Algebraic v Descriptive (Something of a dinosaur)

[Paul Robson]

I am of the old school and use descriptive notation. A friend recently advised me that changing to algebraic would probably result in a 10 point grading improvement!
I am also entering a tournament later in the year where descriptive will not be a recognised as a way of recording moves.

I tried to implement this change at the Blackpool congress but found it really difficult? I do read most books and talk in algebraic when discussing games but alas putting pen to paper during the game is a different matter.

Does anyone have any tips I am told any transition could take a year before I become comfortable with Algebraic , ( I have enough problems playing already).

I played worse than my grade at Blackpool but, not wanting to take away from my opponents, this may have had more to do with drinking with Mr Wolstencroft and Mr Merryman than recording of the moves!

Does your performance improve using algebraic or is this a myth ?

[John Upham]

Try studying an endgame book written in descriptive notation containing many variations and attempt to follow them.

Compare that experience with the same book written in algebraic notation.

[Arshad Ali]

Does your performance improve using algebraic or is this a myth?

I think it's for real. When I'm thinking of a position, I'm partly verbalising at the same time. Thinking and verbalising in terms of descriptive is a pain and inefficient.

[Rob Thompson]

On the other hand, when i look at a position i don't really verbalise at all. My thoughts are simply too abstract for that

[David Buckley]

I am of the old school and use descriptive notation. A friend recently advised me that changing to algebraic would probably result in a 10 point grading improvement!
I am also entering a tournament later in the year where descriptive will not be a recognised as a way of recording moves.

I tried to implement this change at the Blackpool congress but found it really difficult? I do read most books and talk in algebraic when discussing games but alas putting pen to paper during the game is a different matter.

Does anyone have any tips I am told any transition could take a year before I become comfortable with Algebraic , ( I have enough problems playing already).

I played worse than my grade at Blackpool but, not wanting to take away from my opponents, this may have had more to do with drinking with Mr Wolstencroft and Mr Merryman than recording of the moves!

Does your performance improve using algebraic or is this a myth ?

Almost certainly a myth. I can not think of any plausible reason why it should make a difference apart from the fact that modern chess books are written in algebraic so might be easier to understand if you are in the habit of thinking in algebraic yourself.

[Joey Stewart]

One of the kids I teach would benefit hugely from changing to proper notation instead of the old school system - he frequently runs out of time while trying to notate games in the last few minutes and having to stop and think about whether to write down things like queens knight 4 or queens knight 5 (it can be both, depending what side of the board you look at it from)

[David Buckley]

One of the kids I teach would benefit hugely from changing to proper notation instead of the old school system - he frequently runs out of time while trying to notate games in the last few minutes and having to stop and think about whether to write down things like queens knight 4 or queens knight 5 (it can be both, depending what side of the board you look at it from)

Have you told him that he doesn't have to notate if he has less than five minutes on his clock?

[Joey Stewart]

Several times, but he doesnt often rememeber it when under pressure and continues to write them anyway. I think it is a consequence of playing in a league with adjournments - people have almost no sense of danger, thinking that the adjournment leaves them completely safe from timing out, when actually it is still quite possible with slow play.

[Matt Mackenzie]

Started off on descriptive, but switched to algebraic in the mid 1980s. Like many players, one remains "bilingual" though

Those (mostly) young 'uns who don't understand descriptive at all are missing out on quite a bit in terms of older chess literature, IMO

[Alex Holowczak]

Does anyone have any tips I am told any transition could take a year before I become comfortable with Algebraic , ( I have enough problems playing already)

Do you keep your old scoresheets? Translate them into algebraic. Play through them on a board too, so you can visualise the moves and what they mean in terms of letters.

It'll take a while for you to adjust, just as it would to any other change in chess. E.g. if you just started using a digital clock. If you'd always played adjournments and had to play quickplay finishes. Even something like trying to learn a new opening. After a while, it'll become second nature. The important thing is, I guess, not to be afraid of it.

My experience of league chess is that the people who struggle to write their moves down most are the ones who write in descriptive. I think that by writing in algebraic, if you became "fluent" in it, writing the moves down will become easier.

[Christopher Kreuzer]

The only point I really worry about writing moves down is at adjournments. Does anyone else get paranoid about writing the wrong move down (i.e. getting the square wrong)?

[Alex Holowczak]

The only point I really worry about writing moves down is at adjournments. Does anyone else get paranoid about writing the wrong move down (i.e. getting the square wrong)?

Writing in Russian, I'm looking forward to the first time someone sees K(wherever), and claims a win because my King can't go there.

[AustinElliott]

I did Russian O level mainly to write moves in Russian algebraic, but it proved sufficiently thought-requiring - especially when getting short of time - that I soon defaulted back to English. I did pass the O level, though.

Our Russian O level book was very "era-dependent" (this was the late 70s). I remember the first phrase was (apologies for my transcription from the Cyrillic):

"Vot Ivan na traktorye. Ivan rabotayet na Kholkhozye"

A "Kholkhoz" was a collective farm. Somehow I don't imagine there are too many of those left in Russia.

Getting back to the topic of chess strength and algebraic notation, Bobby Fischer is probably the most famous example of a player who stuck to descriptive notation and never adopted algebraic. He seemed to do OK, at least as regards his actual chess-playing...

[Kevin Thurlow]

"drinking with Mr Wolstencroft "

No change there then.

You just get used to algebraic, I found it a bit confusing when I changed about 40 years ago, and still occasionally write g3 instead of g6, but most of the moves on the scoresheet are legal, if not sensible.

[Andy Price]

I too found it really difficult to change, 20 years ago, and still make mistakes. Mind you I probably made mistakes using descriptive in the past! It is worth the effort, just so you can discuss the game with young whippersnappers (anyone under 50) who don't understand descriptive.