# Bout the squares?

• #1

Pls i just thought bout this. basicly when i play my games nd im calculatin i think ok if i do this he move there nd if i do this he cant go there etc... but i dont think if i go g7 he goes a1 or he cant go b2 because im blocking it wit my night on c9 or sumat...

but i notice all gud gms can go liek dat they talk bout the squares nd their doin it so fast that im still tryin to figure out wich square it is...

so i guess my questin is it it beter if i think in terms of squaare cordinates when im calculatin... cos i recently wached video of sumone doin blindfold traini nd he solved the questin before i cud work out wich square a piece was etc...

thx for ur help!

• #2

1. Make more effort with your writing.

2. You will learn coordinates if you play enough without making special effort to do so.

• #3

Agree with Scott.  Record the games yourself with pen and paper if this is important to you.

• #4

i wos wonderin if it helps wit bored visualisation? if u tihk bout individual square does it help whn ur tryin to picture were everythin is etc?

• #5

Perhaps it does. I mean, I just do it out of habit, probably because it makes it easier for me to organize between ideas. Instead of saying "I control this square, but he controls that square," etc, I am probably less likely to forget what I was referring myself to if I attribute each square or line to a specific name, like "g7," "c8," etc.

Kind of like how we often have conscious thought in language, as if we were having a conversation with ourselves.

You'll probably find yourself doing it naturally as you get more experienced with the game. I tend to think it's the sort of thing that is caused by increasing skill level and not the other way around, but who knows. I still think the more conventional ways of improvement would be more effective than simply thinking about coordinates.

• #6

Right now I just look at the position and don't worry about what each square is called, though I'm picking up on it a little more.  People who play a lot can name each square just by looking at an empty board or if you give them a coordinate can find the square instantly.  And people who are really good can play entire games in their head.  I doubt I will ever be able to do that.

I say, just learn the moves and after a while you'll learn each square coordinate as you get more familiar with it.

• #7

This was easy nfor me with descriptive notation. Algebraic I have to count on fingers and toes. NOBODY will ever convince me algebraic is easier. So there!

• #8

I was thinking last about if there has ever been a book, or series of books written about the square's.  I mean each single square addressed seperately.  Certain square's like f2,7 and d4 and d5 all have obvious differences in terms off what is likely to occur on them thourout the course of games.  It would seem to me that certian squares like f5, f3 have so much importance that entire books could be written surrounding thier importance in defense, theory and positional advantage ect . . .  just some thoughts don't mean to be OT

• #9

I think algebraic is simpler and more to the point, and I like how it's universal (in descriptive for instance, "KB4" could mean the square "f4" or "f5," depending on the point of view). Algebraic is a little more abstract though while descriptive tells you what's literally in front of you. But for me, even before I knew of notation I just always found it awkward to describe piece placements based on the starting square of each piece. I can put a piece on "queen four" even if my queen is off the board, yet the square is still associated with a queen. I'd rather just call the queen file the d file -- although that is a dry name, it's at least not confusing

• #10
ticcherr wrote:

Pls i just thought bout this. basicly when i play my games nd im calculatin i think ok if i do this he move there nd if i do this he cant go there etc... but i dont think if i go g7 he goes a1 or he cant go b2 because im blocking it wit my night on c9 or sumat...

but i notice all gud gms can go liek dat they talk bout the squares nd their doin it so fast that im still tryin to figure out wich square it is...

so i guess my questin is it it beter if i think in terms of squaare cordinates when im calculatin... cos i recently wached video of sumone doin blindfold traini nd he solved the questin before i cud work out wich square a piece was etc...

thx for ur help!

Any beginner level chess book written after 1990 will have what you need to know about algebraic notation.

You have bigger fish to fry right now, like being able to write.  "Pls"?  "i" (lowercase)? "bout"? (try "about" or sometimes you see "bout" specifically preceeded by an apostrophic when talking in poetic terms)

Starting sentences with lowercase letters?
Spelling basic words without their starting letter (i.e. about spelled as "bout" or and spelled as "nd"???)
Spelling your "ing" and "ion" suffixes as "in"
"cos"????  Good Grief!

Read an English book, and I do not mean a book on 1.c4.  I mean the language!  Sheesh!

Your native language is freaking English!  Granted, British English instead of American English, but still, all that means is a lot of Z's in the US show as S's in Britain, or where we use "or" they use "our", like "color" (US) vs "colour" (British), but that's not what we are talking here.  The English in message 1, whether intended to be American or British, is horiffic!

• #11

Btw for those who r intrested this is the blindfold thin i wos on bout. The dude has 3 vids on this program and th is is the first one:

It is quite simply amazin..

• #12

When personally visualizing and calculating with a board in front of me there isn't any attribution of nomenclature to the geography.  The squares are simply the squares I want my pieces to go to.  To myself I say, "If I go there and he goes there that means that this piece will have to do this and that piece will have to take this route to get to that square.  Maybe I'll have to push this pawn in order to disrupt the communication of those pieces."

But.

If I try to communicate with someone else I will use the agreed upon terminology so that I can be easily understood.  That takes practice over a number of years up to and including going over and over an empty board and naming all the squares so that without hesitation can I not only tell you its name I can also tell you its location in the terrain.  Bobby Fischer was rumoured to have posted a chess board above his bed so that he could look at it as he drifted to sleep.

Practice and persistence.

• #13
ThrillerFan wrote:
ticcherr wrote:

Pls i just thought bout this. basicly when i play my games nd im calculatin i think ok if i do this he move there nd if i do this he cant go there etc... but i dont think if i go g7 he goes a1 or he cant go b2 because im blocking it wit my night on c9 or sumat...

but i notice all gud gms can go liek dat they talk bout the squares nd their doin it so fast that im still tryin to figure out wich square it is...

so i guess my questin is it it beter if i think in terms of squaare cordinates when im calculatin... cos i recently wached video of sumone doin blindfold traini nd he solved the questin before i cud work out wich square a piece was etc...

thx for ur help!

Any beginner level chess book written after 1990 will have what you need to know about algebraic notation.

You have bigger fish to fry right now, like being able to write.  "Pls"?  "i" (lowercase)? "bout"? (try "about" or sometimes you see "bout" specifically preceeded by an apostrophic when talking in poetic terms)

Starting sentences with lowercase letters?
Spelling basic words without their starting letter (i.e. about spelled as "bout" or and spelled as "nd"???)
Spelling your "ing" and "ion" suffixes as "in"
"cos"????  Good Grief!

Read an English book, and I do not mean a book on 1.c4.  I mean the language!  Sheesh!

Your native language is freaking English!  Granted, British English instead of American English, but still, all that means is a lot of Z's in the US show as S's in Britain, or where we use "or" they use "our", like "color" (US) vs "colour" (British), but that's not what we are talking here.  The English in message 1, whether intended to be American or British, is horiffic!

Or using i.e. (that is), when you mean e.g. (for example) ^_^

He could also either be an immigrant or a chav for all we know.  Chavs are basically Britain's poor people and lower classes (I mean no offense by using this term) essentially have a different English from the middle and above classes.  Someone from the inner-city may use poor subject-verb agreement, use double negatives, and use "be" where "is" or "are" is appropriate (e.g., "It be on the table") just because it's a part of their culture.

• #14
ThrillerFan wrote:
ticcherr wrote:

Pls i just thought bout this. basicly when i play my games nd im calculatin i think ok if i do this he move there nd if i do this he cant go there etc... but i dont think if i go g7 he goes a1 or he cant go b2 because im blocking it wit my night on c9 or sumat...

but i notice all gud gms can go liek dat they talk bout the squares nd their doin it so fast that im still tryin to figure out wich square it is...

so i guess my questin is it it beter if i think in terms of squaare cordinates when im calculatin... cos i recently wached video of sumone doin blindfold traini nd he solved the questin before i cud work out wich square a piece was etc...

thx for ur help!

Any beginner level chess book written after 1990 will have what you need to know about algebraic notation.

You have bigger fish to fry right now, like being able to write.  "Pls"?  "i" (lowercase)? "bout"? (try "about" or sometimes you see "bout" specifically preceeded by an apostrophic when talking in poetic terms)

Starting sentences with lowercase letters?
Spelling basic words without their starting letter (i.e. about spelled as "bout" or and spelled as "nd"???)
Spelling your "ing" and "ion" suffixes as "in"
"cos"????  Good Grief!

Read an English book, and I do not mean a book on 1.c4.  I mean the language!  Sheesh!

Your native language is freaking English!  Granted, British English instead of American English, but still, all that means is a lot of Z's in the US show as S's in Britain, or where we use "or" they use "our", like "color" (US) vs "colour" (British), but that's not what we are talking here.  The English in message 1, whether intended to be American or British, is horiffic!

Do you feel big and strong when you yell at children online?

• #15

Very good post Ali G

or
=

Online Now