I don't know about NIC. I am an avid followers of chess informants during the 80s. That includes ECC. It's beauty is not using verbal explanation making the readers THINK. I'm happy you start a thread about Chess Informants.
Chess Informant vs NIC
Sort:
Dec 12, 2018
0
#3
NIC magazine is very good. NIC yearbooks are also.
I subscribe to Informant.
I think the time I invested in learning to understand the system of Informant codes and playing through many games offering only these language-less coded annotations improved my chess thinking.
I subscribe to Informant.
I think the time I invested in learning to understand the system of Informant codes and playing through many games offering only these language-less coded annotations improved my chess thinking.
Well, ChristWainscott, because verbal explanations hide the actual chess reasons behind a move.
Dec 12, 2018
0
#6
ChrisWainscott wrote:
Why do you believe less verbal is good?
I see every move that masters see, but I spend a lot of time considering moves they reject quickly. The difference is all the garbage in my internal monologue. Fewer words, more clarity translates into better thinking. By reducing chess concepts to the essentials, I look at fewer bad moves.
Which do you think is better and why? I think Chess Informant is much much better due to the superior analysis and less reliance on 'verbal' explanations and deeper analysis.