Old English notation

Sort:
batgirl
skelos

Secondhand books using descriptive notation are really cheap for those of us who know both notations. happy.png (The time to use the books is not so easy to find.)

 

Now, if you want something objectionable, try figurine notation:

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chess_symbols_in_Unicode

 

Gack.

StephenCorelli

What do ELO and LOL stand for???

Dadg777

ELO was a guy's last name, so it doesn't stand for anything. 

The Elo rating system is a method for calculating the relative skill levels of players in competitor-versus-competitor games such as chess. It is named after its creator Arpad Elo, a Hungarian-born American physics professor.

OR  Electric Light Orchestra.  LOL.   Laughing Out Loud.

Darth_Algar
Bur_Oak wrote:

ChessNYCNicolasS, thank you. I learned it in roughly ten minutes when I was about ten years old (in the 1960's). Granted, it took a little longer to become proficient, but descriptive notation was simple, logical, and it worked perfectly well for a very long time until chess notation had to be dumbed down for computers. I don't understand why so many people seem to be afraid of it. I understand algabraic notation. I just think it's wise to be fluent in both. It's not a big deal.

 

"Dumbed down for computers" - nevermind that algebraic is actually an older system than descriptive.

batgirl

For more than you've probably ever wanted to know about the development of chess notation, see this article with the clever title ----> Notation.

(Descriptive is older that Albegraic, but Algebraic is more ancient than most people realize.)

ChessNYCNicolasS

Thank you for all of da info!

craftsmanshipbymark

I'm teaching a half dozen young players and decided to teach them classical notation. They learned it quickly. Probably 60-70% of my chess library is in descriptive and I want to use a lot of that material. In OTB tournaments, I still use descriptive.

Uhohspaghettio1
DJGrim wrote:

Kt was a variant, with N commonly used.

Descriptive notation can often be used to better express ideas like "knights are usually best developed to Bishop-3, and rarely is it good to develop to Rook-3 

The problem is that it is too easy in descriptive notation to be "ambiguous" in your move not noticing the other legal move.

I even saw a BxP in a chess book where there were 2 such legal pawn captures, albeit one was a more obvious choice. 

 

Chess writers would not make such rookie mistakes on a regular basis. I highly doubt that had much/anything to do with it.  

 

The reason is in the reading of it, algebraic is smaller and neater, the majority find it easier to read. That's what the chess publishers cared about and that's why algebraic took over. It had nothing to do with people afraid they would write a move ambiguously. 

  

BlargDragon
batgirl wrote:
 

How fancy!

johnyoudell

It was decades before I switched.  Still very, very slightly hanker for the old notation.

Senior-Lazarus_Long
BlargDragon wrote:
ChessNYCNicolasS wrote:

Yes. Thank you. But what does B-QKt5ch mean? It is kind of confusing.

I think that's part of a nuclear launch code.

Discriptive notation was all there was. Kids!!!!Cool

BlargDragon
Senior-Lazarus_Long wrote:
BlargDragon wrote:
ChessNYCNicolasS wrote:

Yes. Thank you. But what does B-QKt5ch mean? It is kind of confusing.

I think that's part of a nuclear launch code.

Discriptive notation was all there was. Kids!!!!

Writ by thou upon thine parchment with quill in hand and ink in bottle, I doubt not!

Senior-Lazarus_Long

I love racoons. ;p

BlargDragon
Senior-Lazarus_Long wrote:

I love racoons. ;p

Raccoons are one of my favorite animals! FUN RACCOON FACT: There are three species of raccoon. Procyon lotor lives (natively) all over North America, procyon cancrivorus lives all over South America, and procyon pygmaeus lives only on a tiny island off the coast of Mexico. My avatar picture is of the third.

nikoBelicAK
johorsky wrote:

B-QKt5ch means Bb5+ (white) or Bb4+ (black)

crazy

 

craftsmanshipbymark wrote:

I'm teaching a half dozen young players

teaching with 1430 blitz rank?

 

 

baptistpreach
I'm teaching a chess class, and while I taught them to write algebraic notation, one of the boards had no such numbering and lettering, and since I was notating for them, it was incredibly easy to do with classical! I completely understand why it was used, since people with plain boards could follow along easier.
Karpark

Algebraic is also capable of ambiguities, most often popping up with rook moves, though admittedly they are a little more likely to pop up in descriptive. Of course both systems have notational mechanisms for disambiguation. I still like descriptive, though I now use algegraic to record my games. It's worth learning to be able to use some really great books that haven't been translated yet into algebraic. An example is Pachman's three volume classic Modern Chess Strategy (or Complete Chess Strategy in some editions). Fischer's fantastic My 60 Memorable Games can now be found in both notation styles but was only available until relatively recently in descriptive. And what about that mountain of Batsford opening books published in descriptive shortly before the change? There must be some cunning lines in some of them that have been little explored since. The trick about learning descriptive is that the notation relies on the moves being recorded 'ego-centrically'. Therefore P-K4 for white is e4, whereas for black P-K4 is e5.

With regard to teaching with a 1430 blitz rank, why not? If those youngsters are at a beginner or elementary level, it is important that they have a good teacher rather than a titled player. In any case a lot of us, who don't worry too much about ratings, play blitz rather carelessly. I used to play blitz (and do tactics) when I was waiting in a line of some kind (e.g. on the phone), or in my kitchen when I was cooking and where the wireless signal is always failing and giving me timeouts (often enough when I'm winning!) When I want to play proper chess, I go for much longer time controls. 

PATAGONIA1943

Ah  !    nostalgia,   how good was chess when my mind was so young and fresh.

Darth_Algar
baptistpreach wrote:
I'm teaching a chess class, and while I taught them to write algebraic notation, one of the boards had no such numbering and lettering, and since I was notating for them, it was incredibly easy to do with classical! I completely understand why it was used, since people with plain boards could follow along easier.

 

Honestly, it's not at all hard to follow games in algebraic on a non-lettered board.