My dad got me the book "Fischer/Spassy" today on, obviously, there games, the run up to the games, everything else to do with it.
The thing is the games part is in the old (algebric???) notation eg...
1 P-K4 P-K4
...for e4 e5. Does any here acctually understand it? Its quite confuzling to me 🙁
(btw who acctually won?)
Originally posted by Wibble WobbleFischer
My dad got me the book "Fischer/Spassy" today on, obviously, there games, the run up to the games, everything else to do with it.
The thing is the games part is in the old (algebric???) notation eg...
1 P-K4 P-K4
...for e4 e5. Does any here acctually understand it? Its quite confuzling to me 🙁
(btw who acctually won?)
Originally posted by Wibble WobbleWho doesn't know the match of the century Fischer-Spassy.........
My dad got me the book "Fischer/Spassy" today on, obviously, there games, the run up to the games, everything else to do with it.
The thing is the games part is in the old (algebric???) notation eg...
1 P-K4 P-K4
...for e4 e5. Does any here acctually understand it? Its quite confuzling to me 🙁
(btw who acctually won?)
Santa,"actually" must be written with only one "c"........
Originally posted by Wibble WobbleThere are a number of sites that describe the old "descriptive" notation (the new 1. e4 e5 is called algebraic)...
My dad got me the book "Fischer/Spassy" today on, obviously, there games, the run up to the games, everything else to do with it.
The thing is the games part is in the old (algebric???) notation eg...
1 P-K4 P-K4
...for e4 e5. Does any here acctually understand it? Its quite confuzling to me 🙁
(btw who acctually won?)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/English_chess_notation
The one thing to keep in mind when deciphering descriptive notation is that each square on the board is actually given two names, one from white's perspective, one from black's perspective.
The modern algebraic notation is simpler and more straightforward, the only real advantage of descriptive is that the game score itself allows you to see what specific pieces are being captured/exchanged...
e.g. a descriptive notation might read:
19 R x Q P x R
whereas the same move in algebraic might read
19 R x c4 d x c4
The descriptive notation allows you to see that a Queen and Rook were exchanged... Algebraic merely shows where the exchanged pieces were located, but does not indicate which pieces they were (although you can obviously tell that black captured White's Rook on c4, these moves in an of themselves do not tell you that the Rook captured a Queen).
The advantage of knowing descriptive notation is that older books, many of which are out of print, use this notation, so you can't follow what the author is saying unless you know descriptive.
However, many older books are also being, or have already been, 'translated' to the modern algebraic notation..."My System", for example.
Not too long ago, I purchased "Lasker's Manual of Chess" from wholesalechess.com... this is still being printed in descriptive notation, I don't know if it's been translated into algebraic yet, but I imagine it will be at some point...
Yeah, it's pretty easy to understand. The notation is called descriptive.
It is not absed on absolutes, but rather from which side is moving.
P-K4 means Pawn to king's 4th. This is e4 for white and e5 for black.
N-QB3 means Knight to queen's bishop 3. This is Nc3 for white or Nc6 for black. It's pretty easy once you get teh hang of it. I actually perfer descriptive to algebraic becasue it makes it easier for em to follow games as long as I remember whose move it is.
So, in general for we have
Piece that Moves -(x) Piece's square that it moves in front of, number that square is in relation to the abck rank.
Originally posted by Wibble WobbleLearning to read descriptive notation will open the door to many books you would otherwise not be able to read. With a little practice it becomes very natural. I actually prefer it.
My dad got me the book "Fischer/Spassy" today on, obviously, there games, the run up to the games, everything else to do with it.
The thing is the games part is in the old (algebric???) notation eg...
1 P-K4 P-K4
...for e4 e5. Does any here acctually understand it? Its quite confuzling to me 🙁
(btw who acctually won?)