♡ 19 ( +1 | -1 ) Please explainIn a book I found that chess moves were recorded like this: 1. P-K4, P-K4; 2. Kt-KB3, Kt-QB3; 3 B-Kt5, P-QR3; etc... What kind of notation is this? I'm not familiar with it. Can somebody explain how to understand it to me? Thanx.
♡ 37 ( +1 | -1 ) Descriptive notationIt's fairly simple, e.g. yours would be: 1. Pawn to (white's) King 4, Pawn to (black's) king 4) 2. Knight to (white's) King Bishop 3, Knight to Queen Bishop 3, 3. Bishop to Knight 5, Pawn to Queen Rook 3, etc. In algebraic that would be: 1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bb5 a6. If, for example, white later played Nbd2, this would be specified by QN-Q2, or N(N1)-Q2. If White played Nfd2 it would be KN-Q2 or N(B3)-Q2.
♡ 15 ( +1 | -1 ) Re:So, istead of N for a knight we use Kt, and instead of indicating the letter (a..h) we use the name of a piece which in the initial position occupies this file. Is that right?
♡ 59 ( +1 | -1 ) YesI believe you have it! In English you can use either N or Kt for the knight -- whichever you prefer (languages other than English use different letters for the pieces, as you may know). The files are named after the pieces: King Rook file, King Knight file, etc. The Ranks are still numbered 1-8. the nice thing about English Descriptive notation is that it is not biased towards the white side of the board. Having learned chess when descriptive was still used in the US, I find it difficult to record a game in algebraic when I have black and find myself resorting to descriptive.
♡ 75 ( +1 | -1 ) Lasker.........in his "Manual of Chess", after discussing the two notations sums up:
"The descriptive notation goes down to and accentuates the reason for these moves, which are identical [in the two notations], the algebraical notation only states the geometry of the Chess-Board and therefore distinguishes between various geometrical regions of the board without heeding in any way the meaning of Chess strategy. Either notation has its advantages, and it is useful to know both of them. For the use of a people that notation will of course be preferred that has its root in custom, tradition, history of the national Chess community...."
Unfortunately, in the English-speaking world, respect for custom, tradition, and history has ceded to intellectual snobbery, and the descriptive notation has declined to the point where very few, if any, publications now use it.