14979 Players currently online!
Man vs. Machine - good luck!
Turn-based games at any time!
Vote for the best move to win!
Do you have what it takes?
Backgammon, Yatzy, and more!
Sharpen your tactical vision!
Get advice and game insights!
Learn from top players & pros!
View millions of master games!
Your virtual chess coach!
Perfect your opening moves!
Test your skills vs. computer!
Find the right private coach!
Can you solve it each day?
Bring it all together!
Beginners, start here!
Make friends & play team games!
News from the world of chess!
Search all Chess.com members!
Find local clubs & events!
Who's the best of your friends?
Read what members are saying!
N = Novelty which was in the earlier days of the Chess Informant system (publishers of ECO and the codes for it) set as TN for Theoretical Novelty, an opening move not seen before in known master practice.
The dagger symbol was used for check in some early to mid 20th Century publications, but gave way to "+" instead, which is now standard.
@ idreesarif, post 41 : thank you so much for your answers ! My post-text was apparently written too fast, without checking afterwards... and I nota bene said that I did not re-play the given games yet, so I did not see what you now told me !
By the way : I have said that I could imagine that a certain letter was used, so not specifically the letter N, but this is my language-problem.
And forget my remark about a word beginning with an N, no good remark!
But now something better : I have found the following in The Oxford Companion to Chess , I quote :
In the San Francisco 1987 tournament the game Miles - Christiansen began 1 e4 e5 2 Nf3 Nf6 3 Nxe5 d6 4 Nf3 Nxe4 5 Nc3 Bf5 6 Nxe4 Bxe4 7 d3 and was drawn on move 20. The game was published, with 5 ... Bf5 indicated as a TN.
At Biel 1988 Anand played it against Zapata, who replied with 6 Qe2 and Anand resigned. This is one of the quickest losses by a Grandmaster, notable because he did not play a single move of his own. The players in the earlier game had not overlooked this decisive reply, but their game was an agreed draw and the moves they played were merely to observe formalities. Unquote.
Well, perhaps a further step in the N vs TN story, it is up to better players as I am to judge the 5 ... Bf5 TN ,
so it means a theoretical novelty can even be a bad move .....
Yes. In Chess Informant, you will find the N (theoretical novelty) in nearly every game. These range from brilliant moves to outrageous blunders. Of the good ones, a panel votes on the best of each issue. The top theoretical novelty is then republished, often with additional commentary, in the next issue.
by GHIDRAH 5 minutes ago
The Lardy of All Lardys
by alleenkatze 11 minutes ago
London system scrubs
by jengaias 15 minutes ago
Free lesson The problem with low rated players and why they stay low rated.
by MarcoBR444 16 minutes ago
Opening against d4
by SuirenBoid 17 minutes ago
In The Doldrums -- Again ?
by kayak21 23 minutes ago
Chess:The Novel: book two-Trump vs cezar chavez-
by DonaldoTrump 24 minutes ago
What to play in an equal position?
by fieldsofforce 27 minutes ago
Your games realistically analyzed by The King of Patzers
by Robert_New_Alekhine 29 minutes ago
Queen's Gambit, why cxd or dxc stuff
by jengaias 30 minutes ago
Why Join | Chess Topics |
Help & Support |
© 2016 Chess.com
• Chess - English
We are working hard to make Chess.com available in over 70 languages. Check back over the year as we develop the technology to add more, and we will try our best to notify you when your language is ready for translating!