my USCF membership. Be afraid. Be very afraid!

USA CHESS DAY :)

From another site, White = Qe6. Black = Kh8 Qe4 Rf7 g7 h7. I played Qe8+

ketchuplover: Second site where I'm asking myself what happened to the white king, LOL

rabbitoid:

Irrelevant my good man Irrelevant

ketchuplover: right :)

William Lombardy

No moving non-pawns onto your foe's side of the board until all your non-pawns have moved.

If black is adjusting his pieces as white makes move one I think (s)he should have to move a (specific)knight if possible. Thoughts?

for white and black :)

on another site my black pawn was on e2 for 17 moves!

will be Carlsen vs. Caruana. USA! USA! USA!

has won the daily chess world championship :)

and you might receive a free digital issue! Act fast!

Decree #1 - Players must count to a minimum of 10 in their chosen language before moving. Your cooperation is appreciated.

ketchuplover:
Decree #2 All clocks and or time controls will be adjusted accordingly

#591502 at www.stansco.com

Ding Liren is now at 98 unbeaten games and counting!!!!!!!!!!!

Mikhail Tal held the record at 95 games since 1974.

has retired.

ketchuplover: Wild game.

Walter Montego:

muchas gracias meine herr

am I the only person who still uses descriptive notation. I really still after over 40 years playing chess still find algebraic horrible. P-k4 forever

Nothingness: I do not use notation as I no longer record the games. I used to use algebraic notation for recording Dark Chess games as it is easier to follow a game when the site uses it instead of having an option to use descriptive notation. The algebraic notation is simple and doesn't have hardly any ambiguity in use. Why do you prefer descriptive notation? Force of habit? Both notations work, why not use the one that is easier to find in current writings?

for inducting Susan Polgar

Walter Montego: to me its much simpler to use for the same reasons you give for algebraic.. Algebraic too confusing to me.. I cant visualize the board with algebraic. I need to see the "X" for a capture which isn't present in algebraic. when I see something in notation for example E4,, what is moving to E4? I need to see "P"

AH, you are talking about the abbreviated algebraic notation. I do not use it as I do not like it for the reasons that you state.

P-K4 is P E2-E4. On this site it is e2-e4. I am not sure why Pawns are disrespected so much that they do not get a "P". As much as I do not like Pawns, I still put a "P" for them when I keep notation. I may not like them, but I know they are of key importance to Chess and many variants. I want to see it spelled out. Just writing e4 does not work for me.

You might try changing the settings as that is how it appears on the Chess variants I play.
It appears as e2-e4 instead of e4.

If u want 2 play postal chess vs. an inmate please let me know. thanx

ketchuplover: There's still the IECC, https://www.chess-iecc.com/ I have played there for 5-6 years during the 90s, then stopped when IYT appeared, which was much more convenient.

is closing on August 15,2019

has bought chesshere.com

ketchuplover:

His address is in my profile PLEASE PLAY A CALIFORNIA INMATE

has ceased operations after a data breach on June 16

ketchuplover:

He desperately needs more opponents. Please help him asap. tyvm (see post from April 4th)

Hello,
a new strategy game is coming soon on Kickstarter. The game is much more complex than Chess and Go.
https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/bollwerk178/bollwerk-178
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F4GPYG9gK0I&t=7s

English Chess Federation asap tyvm

ends at 125 games !!!

please join the US Chess Federation before June 1st --- thanx

ketchuplover:
USA inmate D38967 awaits your move via jpay.com...ENJOY!

stansco.com will die on 10/20/2021

the new king is DING LIREN

the new king is DING LIREN

Nothingness: You are not the only Chess player or annotator using Descriptive Notation, Sir. There are other enthusiasts of Descriptive Notation, including myself. My personal Web page on Chess is entirely written in Descriptive Notation: https://cssdixieland.neocities.org/cssdixieland_chess

I can read various game notation systems that have existed throughout History, as a completely unified system has NEVER existed, but my own writing is ALWAYS, INVARIABLY, in Descriptive Notation.

I normally score all my games over the board. I ONLY play slow, Classic Chess. Rapid Chess is not for me and I refuse to play that. In tournaments and championships some players or observers comment on my Descriptive Notation (they of course recognise it as Descriptive), and some referee has mentioned that a version of Algebraic Notation is the 'official standard', usually the short version of Algebraic.

But it is NOT mandatory, and even if it were, I am not a man ready to surrender his deeply cherished beliefs. Descriptive Notation is a long-honoured TRADITION and I shall NEVER surrender it. Period.

I accept that a referee may be unable, or rather unwilling, to understand Descriptive Notation. Then I waive my claim to a tied game by three-fold repetition, or by fifty moves each without capture, without moving pawn and without check mate, or by any other rule, but I shall NEVER surrender my beliefs.

Walter Montego: Because Descriptive Notation is the TRADITIONAL ONE in English, French, Italian, Catalan, Spanish, Portuguese, and other languages. I can easily read 'modern' publications that use Algebraic Notation, but if I send any comment, it will be invariably, always, in Descriptive Notation. Whether others understand it, or not. Most of our historical Masters used Descriptive Notation, and it would be a disconsideration to them (if not a disrespect) to use another notation strange to our History.

cssdixieland: Yeah, well, your argument makes about as much sense as the people that say the United States should never, ever adopt the Metric System. There's better ways to do things, and you are right we do not have to do things in a different way just because there are better ways.

Keeping track of the moves in a Chess game is just a way to save the game. Why does it matter how it is done? You make it sound like using the Algebraic Notation is the worse thing in the world, and using tradition as a reason is one reason of many I have heard why we do not use the Metric System here. On BrainKing there is also a pictorial notation, though it does use the algebraic numbering for the squares. My version of the Algebraic Notation is not standard. I do not use shortcuts. I name both squares and I use - for move, and × for capture, and I use the standard abbreviation for the piece every time for every move. My way of using Algebraic Notation eliminates all ambiguity, and it is very easy to use. I can still use Descriptive Notation, but why should I? It is easy to make mistakes using it, and has all sorts of ambiguous moves that require care when recording a game so that you get the right move recorded. I suppose it has a romance to it as it treats both sides equally, but other than that, I see no advantage to preferring it over Algebraic Notation.

When you posted here in reply to a four year old post, I was surprised. I had thought that Descriptive Notation had been completely replaced, and only people that study old games written before Algebraic Notation took over would need to know Descriptive Notation. I find out that I am incorrect in this assumption. Are their many people that share your belief in the Descriptive Notation? The reason to keep track is so that you can replay the game or share it with someone else. If most people do not know Descriptive Notation and you only publish games using it, you will lose a lot of people, or those people must learn it.

Which system is easier? The Metric System or U.S. Standard? We both know the Metric System is easier, but the U.S. Standard has many adherents over the Metric. The Metric System's simplicity is one major reason why is should be used in the United States, though I can think of more reasons. I like the U.S. Standard, but I am also very good with numbers. Most Americans are not, so why do they resist the Metric System? Laziness? Inertia? Or maybe know one cares? You got me why. Considering we have had a decimal money system since 1792, you'd think we would have been on the Metric System bandwagon since the French invented it. Consider that the Metric System was adopted as the standard in United States in 1866 and 1876 and it sill is not universal. That's right, over 150 years ago. It's tradition.

Nothingness: I just came across cssdixieland's post, which got me to go back and find our two posts from 2019, though just a short scroll on this page.
I wrote in my reply to him that I use a long version of the Algebraic Notation. I do not take shortcuts. I write the piece abbreviation, and I name both pieces if a capture is made and I use an × to denote a capture or a - for moving a piece to a square without a capture. I also name the square the piece is moved from to the square the piece is moving to.

So 1. P-K4 as I often see it in Algebraic Notation is just 1. e4
In my notation it is 1. P E2-E4
I only write in capital letters.

Let us say a capture is made.
Abbreviation and shortcuts are also widely used in Descriptive Notation.

Say 23. R×R, and not as 23. R on QB1 × R on QB3 unless there is ambiguity as to which Rook might take the opponent's Rook on which B file if the other opponent's Rook happens to be on KB3 while White's other Rook is on KB1.
Then it might be 23. R(QB1)×R

In my notation this never happens and it looks the same regardless of the position.
23. R×R C1-C3
I am not sure how the main way of Algebraic Notation does this, though it seems it is geared to using the least amount of writing as possible.

I had not thought that someone would leave out the × when making a capture. I just came across someone writing it that way. I am having a very hard time following the games he writes about. How lazy of him not to write the × or -. What does it save? Why do it? Is this common among current players?

Walter Montego: I hope I’m still here in 4 years to read the response. 

Clandestine 1: :)

Google "Chess conversion algebraic descriptive"
You can find conversion programs you can use in case you want to read chess literature written in a format you don't like.

Q on d8,Pon d4&d5,Opposing K on d6