Anyone prefer descriptive notation?

Originally posted by HomerJSimpson
I totally and 100% agree with you

I do however use algebraic when keeping score of my OTB games. I just like to read descriptive when going over games in a book.

Originally posted by der schwarze Ritter
Descriptive notation is ambiguous, especially in endings like B + B + Ps vs. B+ B + Ps.

Descriptive is no more or less ambiguous than algebraic when written correctly.

Of course algebraic is easier to read.. BUT,

I think the big win about descriptive is that you get a better sense of queen's wing and kings wing.. I think it's easier to "mirror" the thinking then. Of course, this is just my subjective way of thinking.. there should logically not be anything harder to know that a,b,c,d is queen's wing and e,f,g,h is king's... still, I think it's sometimes kind of nice to have that clear separation of wings and this general "relative" look on it when analysing (as opposed to playing a game out on the board, where I think algebraic is easier).

I guess it's also related to whatever you're used to.. I know the board by heart in the sense that I know every square colour etc if you give me an algebraic square, but I'm not sure I would do just as fine with the descriptive.. and actually makes me wonder what use I have of it =)

Descriptive notation is an anachronism that should go the way of the dinosaur.

Originally posted by General Putzer
Descriptive notation is an anachronism that should go the way of the dinosaur.

Wrong argument!
Dinosaurs lived for hundreds of millions of years and was a very stable form of life.
Worth all respect.

If descriptive notation is worth all respect is another question...