. They might have been in algebraic in the original Russian, but the translations that I have in English all use English descriptive notation. Good thing that I learned to read this notation 50 years ago.

Her story is that the site is committed to a particular sense of “brand”.

As her blog was one of very few that I follow, I don’t entirely understand the “brand”, but I probably agree with her perspective. The official blogs on this site are near worthless.

It’s called algebraic in FIDE rules, so you math nerds can shut up about semantics. Algebra was also the name of the class where most of us learned to graph 2x - y = 3.

There are also people who insist that the United States is not a democracy. More often than not, they are okay with those who severely limit voting rights.

https://historynotebook.blogspot.com/2025/01/a-republic-if-you-can-keep-it.html

Algebraic Notation heap good. I use the abbreviated form of algebraic

... ie 1. d4 d5 2. c4 dc etc.

Analytic geometry and analytic algebra are more or less identical. At school we learned calculus from first principles. So differentiation is regarding tangents on graphs and integration is regarding conversion to the next dimension, so a line becomes an area and it can be regarding areas under graph lines, indicating effects like cumulative totals etc.

I'm not sure that calculus is taught properly any more ... hence the confusion. Those maths lessons were 57 years ago and I haven't forgotten them.

Two things cannot be 'more or less' identical. They are either identical or they are not.

I would think that every book worth reading got a new edition in the past 40 years updated with the one and only existing notation. It would be weird if that wasn't the case. And mind you, in the case of the UK it's not 40 years, but 80.

Also, knowing "descriptive notation" is one thing. I know it. I can play a game from a book that uses it. But I would never use it myself, I am not insane. I also know roman numerals, but I would never use them in maths.

Algebra is a numerical representation of geometry. They are saying the same thing and so can be thought of as similar.

Pedantically speaking, you're right. However, this isn't a PhD thesis but an informal description to people of various interests and abilities, most of whom (but not all) understand that co-operation is essential in useful communication.

Yes. They are similar. Perhaps you should consider expanding your vocabulary.

You can start by using the common word 'similar' instead of the nonsensical 'more or less identical!'

Perhaps ditto for you, regarding your manners.

Also, making such comments is unnecessary and therefore an indication of your feeling of insecurity ... hence your bad manners.