Content deleted Content added
mNo edit summary |
Double sharp (talk | contribs) →Continued use in some symmetrical contexts: new section |
||
Line 86:
:I was just looking at some old issues, and I can state that as late as December 1975, the magazine ''Chess Life & Review'' was still using descriptive notation exclusively. They did have a box in every issue explaining algebraic notation and encouraging its use, however. Beyond that, I recall that Larry Evans' monthly column was the last holdout: he continued to discuss submissions in whatever form the reader happened to send. (Evans himself argued for algebraic as being unambiguous and universal whenever someone asked.) [[User:WHPratt|WHPratt]] ([[User talk:WHPratt|talk]]) 14:17, 17 April 2013 (UTC)
== Continued use in some symmetrical contexts ==
Annoyingly I cannot remember where I've seen this, but if my memory serves well, DN is still sometimes used in especially symmetrical contexts even when AN is used in the rest of the work. It's like the implicit use of DN in phrases like "rook on the seventh" (which in AN is the second rank if Black's doing it). One might then speak of the weakness at KB2 instead of that at f2/f7, or perhaps PxP listed in variations when it doesn't matter which pawn is doing the taking. Or perhaps in the ultimate sentence justifying the use of DN in such a scenario: "A fianchetto consists of the moves P-N3 and B-N2". [[User:Double sharp|Double sharp]] ([[User talk:Double sharp|talk]]) 18:44, 22 November 2021 (UTC)
| |||