Chessmaster 3000 wasn't the first version. There were CM 2000, CM 2100.
Amazing. "Genetic" error passed on down to the descendants.
Chessmaster 3000 wasn't the first version. There were CM 2000, CM 2100.
Amazing. "Genetic" error passed on down to the descendants.
How do I know all this stuff?
Story time.
Back in the land-line analog AOL telephone days, I played on Yahoo Chess. Yahoo Chess can e-mail your game to . . . Yahoo Mail. Then I can input my game into Chessmaster for analysis. Back in the telephone days.
You don't have to pay a Chess.com subscription non-sense to analyze your games.
Woow, dude, have you been freezed for 30 years?
Yes.
With the death of Yahoo Chess, I quit chess.
Then I learned about Chess.com through a Google search.
Then I learned about the other chess site I can't name through these forums. That's where I play, and in real life.
And Yes.
After Windows XP, all my old chess program cannot run on the new Operating Systems. Chess died for me too.
It's like Rocky III.
I have to get the Eye of the Tiger back. And to do that, I have to:
"Go back to the beginning." Said Biblically by Carl Weathers.
In the early days it was very common to see chess coders get things completely wrong. They were not chess players. They read the rules and made their own interpretations. There was a very popular gaming site - Flipside that offered a chess interface. They got simple rules wrong - allowed for any number of illegal positions. Checkmates allowed the King to move away for some positions. Contacting support was useless. The same program remained in use until the sites demise.Even a site as Yahoo - one would expect could at the minimum get the rules of play right- got things wrong and allowed for illegal moves or did not recognize legal ones.
FIDE has never prohibited AN.
And AN was used by most countries even before the founding of FIDE. The minority countries that used DN have been England, Australia, US, Spain, and a few others. So the question is not why FIDE drop DN, but rather why did it take them so long?
Battleship has not been invented yet?
Sesame Street is not available outside the USA?
When I came to America when I was 10, I used Battleship to play Gomoku.
They could have a movie about me ala The Blind Side.
So what does Battleship have to do with my comments?? Or are you just babbling away??
People cannot think poetically today.
I was joking. Could Battleship have popularized the concept of Algebraic Notation? Since Battleship sold millions of copies.
So what does Battleship have to do with my comments?? Or are you just babbling away??
Logic dictates 2 possibilties.
1. I speak like a baby. (I think it is the etymology of babble)
2. Your comprehension is like a baby.
2. Your comprehension is like a baby.
, sucka (sucker. Ebonics: A person with an intellect of a baby who is still sucking a bottle of milk).
Babble comes from the Biblical tale of the Tower of Babel. See the book of Genesis.
I am familiar. I was a Catholic Altar Boy (sounds like a Super Hero).
Time to get edjacamated (Ebonics: educated)
babble (v.)
mid-13c., babeln "to prattle, utter words indistinctly, talk like a baby," akin to other Western European words for stammering and prattling (Swedish babbla, Old French babillier, etc.) attested from the same era (some of which probably were borrowed from others), all probably ultimately imitative of baby-talk (compare Latin babulus "babbler," Greek barbaros "non-Greek-speaking"). "No direct connexion with Babel can be traced; though association with that may have affected the senses" [OED]. Meaning "to talk excessively" is attested from c. 1500. Related: Babbled; babbler; babbling.
https://www.etymonline.com/search?q=babble
The name of the Rook is its origination.>>
If chessmaster thinks that, then chessmaster is wrong. It's possible that in the very early days of notation, they tried to do that. Of course, they failed.
Chessmaster sold 5 million copies as of 2002.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chessmaster
1. Wouldn't a multi-million dollars enterprise get it right?
2. Wouldn't millions of users spot it if it's wrong?
I'm glad we are going through this topic with a fine toothed comb.
I can't believe CM 3000 is wrong, in a different way.
In Algebraic, CM 3000 interpret the same as modern Figurine Algebraic, 20. Nbxd6.
But it interprets it wrong in Descriptive.