info
Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
What kind of notation was predominantly used in the US in 1983?
14 views
Skip to first unread message
The Horny Goat
Feb 17, 2022, 9:59:59 PM2/17/22
to
Here's a question for all of you particularly the Americans.
What kind of notation was predominantly used in the US in 1983? The
point of my question is that that was the year Walter Tevis wrote The
Queens Gambit and throughout the book (which was I think supposed to
be taking place in the late 60s - which would make Beth Harmon about
5-7 years younger than Fischer - which was certainly in the
descriptive era but I'm pretty sure my scoresheets from 1983-84 were
in algebraic. Certainly by the late 80s both Chess Life and Inside
Chess were algebraic (and the figurine algebraic used by Chess
Informant had a large part to do with the switch and they started in
1965-66)
(There's a section in the front of each Informant showing the standard
symbols and descriptions in a dozen or so languages and to this day I
remember ?? in Serbo-Croatian was 'gruba greska' which a Croatian
fellow at the club taught us to say correctly)
But Tevis wrote the Queens Gambit in 1983 so what notation would have
been most common in the US at that time? (I watched the TV series when
it came out but only finished the book earlier today)
What kind of notation was predominantly used in the US in 1983? The
point of my question is that that was the year Walter Tevis wrote The
Queens Gambit and throughout the book (which was I think supposed to
be taking place in the late 60s - which would make Beth Harmon about
5-7 years younger than Fischer - which was certainly in the
descriptive era but I'm pretty sure my scoresheets from 1983-84 were
in algebraic. Certainly by the late 80s both Chess Life and Inside
Chess were algebraic (and the figurine algebraic used by Chess
Informant had a large part to do with the switch and they started in
1965-66)
(There's a section in the front of each Informant showing the standard
symbols and descriptions in a dozen or so languages and to this day I
remember ?? in Serbo-Croatian was 'gruba greska' which a Croatian
fellow at the club taught us to say correctly)
But Tevis wrote the Queens Gambit in 1983 so what notation would have
been most common in the US at that time? (I watched the TV series when
it came out but only finished the book earlier today)
Eli Kesef
Feb 18, 2022, 1:12:38 AM2/18/22
to
Ken Blake
Feb 18, 2022, 11:20:09 AM2/18/22
to
On Thu, 17 Feb 2022 18:59:56 -0800, The Horny Goat <lcr...@home.ca>
wrote:
>Here's a question for all of you particularly the Americans.
"All of you" means the two or three of us. There's almost nobody still
posting here, and most of the posts are by the very boring Eli Kesef,
posting the same boring three or four games he's played (against
different opponents) over and over and over and over again.
>What kind of notation was predominantly used in the US in 1983?
I don't know for sure, but I *think* by then it was mostly algebraic.
I stopped playing competitively around 1959, and almost everyone then
still kept score in descriptive notation. I was one of the very few
USAians who used algebraic (starting around 1955), mostly because I
had several opening books that used algebraic and because I used to
sometimes get copies of Shakhmaty which used algebraic. I used the
notation I was most used to.
My scoresheets were even stranger because I used the German initials
for the names of the pieces, since I was used to German scores in my
opening books in German (some written in German, some translated to
German from the Russian).
>The
>point of my question is that that was the year Walter Tevis wrote The
>Queens Gambit and throughout the book (which was I think supposed to
>be taking place in the late 60s - which would make Beth Harmon about
>5-7 years younger than Fischer - which was certainly in the
>descriptive era but I'm pretty sure my scoresheets from 1983-84 were
>in algebraic. Certainly by the late 80s both Chess Life and Inside
>Chess were algebraic (and the figurine algebraic used by Chess
>Informant had a large part to do with the switch and they started in
>1965-66)
The most recent Chess publication I have is the New York Times book on
the 1972 Fischer-Spassky match (I bought it many years later when I
found out that it had a picture of me in it). It's descriptive.
>(There's a section in the front of each Informant showing the standard
>symbols and descriptions in a dozen or so languages
I used to know the initials of the pieces in several languages besides
English: German, Russian, Serbo-Croat, French, and others, but I've
forgotten almost all except for German.
> and to this day I
>remember ?? in Serbo-Croatian was 'gruba greska' which a Croatian
>fellow at the club taught us to say correctly)
>
>But Tevis wrote the Queens Gambit in 1983 so what notation would have
>been most common in the US at that time? (I watched the TV series when
>it came out but only finished the book earlier today)
Wait! I just found an article in my files by Hans Berliner, "From the
Deathbed of 4. N-N5 in the Two Knights Defense," written in 1979,
about the Fritz variation. It uses descriptive notation. That's not
very far before 1983. I don't remember where I got the article. On the
Internet? Somewhere else?
wrote:
>Here's a question for all of you particularly the Americans.
posting here, and most of the posts are by the very boring Eli Kesef,
posting the same boring three or four games he's played (against
different opponents) over and over and over and over again.
>What kind of notation was predominantly used in the US in 1983?
I stopped playing competitively around 1959, and almost everyone then
still kept score in descriptive notation. I was one of the very few
USAians who used algebraic (starting around 1955), mostly because I
had several opening books that used algebraic and because I used to
sometimes get copies of Shakhmaty which used algebraic. I used the
notation I was most used to.
My scoresheets were even stranger because I used the German initials
for the names of the pieces, since I was used to German scores in my
opening books in German (some written in German, some translated to
German from the Russian).
>The
>point of my question is that that was the year Walter Tevis wrote The
>Queens Gambit and throughout the book (which was I think supposed to
>be taking place in the late 60s - which would make Beth Harmon about
>5-7 years younger than Fischer - which was certainly in the
>descriptive era but I'm pretty sure my scoresheets from 1983-84 were
>in algebraic. Certainly by the late 80s both Chess Life and Inside
>Chess were algebraic (and the figurine algebraic used by Chess
>Informant had a large part to do with the switch and they started in
>1965-66)
the 1972 Fischer-Spassky match (I bought it many years later when I
found out that it had a picture of me in it). It's descriptive.
>(There's a section in the front of each Informant showing the standard
>symbols and descriptions in a dozen or so languages
English: German, Russian, Serbo-Croat, French, and others, but I've
forgotten almost all except for German.
> and to this day I
>remember ?? in Serbo-Croatian was 'gruba greska' which a Croatian
>fellow at the club taught us to say correctly)
>
>But Tevis wrote the Queens Gambit in 1983 so what notation would have
>been most common in the US at that time? (I watched the TV series when
>it came out but only finished the book earlier today)
Deathbed of 4. N-N5 in the Two Knights Defense," written in 1979,
about the Fritz variation. It uses descriptive notation. That's not
very far before 1983. I don't remember where I got the article. On the
Internet? Somewhere else?
The Horny Goat
Feb 18, 2022, 3:08:14 PM2/18/22
to
On Fri, 18 Feb 2022 09:20:06 -0700, Ken Blake <K...@invalid.news.com>
wrote:
>On Thu, 17 Feb 2022 18:59:56 -0800, The Horny Goat <lcr...@home.ca>
>wrote:
>
>>Here's a question for all of you particularly the Americans.
>
>"All of you" means the two or three of us. There's almost nobody still
>posting here, and most of the posts are by the very boring Eli Kesef,
>posting the same boring three or four games he's played (against
>different opponents) over and over and over and over again.
I tend to think that anybody who is in the 1800-2000 range or stronger
who loses as quickly as is typical in Kesef's traps is either
distracted or unprepared. I have reached losing positions as quickly
as those but not many. (I've spent most of my adult career in the
1700-1900 range - and am best known for my events which in 2003 got me
an International Arbiter title which I've let go dormant when FIDE
introduced licence fees - since I think a lot of the FIDE titles below
IM are mostly cash grabs - though it hangs on my wall next to my MBA
diploma and my Distinguished Toastmaster plaque)
>>What kind of notation was predominantly used in the US in 1983?
>
>I don't know for sure, but I *think* by then it was mostly algebraic.
That's what I thought though of course it would have been descriptive
in 1969-71 when Beth Harmon was doing her magic. For instance MCO 10
was descriptive (I think - am not going to go to my shelf to check)
though I'm pretty sure MCO 12 was algebraic or figurine algebraic.
>I stopped playing competitively around 1959, and almost everyone then
>still kept score in descriptive notation. I was one of the very few
>USAians who used algebraic (starting around 1955), mostly because I
>had several opening books that used algebraic and because I used to
>sometimes get copies of Shakhmaty which used algebraic. I used the
>notation I was most used to.
The Queen's Gambit was set in the late 60s which at least in North
America would have been the descriptive era. Informant started in 1966
and was figurine algebraic from the beginning while in Europe
generally algebraic was the name of the day. I saw one of Spassky's
scoresheets and it was definitely algebraic with the names of the
pieces being in Russian of course.
When I lived in Winnipeg (mid 1980s) I hung around the Communist
bookstore since they got imports of Russian chess books - I was gifted
about 3-4 years worth of Shahmaty Bulletin (which I subsequently
re-gifted when downsizing) from the late 1970s early 80s and they were
all Cyrillic algebraic. This is of course where I met Abe Yanofsky and
heard him reminisce about Groningen and how that changed his life. (He
entered law school on the Canadian GI bill shortly after and besides
playing chess had his law practice plus was a powerful city councillor
which opened the door to a lot of excellent tournament sites)
>My scoresheets were even stranger because I used the German initials
>for the names of the pieces, since I was used to German scores in my
>opening books in German (some written in German, some translated to
>German from the Russian).
>
that - in my opinion it was the best of the Reykjavik match books all
of which were published before the end of 1972) I've said before here
that in my opinion Informant 12 was the best of the series since it
includes all of Reykjavik 1972 plus that year's Olympiad.
wrote:
>On Thu, 17 Feb 2022 18:59:56 -0800, The Horny Goat <lcr...@home.ca>
>wrote:
>
>>Here's a question for all of you particularly the Americans.
>
>"All of you" means the two or three of us. There's almost nobody still
>posting here, and most of the posts are by the very boring Eli Kesef,
>posting the same boring three or four games he's played (against
>different opponents) over and over and over and over again.
who loses as quickly as is typical in Kesef's traps is either
distracted or unprepared. I have reached losing positions as quickly
as those but not many. (I've spent most of my adult career in the
1700-1900 range - and am best known for my events which in 2003 got me
an International Arbiter title which I've let go dormant when FIDE
introduced licence fees - since I think a lot of the FIDE titles below
IM are mostly cash grabs - though it hangs on my wall next to my MBA
diploma and my Distinguished Toastmaster plaque)
>>What kind of notation was predominantly used in the US in 1983?
>
>I don't know for sure, but I *think* by then it was mostly algebraic.
in 1969-71 when Beth Harmon was doing her magic. For instance MCO 10
was descriptive (I think - am not going to go to my shelf to check)
though I'm pretty sure MCO 12 was algebraic or figurine algebraic.
>I stopped playing competitively around 1959, and almost everyone then
>still kept score in descriptive notation. I was one of the very few
>USAians who used algebraic (starting around 1955), mostly because I
>had several opening books that used algebraic and because I used to
>sometimes get copies of Shakhmaty which used algebraic. I used the
>notation I was most used to.
America would have been the descriptive era. Informant started in 1966
and was figurine algebraic from the beginning while in Europe
generally algebraic was the name of the day. I saw one of Spassky's
scoresheets and it was definitely algebraic with the names of the
pieces being in Russian of course.
When I lived in Winnipeg (mid 1980s) I hung around the Communist
bookstore since they got imports of Russian chess books - I was gifted
about 3-4 years worth of Shahmaty Bulletin (which I subsequently
re-gifted when downsizing) from the late 1970s early 80s and they were
all Cyrillic algebraic. This is of course where I met Abe Yanofsky and
heard him reminisce about Groningen and how that changed his life. (He
entered law school on the Canadian GI bill shortly after and besides
playing chess had his law practice plus was a powerful city councillor
which opened the door to a lot of excellent tournament sites)
>My scoresheets were even stranger because I used the German initials
>for the names of the pieces, since I was used to German scores in my
>opening books in German (some written in German, some translated to
>German from the Russian).
>
>The most recent Chess publication I have is the New York Times book on
>the 1972 Fischer-Spassky match (I bought it many years later when I
>found out that it had a picture of me in it). It's descriptive.
Is that the one with the white cover about 6" x 8" in size? (I've got
>the 1972 Fischer-Spassky match (I bought it many years later when I
>found out that it had a picture of me in it). It's descriptive.
that - in my opinion it was the best of the Reykjavik match books all
of which were published before the end of 1972) I've said before here
that in my opinion Informant 12 was the best of the series since it
includes all of Reykjavik 1972 plus that year's Olympiad.
Ken Blake
Feb 18, 2022, 5:24:28 PM2/18/22
to
On Fri, 18 Feb 2022 12:08:10 -0800, The Horny Goat <lcr...@home.ca>
Yes.
>(I've got that
Look at the bottom picture just after page 122. At the back, about in
the middle is a young man with glasses and a horizontally-striped
shirt. That's me.
To my left is Bill Lombardy, pointing at something. He was a good
friend of mine.
To his left is Aben Rudy, who was my closest chess friend. He's still
alive (he's 86) and is still a close friend. Although we live in
different places and haven't seen each other in several years, we
still correspond by e-mail.
wrote:
>On Fri, 18 Feb 2022 09:20:06 -0700, Ken Blake <K...@invalid.news.com>
>wrote:
>
>>On Thu, 17 Feb 2022 18:59:56 -0800, The Horny Goat <lcr...@home.ca>
>>wrote:
>>
>>>Here's a question for all of you particularly the Americans.
>>
>>"All of you" means the two or three of us. There's almost nobody still
>>posting here, and most of the posts are by the very boring Eli Kesef,
>>posting the same boring three or four games he's played (against
>>different opponents) over and over and over and over again.
>
>I tend to think that anybody who is in the 1800-2000 range or stronger
>who loses as quickly as is typical in Kesef's traps is either
>distracted or unprepared.
Yep.
>On Fri, 18 Feb 2022 09:20:06 -0700, Ken Blake <K...@invalid.news.com>
>wrote:
>
>>On Thu, 17 Feb 2022 18:59:56 -0800, The Horny Goat <lcr...@home.ca>
>>wrote:
>>
>>>Here's a question for all of you particularly the Americans.
>>
>>"All of you" means the two or three of us. There's almost nobody still
>>posting here, and most of the posts are by the very boring Eli Kesef,
>>posting the same boring three or four games he's played (against
>>different opponents) over and over and over and over again.
>
>I tend to think that anybody who is in the 1800-2000 range or stronger
>who loses as quickly as is typical in Kesef's traps is either
>distracted or unprepared.
>(I've got that
Look at the bottom picture just after page 122. At the back, about in
the middle is a young man with glasses and a horizontally-striped
shirt. That's me.
To my left is Bill Lombardy, pointing at something. He was a good
friend of mine.
To his left is Aben Rudy, who was my closest chess friend. He's still
alive (he's 86) and is still a close friend. Although we live in
different places and haven't seen each other in several years, we
still correspond by e-mail.
William Hyde
Feb 18, 2022, 6:09:27 PM2/18/22
to
On Friday, February 18, 2022 at 3:08:14 PM UTC-5, The Horny Goat wrote:
> On Fri, 18 Feb 2022 09:20:06 -0700, Ken Blake <K...@invalid.news.com>
> wrote:
> >On Thu, 17 Feb 2022 18:59:56 -0800, The Horny Goat <lcr...@home.ca>
> >wrote:
> >
> >>Here's a question for all of you particularly the Americans.
> >
> >"All of you" means the two or three of us. There's almost nobody still
> >posting here, and most of the posts are by the very boring Eli Kesef,
> >posting the same boring three or four games he's played (against
> >different opponents) over and over and over and over again.
> I tend to think that anybody who is in the 1800-2000 range or stronger
> who loses as quickly as is typical in Kesef's traps is either
> distracted or unprepared.
You are paying too much attention to the numbers. Lichess may rate them 1800, but they are not 1800 CFC. The 1800 players are about 1200. Ratings inflation is a serious problem in such systems, and there is no motivation to take care of this, because players like being "highly rated".
> On Fri, 18 Feb 2022 09:20:06 -0700, Ken Blake <K...@invalid.news.com>
> wrote:
> >On Thu, 17 Feb 2022 18:59:56 -0800, The Horny Goat <lcr...@home.ca>
> >wrote:
> >
> >>Here's a question for all of you particularly the Americans.
> >
> >"All of you" means the two or three of us. There's almost nobody still
> >posting here, and most of the posts are by the very boring Eli Kesef,
> >posting the same boring three or four games he's played (against
> >different opponents) over and over and over and over again.
> I tend to think that anybody who is in the 1800-2000 range or stronger
> who loses as quickly as is typical in Kesef's traps is either
> distracted or unprepared.
I have reached losing positions as quickly
> as those but not many. (I've spent most of my adult career in the
> 1700-1900 range
William Hyde
The Horny Goat
Feb 19, 2022, 4:07:43 AM2/19/22
to
On Fri, 18 Feb 2022 15:24:24 -0700, Ken Blake <K...@invalid.news.com>
wrote:
>>>The most recent Chess publication I have is the New York Times book on
>>>the 1972 Fischer-Spassky match (I bought it many years later when I
>>>found out that it had a picture of me in it). It's descriptive.
>>
>>Is that the one with the white cover about 6" x 8" in size?
>
>Yes.
>
>>(I've got that
>
>Look at the bottom picture just after page 122. At the back, about in
>the middle is a young man with glasses and a horizontally-striped
>shirt. That's me.
>
>To my left is Bill Lombardy, pointing at something. He was a good
>friend of mine.
OK will have to dig it out at some point - that section of the
bookshelf currently has two stacks of boxes in front of it (with a
plastic jack-o-lantern in front of it which didn't get used this year
as my unvaxxed wife didn't want to deal with kids on Halloween)
>To his left is Aben Rudy, who was my closest chess friend. He's still
>alive (he's 86) and is still a close friend. Although we live in
>different places and haven't seen each other in several years, we
>still correspond by e-mail.
Will try to keep it in mind when I grab the book. Am pretty sure I
would recognize Lombardy either with or without collar.
wrote:
>>>The most recent Chess publication I have is the New York Times book on
>>>the 1972 Fischer-Spassky match (I bought it many years later when I
>>>found out that it had a picture of me in it). It's descriptive.
>>
>>Is that the one with the white cover about 6" x 8" in size?
>
>Yes.
>
>>(I've got that
>
>Look at the bottom picture just after page 122. At the back, about in
>the middle is a young man with glasses and a horizontally-striped
>shirt. That's me.
>
>To my left is Bill Lombardy, pointing at something. He was a good
>friend of mine.
bookshelf currently has two stacks of boxes in front of it (with a
plastic jack-o-lantern in front of it which didn't get used this year
as my unvaxxed wife didn't want to deal with kids on Halloween)
>To his left is Aben Rudy, who was my closest chess friend. He's still
>alive (he's 86) and is still a close friend. Although we live in
>different places and haven't seen each other in several years, we
>still correspond by e-mail.
would recognize Lombardy either with or without collar.
Quadibloc
Mar 3, 2022, 9:19:13 PM3/3/22
to
On Thursday, February 17, 2022 at 7:59:59 PM UTC-7, The Horny Goat wrote:
> But Tevis wrote the Queens Gambit in 1983 so what notation would have
> been most common in the US at that time?
It was in 1981 that FIDE stopped recognizing descriptive chess notation, so from
> But Tevis wrote the Queens Gambit in 1983 so what notation would have
> been most common in the US at that time?
that point onwards, chess players in international tournaments had to record their
moves in algebraic.
But even in 1983, descriptive notation was used along with algebraic in the
pages of Chess Life. I'm not sure in what year the USCF made algebraic the only
recognized notation in the U.S..
John Savard
0 new messages