Old chess notations? • page 2/2 • General Chess Discussion • lichess.org

First off, good book! It'll be well worth picking up descriptive to unlock its pages.

And there is after all one advantage to descriptive: you can name a square irrespective of color. So for example if I want to denote that notorious unprotected square next to my opponent's king, I can say KB7 (instead of having to resort to something goofy like f2/f7).

First off, good book! It'll be well worth picking up descriptive to unlock its pages. And there is after all one advantage to descriptive: you can name a square irrespective of color. So for example if I want to denote that notorious unprotected square next to my opponent's king, I can say KB7 (instead of having to resort to something goofy like f2/f7).

jomega edited

#12

A little older is the descriptive in the 1895 Hastings tournament book, which is free on google. For example...

White Black
1 P to Q4 P to Q4
2 P to QB4 P to K3
3 Kt to Qb3 Kt to Kb3
4 Kt to Kb3 B to K2
5 P to K3 Castles
6 B to K2 PxP

and later in that game (Burn - von Bardeleben)
12 B to Q2 QKt to Q2
14 B to K sq

I read somewhere that some of the chess sets had written on the base of the Rooks, Knights, and Bishops the initials to distinguish the piece from its twin. Hence, what would be ambiguous notation could be avoided as in Black's 12th move.
Is White's 14th move written that way instead of "B to K1" for some reason?

Of course without such a set, one has to keep track of which Knight is the King's Knight, which might mean retracing steps in a position far from the opening.

A little older is the descriptive in the 1895 Hastings tournament book, which is free on google. For example... White Black 1 P to Q4 P to Q4 2 P to QB4 P to K3 3 Kt to Qb3 Kt to Kb3 4 Kt to Kb3 B to K2 5 P to K3 Castles 6 B to K2 PxP and later in that game (Burn - von Bardeleben) 12 B to Q2 QKt to Q2 14 B to K sq I read somewhere that some of the chess sets had written on the base of the Rooks, Knights, and Bishops the initials to distinguish the piece from its twin. Hence, what would be ambiguous notation could be avoided as in Black's 12th move. Is White's 14th move written that way instead of "B to K1" for some reason? Of course without such a set, one has to keep track of which Knight is the King's Knight, which might mean retracing steps in a position far from the opening.

NM MrPushwood

#13

Go back even farther--say to Philidor's time--and you'll run into stuff like this:

W. King's pawn to the fourth of the file.
B. The same.

Talk about descriptive notation! :D (I guess scoresheets must've been bigger back then.)

It would also explain why Black might choose a symmetrical opening--a lot easier on the hand. :)

Go back even farther--say to Philidor's time--and you'll run into stuff like this: W. King's pawn to the fourth of the file. B. The same. Talk about descriptive notation! :D (I guess scoresheets must've been bigger back then.) It would also explain why Black might choose a symmetrical opening--a lot easier on the hand. :)