Hatrack River Writers Workshop: Logical Fallacies plus a Chess Game

This is topic Logical Fallacies plus a Chess Game in forum Grist for the Mill at Hatrack River Writers Workshop.

To visit this topic, use this URL:
http://www.hatrack.com/ubb/writers/ultimatebb.php?ubb=get_topic;f=8;t=000035

Posted by extrinsic (Member # 8019) on :

We've been discussing train of thought in our reader-writing circle. Each of our latest and previous stories are structurally sound in the ways of plot, nonetheless we each sensed the stories were poorly formed structurally. What is off? we asked. How do we figure it out? What can be done about it? The trains of thoughts are jumpy, out of any kind of direct causal sequence, the emotional anchors drift so much that it's not possible to feel any resonance with the milieu, idea, character, or event. How do we get our stories in line?

The stories have nonlinear causation, a fallacy of logic where being "demonstrably flawed in logic or form, renders the argument invalid." In the case of story, flawed in linear causation, the emotional connection to the reader is not established, maintained, or resolved. The specific type of fallacy we've uncovered in our writing is Fallacy of False Cause or Non Sequitur where the train of causation "incorrectly assumes one thing is the cause of another." Two special cases of Non Sequitur--it does not follow--are at the root of our fallacies of causation, "post hoc ergo propter hoc, the fallacy of believing that temporal succession implies a causal relation." And "cum hoc ergo propter hoc, the fallacy of believing that happenstance implies causal relation (aka as fallacy of causation versus correlation: assumes that correlation implies causation)." Wikipedia: Logical Fallacy.

Blow me down. Sure, that's a lot of high-power thinking, in Latin no less; however, the result is that of perceiving what's not working with the stories we have under the microscope. Four scenes, each temporally related to the protagonist, but nonlinear in causation, relevant emotional clustering, or antagonism. The stories follow a stream of consciousness structure that is not rhetorically significant. Having a critical tool for evaluating linear causation has made all the difference for me. I'm incorporating this new insight into revisions of the stories that didn't have linear structure, in the ones I'm writing, and in my process of analysis for the stories of other emerging writers. I've also tested it against the published stories that I use as test beds. Huh, why didn't I see that before now?

Posted by Crystal Stevens (Member # 8006) on :

extrinsic; I've been thinking this for some time, but by chance are you a Vulcan

Posted by KayTi (Member # 5137) on :

Um, so are you saying that the flaw you've discovered is a poor cause-effect relationship? Cause-effects where the cause wasn't really the cause, or the effect doesn't naturally flow from the cause?

If so...I think it's in the book called STORY (yes I am still talking about this book, it's a good book!) by Robert McKee that he went into some great detail about how to manage the cause-effect relationships so that everything in the story naturally flows from one part to the next.

Posted by Kathleen Dalton Woodbury (Member # 59) on :

Causes are rather fun to play with in stories, if you know what you're doing. You can have characters operate by the fallacies extrinsic has mentioned, for example, even though you have to be sure that you, the writer, are not operating by such fallacies.

(In an attempt to help those who aren't sure what extrinsic was talking about, the two fallacies might be described as thinking "A causes B because B happens after A happens" (a priest thinks the sun rises each day because he gets up in the dark and sings to it) and thinking "A causes B because B happens under the same circumstances as A--or is related to A in some other way" (a guy thinks a girl likes him because she smiles every time she sees him--not realizing that she is smiling because of the eyeglasses he always wears). Both of these might qualify as "magical thinking" if someone tries to act on one of these "causes" to get the desired "effect.")

Another thing you can do with causes is to have a character try something in hopes of a specific result and something else happens instead (Murphy's law, anyone?). Just be sure what happens doesn't fit one of the above fallacies.

Posted by extrinsic (Member # 8019) on :

Crystal Stevens, no, I'm not Vulcan, although I do approach everday life in a dispassionately logical way, anymore. A product of many facets of hardship and grief.

KayTi, no, not that the flaw is a poor causal relationship. Causality is there in the stories I'm referring to, but it's not as readily accessible at the time of reading as needed. Nor is it easily accessible on the figurative level during reading. Deciphering the causal train of thought requires more work than is convenient at the time of reading so the intended emotional connection doesn't happen between the reader and the story. Information and context that is available to the writer isn't provided as needed when needed by the reader. I see it as a matter of the narrative arch. The writer is forcing the reader's efforts to meet up past the apex of the arch and into the writer's efforts that have fallen short due to sparsely related context. Too much "show," not enough context to know what it means. Resulting in disruptions for the reader's experience.

What I've wanted is a tool for identifying how much information is enough, too little, or too much for the reader to fully appreciate the emotional meaning without being overly guided to the meaning and a tool for combing out causation so it is logical, and not necessarily chronological. Logical fallacy provides one approach to unraveling what's not needed or what's missing through both a writer's fallacy of thinking there's enough context when there isn't--or too much context--and through seeing what's illogical about the train of causation.

The way that the special fallacies of logic apply to the stories we're discussing is the writer thinking that a causal focal character correlation, or a causal happenstance, synchronous, or chronological correlation suffices to "show" the meaning of the causal train of thought intended. Causality is present but insufficient to the needs of the story, especially the emotional train of thought.

I've uncovered an extended formula for causation: cause, emotional response, action, emotional response, reaction, emotional response, effect, emotional response. The resultant effect in turn escalates into a new cause, and so on toward climax, as long as the causes entrain in direct, logical nonfallacy correlation.

What has become most apparent to me is that the linear train of events is not the sole or necessarily the organizing feature of causation, rather it's the linear, escalating train of emotional responses that is the organizing and compelling feature of causation.

As an example, I've noted how the Kübler-Ross model, the Five Stages of Grief, is a common organizing feature in many stories I've read. Some by emerging writers, though, to me, their application of the model seems at times partial and on an instinctive level rather than deliberate. Yet, no small number of the published stories I've read conform so tightly to the model that the progression through the stages is apparent but invisible and natural to the larger story.

First a First Cause that's an Inciting Moment, say, a childhood existential crisis of identity. Then;

Anger
Denial
Depression
Bargaining
Acceptance

Followed by accommodation and resolution. Denouement!

[This message has been edited by extrinsic (edited October 03, 2008).]

Posted by philocinemas (Member # 8108) on :

So, are you applying this insight to all aspects of your stories - temporal, emotional, social, etc? How are you measuring this differently than a writer simply analyzing whether a character or event would or should react in a specific way to a specific event?

This possibly could relate to something on which I am currently working. It is the first of a possible series of stories loosely based on the artwork of M.C. Escher. My current project involves temporal causality and how that would be perceived if one could step outside of time. I am wrapping the story similar to Relativity, raising questions of whether specific "events" could indeed possibly occur or exist in such case. The story also has a strong emotional "rising" and "falling", which I am having difficulty pacing.

EDITED: You answered my second question while I was writing this.

[This message has been edited by philocinemas (edited October 02, 2008).]

Posted by extrinsic (Member # 8019) on :

Yes, the temporal and emotional aspects--most significantly the emotional. I'm not sure what's meant by "social" aspects.

The premises of the story are what I've found need linking and flowing in logical ways. Not so much analyzing specific character reactions or specific unfolding events, but rather the way that the imaginative premise, the dramatic premise, and the emotional premise are logically linked and escalate in proportionate tension: the vertical movement of plot. Just because an imaginative premise is interesting doesn't mean it will logically influence the dramatic premise and the emotional premise, though I believe it must for a story to be good.

In H.G. Wells The Time Machine, the time machine is the imaginative premise, interesting all by itself because it hadn't been done before, but without effective emotional and dramatic structures the narrative would have been merely an interesting anecdote. Without the time machine, the dramatic premise wouldn't have meant anything. The dramatic premise that is most powerful in the novel is the answer to a what if question, what if it were possible to perceive the future the way that history perceives the past, but in person. The emotional premise is a little harder to unravel from the story, but it too is tied tightly to the imaginative and dramatic premises.

Discerning the emotional premise--the root of the emotional structure--required examining what kind of story it is. From Damon Knight's story types, conflict resolution, revelation, trick ending, decision, etc.; from Orson Scott Card's milieu, idea, character, event, I concluded that the novel is a revelation story--the revelation that humankind is destined to repeat its mistakes because we don't learn from them--and an idea-type story--looking futureward to see that the future is the past, although with the added specter of mass human extinction is an inevitable consequence of "progress." So determining how the story invests a reader emotionally required exploring the imaginative premise's emotional impact. The idea and its resulting revelation is paramount to the emotional premise, not the milieu, the character, or the event. The story's emotional structure rises and falls on the power of the idea.

None of the story's emotional structure digresses from the idea nor depends upon the character, the milieu, or the event, per se, at least not as a logical fallacy of correlating a happenstance or temporal connection distinct from the idea.

An early question I now ask of a story inspiration is, what kind of story does the inspiration suggest. From the answer and the inspiration, I can glean the emotional premise and the dramatic premise. If the inspiration hasn't included the imaginative premise, it too.

[This message has been edited by extrinsic (edited October 03, 2008).]

Posted by philocinemas (Member # 8108) on :

quote:
Yes, the temporal and emotional aspects--most significantly the emotional. I'm not sure what's meant by "social" aspects.

I see literature as a reflective medium. I believe readers connect to what they experience as self-revelatory. This includes how they experience time, emotions, relationships, faith, politics, culture, understanding of history, expectations for the future, etc. Readers do not have to agree with what they read, but their most strongly held concepts and ideals must be truly challenged or reaffirmed for there to be this connection. As a writer, I aspire to challenge preconceived concepts and affirm my readers’ understanding of the nature of our existence. I concentrate deeply on duality; I find the principles of balance and paradox to be appealing. I enjoy ambiguities. Therefore, most of what I write has multiple meanings, of which my intent is to reach into the aforementioned areas of experience.

I find this topic intriguing in that I have recently been inundated with information directly related to it. I am reading a book about writing science fiction by James Gunn that addresses what makes science fiction different from other genres of literature. He discusses how characterization tends to be the primary interest in other genres and that setting and conflict tend to propel science fiction and fantasy. He also mentions that the social connection tends to be different - there is more of an inclination toward the common man/woman, representing the whole of mankind, in science fiction, and the setting or conflict is extraordinary. With other fiction, it is more concerned with the extraordinary individual and these other inclinations are also reversed. This affects the emotional relationship of the story to the reader.

There have been several discussions here in this forum that have danced around this issue. I even recently read elsewhere how the Star Wars prequels suffered due to a lack of substantiating the relationships of the characters and not investing into emotional bonds with the viewer.

Posted by extrinsic (Member # 8019) on :

I'm reminded of something similar Georg Lukács says in The Historical Novel (1937), that historical narrative interprets the past through present-day perceptions and expectations. Science fiction explores fantastical futureward technological, scientific and/or societal circumstances through present-day perceptions and expectations and, due to its fantastical nature, challenges those perceptions and expectations more than literary genres.

My favorite story theme and, coincidentally, tightly linked imaginative, dramatic, and emotional premises, is that of the familiar stranger striving to belong in an alienating, hostile society and being rejected at every turn.

e3.

[This message has been edited by extrinsic (edited October 04, 2008).]

Posted by Patrick James (Member # 7847) on :

Having taken extensive courses in logic I am almost ashamed to say that I understood every word you said in regards to logic theory, even those in latin.

I too have stories with linear/causation difficulties. I have aways tried to correct them by running them by a friend, however, we all now this can be embarassing when he points out thet George in the third chapter was Goergina, as somewhere along the line you had a rewrite and decided your main character should be a man but forgot to remove the scene where he/she is getting intimate with a man... Okay, so maybe we don't all share this expierence. And anyway you were probably refering to the more mundane nonlinear events that come from writing a story across many weeks, or years and having a different frame of mind when returning to your story. The different frame of mind being the cause why your character suddenly acts out of character. Or maybe your story just drifted apart time as you forgot where you were going with it, and you didnt make a good guideline.

In any event, You say you have a 'device/process' by which to make your stories more cohesive. Are you refering to critical thinking? And if it really helps, i wouldnt mind if you explained your process.

This was my reaction to your first post. Your second alludes to a method of gauging when you have 'info-dumped' then goes on about a test to see if your characters have gone out of character.

I think both of these are useful devices, which was the one you found useful?

Posted by extrinsic (Member # 8019) on :

I don't have the good fortune to be able to write good stories intuitively, yet, nor the luck to have story inspirations that right [sic] themselves. Nor do I have the desire to flounder around in the dark for the next decade writing, submitting, and revising and recylcing stories until I stumble onto a productive method, or be willing to admit I won't. So I've been developing a tool kit for evaluation of my writing, the writing of other emerging writers, and the published writing of authors. My goal is to thoroughly understand the theory of story so that I can produce effective story results at will. As a part of the process, I test my theories against published work, look for methods to objectively analyze emerging writers' stories, and apply what I learn to mine.

Publishing careers interest me, at least the concept of developmental editing and the practices of production editing, vocational interests as well as giving back and paying forward to other emerging writers struggling to reinvent the wheel from scratch the way I have, and many writers have. Writing good, publishable stories also interests me. I have a remarkable story to share that's been my Sisyphian burden for thirty-some years.

In the recent past, many publishers worked with writers to develop stories, worthwhile ones anyway. That's a fading practice not pursued in many houses and agencies, and not all that much of a priority in the ones who still do. Writing workshop and writer-reader circles have largely taken on the onus of developmental editing. My experiences are mixed, the efforts are there, the results are not. I think there's a missing method in what makes workshops effective and not knowing what the best practices and methods of developmental editing are, workshops generally don't explore them. It's not in my circle either, or wasn't until recently.

We've been through discussions of story elements, what they mean to a story, how they are applied, which different ones to emphasize for what type of story, and on and on toward mechanically sound stories that nevertheless lacked in some undetermined, fundamental way. We've discussed literal and figurative meanings, high-concept premises and low-concept premises. Subtext, trope, allegory, story modes, genres, and forms, lexicons, definitions, conventions, traditions, crossovers from other art mediums, Damon Knight's story types, Orson Scott Card's story types, Norman Friedman's plot types, and so on, ad infinitum. We explored causation, not fully aware of all its ramifications. We examined antagonism as it relates to conflict-resolution type stories and how it's presented in other story types. We scrutinzed tension and plot and how they correlate in the emotional structure of story. Again, on and on around the mulberry bush, the monkey chased the weasel, with no outcome and no sense of direction into where we were going.

One of the circle members had an insight from exploring train of thought as the organizing feature of a story's dramatic structure. Gosh! our discussions have been all over the place. No wonder train of thought became a talking point. I was exploring emotional structure and we didn't think the twain would meet. A lightbulb with the candlepower of a searchlight flared across the divide. We were climbing toward the writing mountain's summit from different faces. Non sequitur, it does not follow. A logical fallacy limited all of our writing progress. Just because the protagonist is at the center of circumstances, and experiences them in a chronological or other organizing sequence, doesn't make them any less mere happenstance, solely temporally correlated, or irrationally connected circumstances. No organizing emotional structure because the dramatic structure is flawed. I read a lot of emerging writers' stories. I've got six under the microscope right now, plus other testing of stories at online writing workshops that I sample when the urge strikes me. I've found that many otherwise good stories are unpublishable, in my opinion, solely due to one insight. They're organized in happenstance and temporal non sequitur emotional and structural causations.

Critical thinking, yes, that's the entire tool kit for developmental editing, for self's stories, for analysing others'. My process is to mark a story's structural benchmarks relative to its dramatic and emotional premises. Then analyze whether their structures follow a logical and interrelated progression of causation. Does it logically follow is the question I ask of every premise, phrase, and scene. I check for linear causation in emotional reponses and action-reactions. Like nonverbal expressions--action-reactions--emotional reponses come in cluster progressions.

Surprise, a primary emotion, can be fleeting, displayed and sublimated in an instant, say, less than a sentence in narrative. Surprise can lead to wonder, then awe, then admiration, then satiation, then satisfaction. Showing the progression of those responses can be through physical description of nonverbal expressions, dialogue, or internal monologue. Surprise can also lead to anger, denial, depression, bargaining, acceptance. Anger by itself invariably has a preceding cause. Surprise as an emotional response also has a preceding cause. So my process also tests for causation from the real-world Law that cause precedes effect. What is the First Cause is the first question I ask of any story anymore.

An example, the first scene of a story (actually this is a conflation of a host of stories I've read over the last year) develops the mythology of an object. (Mythology: what an object or place or other character means to a character, emotional sentiments, not what the mythical properties are.)

The opening scene promises a potent story based upon the possibilities of the object. However, it only marginally appears in the next scene and not at all in the two subsequent scenes. That's Chekov's Gun, obviously, but it has a causal purpose that was overlooked in the story. It was meant to represent a wish fulfillment goal for the protagonist. No First Cause yet, no plot movement. A hint of a desire or goal or purpose, maybe.

The next scene is a celebratory occasion. The object is a gift but its significance as a statement of the wish desire to be fulfilled isn't developed.

The next scene is a rebellious act by the protagonist. The First Cause presents. Dissatisfaction at the protagonist's lot in life. The rebellion is a reaction to that dissatisfaction, though, presented in backwards causation. At that point, I felt the story's tension begin to build, but the protagonist side-tracked into a less tension-building alternative to rebellion, second thoughts before engaging in the trials presented by the rebellion.

The last scene, the miscreant protagonist returns defeated to suffer the authority figure's scorn, the character who'd been rebelled against and who was the recipient of the gift. Fini. One of Friedman's plot types, the maturation plot, a coming of age story, yet, the protagonist returned to the baseline of adolescence rather than advancing toward adulthood. Non sequitur, happenstances, temporal connections only, dramatic premise and emotional premise inconsistent, climax averted, resolution deflected.

What I'm getting at it is not how to discern an info dump or whether a character has stepped away from what the character is intended to be, but how to discern if something is missing, what it is, when something is superfluous to a story or out of place, and how to objectively, conclusively determine same so it can be fixed. Unraveling non sequitur is just one tool, one I've overlooked and am now happy to have in my tool kit, it's the key developmental tool I've sought for organizing a story.

e3, anyone?

[This message has been edited by extrinsic (edited October 05, 2008).]

Posted by philocinemas (Member # 8108) on :

I studied movies in much the same way a few years back, analyzing what made a particular one enjoyable. A movie containing a constant succession of action, humor, romance, or suspense was not as enjoyable (nor as profitable) as one that created a series of [action], lull, emotional response, and re-action (repeating as in a crescendo) until reaching a climax and emotional response that peak together.

The best examples of this (though there are a great number) are Die Hard, Aliens, Titanic, and Ghostbusters.

d4 (?)

Posted by extrinsic (Member # 8019) on :

Since I stumbled onto these insights, many movies, television shows--including those banal Reality TV game shows--commercials, even those not-to-be-named panoplies of succession processes playing out in the news media, have bombarded me with examples of non sequitur. It is illustrative to study effective causation in good examples, but I learn more through studying it in failed examples. Grindhouse movies are a gas.

d4 (?) I'm not sure of your move. Algebraic notation marks each square with unique identifier coordinates. a1 is at the left end of White's back row. Assuming you mean d5, Nc3.

1. e3 d5
2. Nc3

Posted by philocinemas (Member # 8108) on :

My apologies; I was looking at my board upside down and wasn't paying attention to the numbering.

Nf6

Posted by philocinemas (Member # 8108) on :

It's your move.

Posted by extrinsic (Member # 8019) on :

Sorry for the delay, a deluge of work required my concentration. Also, I think that, without continuing an on-topic discussion, posting our moves here might be a nuisance to the membership. If we could perpetuate the discussion and tuck our moves into the message, we might not be so intrusive. Otherwise, perhaps we should take the game to e-mail. Qf3.

1. e3 d5
2. Nc3 Nf6
3. Qf3

[This message has been edited by extrinsic (edited October 07, 2008).]

Posted by Kathleen Dalton Woodbury (Member # 59) on :

Or I could move the topic to Grist for the Mill.

Posted by extrinsic (Member # 8019) on :

That would suit me fine, especially if there's an interested audience for a chess match here at Hatrack.

Posted by Kathleen Dalton Woodbury (Member # 59) on :

Done!

Posted by Zero (Member # 3619) on :

Ooh ooh ok ok

your move, extrinsic!

Posted by extrinsic (Member # 8019) on :

Zero, are you starting a new match than the one that philocinemas and I are in?

If so, I only have one board. In order to keep the games separate and be able to reset the board for each match we'll need to use the cumulative algebraic notational system. d5.

1. e4 d5

Posted by philocinemas (Member # 8108) on :

You're going to play Zero and me at the same time? OK...
Moving your queen out early. Aggressive.

1. e3 d5
2. Nc3 Nf6
3. Qf3 e6

Posted by Zero (Member # 3619) on :

Awww... what a boringly even defense. I was hoping to get into an evans game.

e4xd5

[This message has been edited by Zero (edited October 08, 2008).]

Posted by Zero (Member # 3619) on :

I'll start a game with you too philo, if you can handle it

Posted by Zero (Member # 3619) on :

I'll even let you be white.

Posted by extrinsic (Member # 8019) on :

extrinsic v philocinemas
1. e3 d5
2. Nc3 Nf6
3. Qf3 e6
4. Bb5+

Zero v extrinsic
1. e4 d5
2. xd5 Nf6

I'm rusty but inclined toward the challenge of the game. After a few matches I might not be as rusty.

Posted by philocinemas (Member # 8108) on :

Alright, Zero. I'll take you up on the challenge. I too am a little rusty. However, I do have two boards (and then some), but the challenge will be keeping my six-year-old son from using the pieces as army men.

extrinsic v philocinemas
1. e3 d5
2. Nc3 Nf6
3. Qf3 e6
4. Bb5+ Nc6

philocinemas v Zero
1. e4

Posted by Zero (Member # 3619) on :

For simplicity's sake I'm going to post all the games--even the one I'm not playing, and if we keepo them all together we'll never have to hunt for the games individually.

So:
extrinsic v philocinemas
1. e3 d5
2. Nc3 Nf6
3. Qf3 e6
4. Bb5+ Nc6

philocinemas v Zero
1. e4 e5

Zero v extrinsic
1. e4 d5
2. xd5 Nf6
3. Nc3

Posted by extrinsic (Member # 8019) on :

extrinsic v philocinemas
1. e3 d5
2. Nc3 Nf6
3. Qf3 e6
4. Bb5+ Nc6
5. d4

philocinemas v Zero
1. e4 e5

Zero v extrinsic
1. e4 d5
2. xd5 Nf6
3. Nc3 Bg4

Edit: Thanks, Ms. Dalton-Woodbury, for moving the thread and allowing us to play here.

[This message has been edited by extrinsic (edited October 09, 2008).]

Posted by philocinemas (Member # 8108) on :

Yes, thanks, KDW!

extrinsic v philocinemas
1. e3 d5
2. Nc3 Nf6
3. Qf3 e6
4. Bb5+ Nc6
5. d4 a6

philocinemas v Zero
1. e4 e5
2. Nf3

Zero v extrinsic
1. e4 d5
2. xd5 Nf6
3. Nc3 Bg4

Posted by Zero (Member # 3619) on :

(Yes, KDW, thanks.)

extrinsic v philocinemas
1. e3 d5
2. Nc3 Nf6
3. Qf3 e6
4. Bb5+ Nc6
5. d4 a6

philocinemas v Zero
1. e4 e5
2. Nf3 Nf6

Zero v extrinsic
1. e4 d5
2. xd5 Nf6
3. Nc3 Bg4
4. Be2

Posted by extrinsic (Member # 8019) on :

extrinsic v philocinemas
1. e3 d5
2. Nc3 Nf6
3. Qf3 e6
4. Bb5+ Nc6
5. d4 a6
6. Ba4

philocinemas v Zero
1. e4 e5
2. Nf3 Nf6

Zero v extrinsic
1. e4 d5
2. xd5 Nf6
3. Nc3 Bg4
4. Be2 c6

Posted by philocinemas (Member # 8108) on :

extrinsic v philocinemas
1. e3 d5
2. Nc3 Nf6
3. Qf3 e6
4. Bb5+ Nc6
5. d4 a6
6. Ba4 b5

philocinemas v Zero
1. e4 e5
2. Nf3 Nf6
3. Nc3

Zero v extrinsic
1. e4 d5
2. xd5 Nf6
3. Nc3 Bg4
4. Be2 c6

Posted by Zero (Member # 3619) on :

extrinsic v philocinemas
1. e3 d5
2. Nc3 Nf6
3. Qf3 e6
4. Bb5+ Nc6
5. d4 a6
6. Ba4 b5

philocinemas v Zero
1. e4 e5
2. Nf3 Nf6
3. Nc3 Nc6

Zero v extrinsic
1. e4 d5
2. xd5 Nf6
3. Nc3 Bg4
4. Be2 c6
5. Bxg4

Posted by philocinemas (Member # 8108) on :

extrinsic v philocinemas
1. e3 d5
2. Nc3 Nf6
3. Qf3 e6
4. Bb5+ Nc6
5. d4 a6
6. Ba4 b5
philocinemas v Zero
1. e4 e5
2. Nf3 Nf6
3. Nc3 Nc6
4. Bc4

Zero v extrinsic
1. e4 d5
2. xd5 Nf6
3. Nc3 Bg4
4. Be2 c6
5. Bxg4

Posted by extrinsic (Member # 8019) on :

extrinsic v philocinemas
1. e3 d5
2. Nc3 Nf6
3. Qf3 e6
4. Bb5+ Nc6
5. d4 a6
6. Ba4 b5
7. Bc3

philocinemas v Zero
1. e4 e5
2. Nf3 Nf6
3. Nc3 Nc6
4. Bc4

Zero v extrinsic
1. e4 d5
2. xd5 Nf6
3. Nc3 Bg4
4. Be2 c6
5. Bxg4 xd5

Posted by Robert Nowall (Member # 2764) on :

...ah, today, I regret I never properly learned the new chess game coding, and can't follow a game in it...

Posted by Zero (Member # 3619) on :

quote:
...ah, today, I regret I never properly learned the new chess game coding, and can't follow a game in it...

The new coding is pretty slick. The first letter (in caps) represents the piece you are moving. K=king, Q=queen, R=rook, N=knight, B=bishop, and for pawns there is no capital letter.

Then you add the tile that the piece is moving to. So if I am moving my bishop to c7, the move would be recorded as Bc7. If my piece takes another piece, this attack is marked by an x. So if my Bishop takes any piece on c7, the move would be recorded thusly "Bxc7". 1. The piece I move 2.the fact that he captures something and 3. his destination.

For pawn movements you just state the square the pawn moves to. So my first move was e4, so it's clearly a pawn move because it isn't preceded by a capital letter.

But... if a pawn captures a piece, the moves must include the column designation of the pawn I move (for example e, or a, or g) and then the x to indicate that I captured a piece, and of course the spot where it lands. So if my pawn is moving from e4 to capture a piece on d5 (doesn't matter what the piece is), it is recorded as "exd5"

And if I am putitng the king in check, I put a + at the end of the move. Bc5+ (bishop moves to c5 and checks the King), and when it is checkmate I put a # at the end. Bc5# (Bishop moves to c5 checkmate) or if you want to be really fancy Bxc5# (Bishop captures a piece on c5 and checkmates the King)

Any questions?

extrinsic v philocinemas
1. e3 d5
2. Nc3 Nf6
3. Qf3 e6
4. Bb5+ Nc6
5. d4 a6
6. Ba4 b5

philocinemas v Zero
1. e4 e5
2. Nf3 Nf6
3. Nc3 Nc6
4. Bc4 Be7

Zero v extrinsic
1. e4 d5
2. xd5 Nf6
3. Nc3 Bg4
4. Be2 c6
5. Bxg4 [c]xd5 (you did mean to capture with the pawn, right?)
6. Bf3

[This message has been edited by Zero (edited October 15, 2008).]

Posted by philocinemas (Member # 8108) on :

extrinsic v philocinemas
1. e3 d5
2. Nc3 Nf6
3. Qf3 e6
4. Bb5+ Nc6
5. d4 a6
6. Ba4 b5
7. Bc3 (your knight is on c3 - see #2)

philocinemas v Zero
1. e4 e5
2. Nf3 Nf6
3. Nc3 Nc6
4. Bc4 Be7
5. Ng5

Zero v extrinsic
1. e4 d5
2. xd5 Nf6
3. Nc3 Bg4
4. Be2 c6
5. Bxg4 [c]xd5 (you did mean to capture with the pawn, right?)
6. Bf3

Posted by extrinsic (Member # 8019) on :

extrinsic v philocinemas
1. e3 d5
2. Nc3 Nf6
3. Qf3 e6
4. Bb5+ Nc6
5. d4 a6
6. Ba4 b5
7. Bb3 (Whoopsy)

philocinemas v Zero
1. e4 e5
2. Nf3 Nf6
3. Nc3 Nc6
4. Bc4 Be7
5. Ng5

Zero v extrinsic
1. e4 d5
2. xd5 Nf6
3. Nc3 Bg4
4. Be2 c6
5. Bxg4 cxd5
6. Bf3 Kc6

Algebraic chess notation has been around for a while, since 1737 when Phillip Stamma introduced it. Although it didn't catch on very quickly, gradually in the 19th Century, but nearly universally by the middle of the 20th Century. Figurine algebraic notation is language independent, when the players' browsers supports the unicode for chess figures: ♔, ♕, ♖, ♗, ♘, ♙, ♚, ♛, ♜, ♝, ♞, ♟

Other notations in algebraic notation. King side castle 0-0, Queen side castle 0-0-0, pawn promotion has the chosen piece noted after the move, eg, e8Q, en passant is treated differently according to whichever standard, the least ambiguous being the original file letter, an x indicating the capture, the coordinate location of the square to which the capturing pawn moves, optionally followed by e.p., exf6 e.p. End of game, 1-0 for white won, 0-1 for black won, ½-½ for a draw. Slight variations persist in all standards of algebraic chess notation.

Posted by philocinemas (Member # 8108) on :

Extrinsic, now it gets interesting...

extrinsic v philocinemas
1. e3 d5
2. Nc3 Nf6
3. Qf3 e6
4. Bb5+ Nc6
5. d4 a6
6. Ba4 b5
7. Bb3 Qd6

philocinemas v Zero
1. e4 e5
2. Nf3 Nf6
3. Nc3 Nc6
4. Bc4 Be7
5. Ng5

Zero v extrinsic
1. e4 d5
2. xd5 Nf6
3. Nc3 Bg4
4. Be2 c6
5. Bxg4 cxd5
6. Bf3 Kc6

Posted by Zero (Member # 3619) on :

extrinsic v philocinemas
1. e3 d5
2. Nc3 Nf6
3. Qf3 e6
4. Bb5+ Nc6
5. d4 a6
6. Ba4 b5
7. Bb3 Qd6

philocinemas v Zero
1. e4 e5
2. Nf3 Nf6
3. Nc3 Nc6
4. Bc4 Be7
5. Ng5 O-O

Zero v extrinsic
1. e4 d5
2. xd5 Nf6
3. Nc3 Bg4
4. Be2 c6
5. Bxg4 cxd5
6. Bf3 Kc6 (that's not a legal move - did you mean Nc6? - if so then my response is 7. g3

Posted by extrinsic (Member # 8019) on :

extrinsic v philocinemas
1. e3 d5
2. Nc3 Nf6
3. Qf3 e6
4. Bb5+ Nc6
5. d4 a6
6. Ba4 b5
7. Bb3 Qd6
8. Nh3

philocinemas v Zero
1. e4 e5
2. Nf3 Nf6
3. Nc3 Nc6
4. Bc4 Be7
5. Ng5 0-0

Zero v extrinsic
1. e4 d5
2. exd5 Nf6
3. Nc3 Bg4
4. Be2 c6
5. Bxg4 cxd5
6. Bf3 Kc6
7. g3 Qb6

Doi! my eyes and fingers don't do what my mind wants them to do, mosttimes. Oh well, in for a penny, in for a pound.

Posted by Zero (Member # 3619) on :

Kc6 is an illegal move. Now I'm confused. Please clarify what your 6. move was please, extrinsic?

Posted by extrinsic (Member # 8019) on :

Doi! I did it again.

extrinsic v philocinemas
1. e3 d5
2. Nc3 Nf6
3. Qf3 e6
4. Bb5+ Nc6
5. d4 a6
6. Ba4 b5
7. Bb3 Qd6
8. Nh3

philocinemas v Zero
1. e4 e5
2. Nf3 Nf6
3. Nc3 Nc6
4. Bc4 Be7
5. Ng5 0-0

Zero v extrinsic
1. e4 d5
2. exd5 Nf6
3. Nc3 Bg4
4. Be2 c6
5. Bxg4 cxd5
6. Bf3 Nc6
7. g3 Qb6

Posted by Zero (Member # 3619) on :

haha, ok, ok. I was wondering how it would complicate my checkmating strategy if you had a magical teleporting king

extrinsic v philocinemas
1. e3 d5
2. Nc3 Nf6
3. Qf3 e6
4. Bb5+ Nc6
5. d4 a6
6. Ba4 b5
7. Bb3 Qd6
8. Nh3

philocinemas v Zero
1. e4 e5
2. Nf3 Nf6
3. Nc3 Nc6
4. Bc4 Be7
5. Ng5 0-0

Zero v extrinsic
1. e4 d5
2. exd5 Nf6
3. Nc3 Bg4
4. Be2 c6
5. Bxg4 cxd5
6. Bf3 Nc6
7. g3 Qb6
8. Nxd5

[This message has been edited by Zero (edited October 16, 2008).]

Posted by philocinemas (Member # 8108) on :

Sorry for the delay; my internet has been down.

extrinsic v philocinemas
1. e3 d5
2. Nc3 Nf6
3. Qf3 e6
4. Bb5+ Nc6
5. d4 a6
6. Ba4 b5
7. Bb3 Qd6
8. Nh3 Na5

philocinemas v Zero
1. e4 e5
2. Nf3 Nf6
3. Nc3 Nc6
4. Bc4 Be7
5. Ng5 0-0
6. 0-0

Zero v extrinsic
1. e4 d5
2. exd5 Nf6
3. Nc3 Bg4
4. Be2 c6
5. Bxg4 cxd5
6. Bf3 Nc6
7. g3 Qb6
8. Nxd5

Posted by extrinsic (Member # 8019) on :

A welcome deluge of work has kept me busy. But that's what's great about this forum process, the leisure of playing when it's convenient.

extrinsic v philocinemas
1. e3 d5
2. Nc3 Nf6
3. Qf3 e6
4. Bb5+ Nc6
5. d4 a6
6. Ba4 b5
7. Bb3 Qd6
8. Nh3 Na5
9. Ng5

philocinemas v Zero
1. e4 e5
2. Nf3 Nf6
3. Nc3 Nc6
4. Bc4 Be7
5. Ng5 0-0
6. 0-0

Zero v extrinsic
1. e4 d5
2. exd5 Nf6
3. Nc3 Bg4
4. Be2 c6
5. Bxg4 cxd5
6. Bf3 Nc6
7. g3 Qb6
8. Nxd5 Qd8

[This message has been edited by extrinsic (edited October 20, 2008).]

Posted by philocinemas (Member # 8108) on :

extrinsic v philocinemas
1. e3 d5
2. Nc3 Nf6
3. Qf3 e6
4. Bb5+ Nc6
5. d4 a6
6. Ba4 b5
7. Bb3 Qd6
8. Nh3 Na5
9. Ng5 h6

philocinemas v Zero
1. e4 e5
2. Nf3 Nf6
3. Nc3 Nc6
4. Bc4 Be7
5. Ng5 0-0
6. 0-0

Zero v extrinsic
1. e4 d5
2. exd5 Nf6
3. Nc3 Bg4
4. Be2 c6
5. Bxg4 cxd5
6. Bf3 Nc6
7. g3 Qb6
8. Nxd5 Qd8

Posted by satate (Member # 8082) on :

You guys are hilarious. I get the biggest kick out of your game. I think it's cool.

Posted by Zero (Member # 3619) on :

extrinsic v philocinemas
1. e3 d5
2. Nc3 Nf6
3. Qf3 e6
4. Bb5+ Nc6
5. d4 a6
6. Ba4 b5
7. Bb3 Qd6
8. Nh3 Na5
9. Ng5 h6

philocinemas v Zero
1. e4 e5
2. Nf3 Nf6
3. Nc3 Nc6
4. Bc4 Be7
5. Ng5 0-0
6. 0-0 d6

Zero v extrinsic
1. e4 d5
2. exd5 Nf6
3. Nc3 Bg4
4. Be2 c6
5. Bxg4 cxd5
6. Bf3 Nc6
7. g3 Qb6
8. Nxd5 Qd8
9. Nxf6+

Posted by Zero (Member # 3619) on :

Satate, I'm up for a third game if you want in on this action.

Posted by philocinemas (Member # 8108) on :

extrinsic v philocinemas
1. e3 d5
2. Nc3 Nf6
3. Qf3 e6
4. Bb5+ Nc6
5. d4 a6
6. Ba4 b5
7. Bb3 Qd6
8. Nh3 Na5
9. Ng5 h6

philocinemas v Zero
1. e4 e5
2. Nf3 Nf6
3. Nc3 Nc6
4. Bc4 Be7
5. Ng5 0-0
6. 0-0 d6
7. h3

Zero v extrinsic
1. e4 d5
2. exd5 Nf6
3. Nc3 Bg4
4. Be2 c6
5. Bxg4 cxd5
6. Bf3 Nc6
7. g3 Qb6
8. Nxd5 Qd8
9. Nxf6+

Posted by satate (Member # 8082) on :

Ha! I can't even play chess when there's a real chess board in front of me. Thanks for the offer though.

Posted by Zero (Member # 3619) on :

satate, well - the offer still stands if you change your mind. It's more for fun anyway - we're not at a tournament. And if you mean you don't know how to play, we'd be glad to teach you the basics. They're worth knowing.

extrinsic v philocinemas
1. e3 d5
2. Nc3 Nf6
3. Qf3 e6
4. Bb5+ Nc6
5. d4 a6
6. Ba4 b5
7. Bb3 Qd6
8. Nh3 Na5
9. Ng5 h6

philocinemas v Zero
1. e4 e5
2. Nf3 Nf6
3. Nc3 Nc6
4. Bc4 Be7
5. Ng5 0-0
6. 0-0 d6
7. h3 h6

Zero v extrinsic
1. e4 d5
2. exd5 Nf6
3. Nc3 Bg4
4. Be2 c6
5. Bxg4 cxd5
6. Bf3 Nc6
7. g3 Qb6
8. Nxd5 Qd8
9. Nxf6+

Posted by philocinemas (Member # 8108) on :

extrinsic v philocinemas
1. e3 d5
2. Nc3 Nf6
3. Qf3 e6
4. Bb5+ Nc6
5. d4 a6
6. Ba4 b5
7. Bb3 Qd6
8. Nh3 Na5
9. Ng5 h6

philocinemas v Zero
1. e4 e5
2. Nf3 Nf6
3. Nc3 Nc6
4. Bc4 Be7
5. Ng5 0-0
6. 0-0 d6
7. h3 h6
8. Nf3

Zero v extrinsic
1. e4 d5
2. exd5 Nf6
3. Nc3 Bg4
4. Be2 c6
5. Bxg4 cxd5
6. Bf3 Nc6
7. g3 Qb6
8. Nxd5 Qd8
9. Nxf6+

Posted by extrinsic (Member # 8019) on :

extrinsic v philocinemas
1. e3 d5
2. Nc3 Nf6
3. Qf3 e6
4. Bb5+ Nc6
5. d4 a6
6. Ba4 b5
7. Bb3 Qd6
8. Nh3 Na5
9. Ng5 h6
10. Nf7

philocinemas v Zero
1. e4 e5
2. Nf3 Nf6
3. Nc3 Nc6
4. Bc4 Be7
5. Ng5 0-0
6. 0-0 d6
7. h3 h6
8. Nf3

Zero v extrinsic
1. e4 d5
2. exd5 Nf6
3. Nc3 Bg4
4. Be2 c6
5. Bxg4 cxd5
6. Bf3 Nc6
7. g3 Qb6
8. Nxd5 Qd8
9. Nxf6+ gxf6

Posted by philocinemas (Member # 8108) on :

extrinsic, this is about to get very interesting...

extrinsic v philocinemas
1. e3 d5
2. Nc3 Nf6
3. Qf3 e6
4. Bb5+ Nc6
5. d4 a6
6. Ba4 b5
7. Bb3 Qd6
8. Nh3 Na5
9. Ng5 h6
10. Nf7 Kxf7

philocinemas v Zero
1. e4 e5
2. Nf3 Nf6
3. Nc3 Nc6
4. Bc4 Be7
5. Ng5 0-0
6. 0-0 d6
7. h3 h6
8. Nf3

Zero v extrinsic
1. e4 d5
2. exd5 Nf6
3. Nc3 Bg4
4. Be2 c6
5. Bxg4 cxd5
6. Bf3 Nc6
7. g3 Qb6
8. Nxd5 Qd8
9. Nxf6+ gxf6

Posted by Zero (Member # 3619) on :

extrinsic v philocinemas
1. e3 d5
2. Nc3 Nf6
3. Qf3 e6
4. Bb5+ Nc6
5. d4 a6
6. Ba4 b5
7. Bb3 Qd6
8. Nh3 Na5
9. Ng5 h6
10. Nf7 Kxf7

philocinemas v Zero
1. e4 e5
2. Nf3 Nf6
3. Nc3 Nc6
4. Bc4 Be7
5. Ng5 0-0
6. 0-0 d6
7. h3 h6
8. Nf3 Be6

Zero v extrinsic
1. e4 d5
2. exd5 Nf6
3. Nc3 Bg4
4. Be2 c6
5. Bxg4 cxd5
6. Bf3 Nc6
7. g3 Qb6
8. Nxd5 Qd8
9. Nxf6+ gxf6
10. c3

Posted by philocinemas (Member # 8108) on :

extrinsic v philocinemas
1. e3 d5
2. Nc3 Nf6
3. Qf3 e6
4. Bb5+ Nc6
5. d4 a6
6. Ba4 b5
7. Bb3 Qd6
8. Nh3 Na5
9. Ng5 h6
10. Nf7 Kxf7

philocinemas v Zero
1. e4 e5
2. Nf3 Nf6
3. Nc3 Nc6
4. Bc4 Be7
5. Ng5 0-0
6. 0-0 d6
7. h3 h6
8. Nf3 Be6
9. d3

Zero v extrinsic
1. e4 d5
2. exd5 Nf6
3. Nc3 Bg4
4. Be2 c6
5. Bxg4 cxd5
6. Bf3 Nc6
7. g3 Qb6
8. Nxd5 Qd8
9. Nxf6+ gxf6
10. c3

Posted by Zero (Member # 3619) on :

extrinsic v philocinemas
1. e3 d5
2. Nc3 Nf6
3. Qf3 e6
4. Bb5+ Nc6
5. d4 a6
6. Ba4 b5
7. Bb3 Qd6
8. Nh3 Na5
9. Ng5 h6
10. Nf7 Kxf7

philocinemas v Zero
1. e4 e5
2. Nf3 Nf6
3. Nc3 Nc6
4. Bc4 Be7
5. Ng5 0-0
6. 0-0 d6
7. h3 h6
8. Nf3 Be6
9. d3 d5

Zero v extrinsic
1. e4 d5
2. exd5 Nf6
3. Nc3 Bg4
4. Be2 c6
5. Bxg4 cxd5
6. Bf3 Nc6
7. g3 Qb6
8. Nxd5 Qd8
9. Nxf6+ gxf6
10. c3

Posted by philocinemas (Member # 8108) on :

extrinsic v philocinemas
1. e3 d5
2. Nc3 Nf6
3. Qf3 e6
4. Bb5+ Nc6
5. d4 a6
6. Ba4 b5
7. Bb3 Qd6
8. Nh3 Na5
9. Ng5 h6
10. Nf7 Kxf7

philocinemas v Zero
1. e4 e5
2. Nf3 Nf6
3. Nc3 Nc6
4. Bc4 Be7
5. Ng5 0-0
6. 0-0 d6
7. h3 h6
8. Nf3 Be6
9. d3 d5
10. Bb5

Zero v extrinsic
1. e4 d5
2. exd5 Nf6
3. Nc3 Bg4
4. Be2 c6
5. Bxg4 cxd5
6. Bf3 Nc6
7. g3 Qb6
8. Nxd5 Qd8
9. Nxf6+ gxf6
10. c3

Posted by extrinsic (Member # 8019) on :

I'll be away through Sunday, starting tomorrow morning.

extrinsic v philocinemas
1. e3 d5
2. Nc3 Nf6
3. Qf3 e6
4. Bb5+ Nc6
5. d4 a6
6. Ba4 b5
7. Bb3 Qd6
8. Nh3 Na5
9. Ng5 h6
10. Nf7 Kxf7
11. 0-0-0

philocinemas v Zero
1. e4 e5
2. Nf3 Nf6
3. Nc3 Nc6
4. Bc4 Be7
5. Ng5 0-0
6. 0-0 d6
7. h3 h6
8. Nf3 Be6
9. d3 d5
10. Bb5

Zero v extrinsic
1. e4 d5
2. exd5 Nf6
3. Nc3 Bg4
4. Be2 c6
5. Bxg4 cxd5
6. Bf3 Nc6
7. g3 Qb6
8. Nxd5 Qd8
9. Nxf6+ gxf6
10. c3 Bh6

Posted by philocinemas (Member # 8108) on :

extrinsic, your bishop is still on c1. I hope your trip is enjoyable.

[This message has been edited by philocinemas (edited October 24, 2008).]

Posted by extrinsic (Member # 8019) on :

I've really been more absentmined than usual lately. I notated castle the wrong direction.

extrinsic v philocinemas
1. e3 d5
2. Nc3 Nf6
3. Qf3 e6
4. Bb5+ Nc6
5. d4 a6
6. Ba4 b5
7. Bb3 Qd6
8. Nh3 Na5
9. Ng5 h6
10. Nf7 Kxf7
11. 0-0

philocinemas v Zero
1. e4 e5
2. Nf3 Nf6
3. Nc3 Nc6
4. Bc4 Be7
5. Ng5 0-0
6. 0-0 d6
7. h3 h6
8. Nf3 Be6
9. d3 d5
10. Bb5

Zero v extrinsic
1. e4 d5
2. exd5 Nf6
3. Nc3 Bg4
4. Be2 c6
5. Bxg4 cxd5
6. Bf3 Nc6
7. g3 Qb6
8. Nxd5 Qd8
9. Nxf6+ gxf6
10. c3 Bh6

Posted by philocinemas (Member # 8108) on :

extrinsic v philocinemas
1. e3 d5
2. Nc3 Nf6
3. Qf3 e6
4. Bb5+ Nc6
5. d4 a6
6. Ba4 b5
7. Bb3 Qd6
8. Nh3 Na5
9. Ng5 h6
10. Nf7 Kxf7
11. 0-0 Nb3

philocinemas v Zero
1. e4 e5
2. Nf3 Nf6
3. Nc3 Nc6
4. Bc4 Be7
5. Ng5 0-0
6. 0-0 d6
7. h3 h6
8. Nf3 Be6
9. d3 d5
10. Bb5

Zero v extrinsic
1. e4 d5
2. exd5 Nf6
3. Nc3 Bg4
4. Be2 c6
5. Bxg4 cxd5
6. Bf3 Nc6
7. g3 Qb6
8. Nxd5 Qd8
9. Nxf6+ gxf6
10. c3 Bh6

Posted by Zero (Member # 3619) on :

Sorry for the delay, everyone.

extrinsic v philocinemas
1. e3 d5
2. Nc3 Nf6
3. Qf3 e6
4. Bb5+ Nc6
5. d4 a6
6. Ba4 b5
7. Bb3 Qd6
8. Nh3 Na5
9. Ng5 h6
10. Nf7 Kxf7
11. 0-0 Nb3

philocinemas v Zero
1. e4 e5
2. Nf3 Nf6
3. Nc3 Nc6
4. Bc4 Be7
5. Ng5 0-0
6. 0-0 d6
7. h3 h6
8. Nf3 Be6
9. d3 d5
10. Bb5 d4

Zero v extrinsic
1. e4 d5
2. exd5 Nf6
3. Nc3 Bg4
4. Be2 c6
5. Bxg4 cxd5
6. Bf3 Nc6
7. g3 Qb6
8. Nxd5 Qd8
9. Nxf6+ gxf6
10. c3 Bh6
11. Qa4

Posted by philocinemas (Member # 8108) on :

extrinsic v philocinemas
1. e3 d5
2. Nc3 Nf6
3. Qf3 e6
4. Bb5+ Nc6
5. d4 a6
6. Ba4 b5
7. Bb3 Qd6
8. Nh3 Na5
9. Ng5 h6
10. Nf7 Kxf7
11. 0-0 Nb3

philocinemas v Zero
1. e4 e5
2. Nf3 Nf6
3. Nc3 Nc6
4. Bc4 Be7
5. Ng5 0-0
6. 0-0 d6
7. h3 h6
8. Nf3 Be6
9. d3 d5
10. Bb5 d4
11. Ne2

Zero v extrinsic
1. e4 d5
2. exd5 Nf6
3. Nc3 Bg4
4. Be2 c6
5. Bxg4 cxd5
6. Bf3 Nc6
7. g3 Qb6
8. Nxd5 Qd8
9. Nxf6+ gxf6
10. c3 Bh6
11. Qa4

Posted by extrinsic (Member # 8019) on :

I'm resigning both matches and moving on. Time to write.

Posted by philocinemas (Member # 8108) on :

No problem - I'm sure it was a pain with just one board. Zero, are you still in or should we all just call it quits?

Posted by Zero (Member # 3619) on :

Oh no, I'm still in. I'm just being very thoughtful about this next move, sorry.

Posted by philocinemas (Member # 8108) on :

That's good - take your time.

Posted by philocinemas (Member # 8108) on :

Zero, what's going on? I'm not trying to rush you, but I am most likely going to do what you're expecting me to do, so why don't you just give Big Blue a rest and move. Kasparov, I am not.

Posted by Zero (Member # 3619) on :

Sorry, I was very busy until now, since the election is over. I apologize for the delay of game.

philocinemas v Zero
1. e4 e5
2. Nf3 Nf6
3. Nc3 Nc6
4. Bc4 Be7
5. Ng5 0-0
6. 0-0 d6
7. h3 h6
8. Nf3 Be6
9. d3 d5
10. Bb5 d4
11. Ne2 Bd6

Posted by philocinemas (Member # 8108) on :

That's OK, I've been incredibly busy as well - I've been buried under a lot of paperwork recently. BTW, I figured that (Bd6) would be your move. So, here it goes - I'll drawl first.

philocinemas v Zero
1. e4 e5
2. Nf3 Nf6
3. Nc3 Nc6
4. Bc4 Be7
5. Ng5 0-0
6. 0-0 d6
7. h3 h6
8. Nf3 Be6
9. d3 d5
10. Bb5 d4
11. Ne2 Bd6
12. Bxc6

Posted by Zero (Member # 3619) on :

ohh so you're a mind reader? I'll remember that so I have an excuse if I lose.

philocinemas v Zero
1. e4 e5
2. Nf3 Nf6
3. Nc3 Nc6
4. Bc4 Be7
5. Ng5 0-0
6. 0-0 d6
7. h3 h6
8. Nf3 Be6
9. d3 d5
10. Bb5 d4
11. Ne2 Bd6
12. Bxc6 bxc6

Posted by philocinemas (Member # 8108) on :

I'm not a mind reader - it's just, that was what I would have done to protect my pawn. It's too bad extrinsic dropped out - I was up one knight, but he had my pieces scattered everywhere and my king was not very protected - it would have been an interesting game.

philocinemas v Zero
1. e4 e5
2. Nf3 Nf6
3. Nc3 Nc6
4. Bc4 Be7
5. Ng5 0-0
6. 0-0 d6
7. h3 h6
8. Nf3 Be6
9. d3 d5
10. Bb5 d4
11. Ne2 Bd6
12. Bxc6 bxc6
13. Ng3

Posted by Zero (Member # 3619) on :

Technically you attacked me first. (Bxc6) so my war is justified! haha, let's see if your mind reading abilities can help you now.

philocinemas v Zero
1. e4 e5
2. Nf3 Nf6
3. Nc3 Nc6
4. Bc4 Be7
5. Ng5 0-0
6. 0-0 d6
7. h3 h6
8. Nf3 Be6
9. d3 d5
10. Bb5 d4
11. Ne2 Bd6
12. Bxc6 bxc6
13. Ng3 Rb8

PS very balanced game so far, I am enjoying it

Posted by philocinemas (Member # 8108) on :

philocinemas v Zero

1. e4 e5
2. Nf3 Nf6
3. Nc3 Nc6
4. Bc4 Be7
5. Ng5 0-0
6. 0-0 d6
7. h3 h6
8. Nf3 Be6
9. d3 d5
10. Bb5 d4
11. Ne2 Bd6
12. Bxc6 bxc6
13. Ng3 Rb8
14. Nh2

Posted by philocinemas (Member # 8108) on :

By the way, I'm enjoying it too - I haven't played against a human being in about 5 years.

Posted by Zero (Member # 3619) on :

Do you usually play with aliens?

Posted by Zero (Member # 3619) on :

philocinemas vs Zero

1. e4 e5
2. Nf3 Nf6
3. Nc3 Nc6
4. Bc4 Be7
5. Ng5 0-0
6. 0-0 d6
7. h3 h6
8. Nf3 Be6
9. d3 d5
10. Bb5 d4
11. Ne2 Bd6
12. Bxc6 bxc6
13. Ng3 Rb8
14. Nh2 Bb4

Posted by philocinemas (Member # 8108) on :

When I do play, it is usually with my Chessmaster X. I once thought about joining the local chess club, but my time is very stretched as it is. I know there are sites where I can go and just start playing, but I don't like the time constraints - I have a hard time concentrating when under pressure.

Now back to our game - my mindreading ability has totally failed me, because I have no idea what you are trying to do.

philocinemas vs Zero
1. e4 e5
2. Nf3 Nf6
3. Nc3 Nc6
4. Bc4 Be7
5. Ng5 0-0
6. 0-0 d6
7. h3 h6
8. Nf3 Be6
9. d3 d5
10. Bb5 d4
11. Ne2 Bd6
12. Bxc6 bxc6
13. Ng3 Rb8
14. Nh2 Bb4
15. Nh5

Posted by Zero (Member # 3619) on :

The question is, do I know what I'm trying to do?

philocinemas vs Zero
1. e4 e5
2. Nf3 Nf6
3. Nc3 Nc6
4. Bc4 Be7
5. Ng5 0-0
6. 0-0 d6
7. h3 h6
8. Nf3 Be6
9. d3 d5
10. Bb5 d4
11. Ne2 Bd6
12. Bxc6 bxc6
13. Ng3 Rb8
14. Nh2 Bb4
15. Nh5 Nxh5

[This message has been edited by Zero (edited November 13, 2008).]

Posted by philocinemas (Member # 8108) on :

philocinemas vs Zero
1. e4 e5
2. Nf3 Nf6
3. Nc3 Nc6
4. Bc4 Be7
5. Ng5 0-0
6. 0-0 d6
7. h3 h6
8. Nf3 Be6
9. d3 d5
10. Bb5 d4
11. Ne2 Bd6
12. Bxc6 bxc6
13. Ng3 Rb8
14. Nh2 Bb4
15. Nh5 Nxh5
16. Qxh5

Posted by Zero (Member # 3619) on :

I'm gonna move my rook. Any guess as to where? I would do it now, but I'm only mostly sure about the position in my head, and I don't have a chessboard with me to verify it. And it is such an even game I'd hate to throw it away on account of accidentally making a stupid move.

But I'm pretty sure I'm going to move my rook.

[This message has been edited by Zero (edited November 13, 2008).]

Posted by philocinemas (Member # 8108) on :

You actually should leave your rook there, and try and bait me to take the pawn with my queen. Then move your rook, force me to move my queen, and move your rook to your king side on row 5. But that's what I'd do.

Posted by philocinemas (Member # 8108) on :

Of course, I could just be trying to trick you, so you don't move your rook.

Posted by philocinemas (Member # 8108) on :

But of course, my suggesting that it might be a trick should make you think that it really wasn't a trick. But the fact that I know that you would think this, should make you think that it was a trick. But because you know that I know you would think this it might not be a trick. So what is it? Trick or Treat?

Posted by Kathleen Dalton Woodbury (Member # 59) on :

I think someone has been watching THE PRINCESS BRIDE for too long.

Posted by philocinemas (Member # 8108) on :

"Inconceivable!"

Posted by MrsBrown (Member # 5195) on :

As an aside, I 'mated my 4.5 year-old son last evening, but he had such anguish about losing (bawling and tears) that I handed him my rooks and let him beat me. I finished the game with a king and one pawn. Its cool to watch the little guy figure out chess, but oh I wish he could win and lose gracefully!

FYI: Don't let young children use chess clocks. It frustrates the child and the clock gets broken.

[This message has been edited by MrsBrown (edited November 14, 2008).]

Posted by philocinemas (Member # 8108) on :

It's great that he is understanding the principles of the game. My son is 6 and he understands it some, but has little patience with it.

Maybe you could handicap yourself (play without a queen, or use only king side royalty), so the little guy has a fighting chance.

Posted by Kathleen Dalton Woodbury (Member # 59) on :

My almost 5.5 -year-old grandson is all about winning.

I suspect that it might be part of their learning to feel capable in their environment, and letting them win is not too high a price to pay so that they can learn to enjoy the challenge.

However, I wouldn't recommend making it too easy for him, especially as he increases in skill.

Posted by philocinemas (Member # 8108) on :

I suppose this will sound like bragging, but it is meant to inspire you regarding your child's interests. I learned to play chess when I was six and was quickly able to best my mom and step-father. We weren't very affluent, and I would stay at a daycare service provided by the Parks and Recreation over the summers. I could beat most adults by the time I was seven, and I won several tournaments (I lost once to a boy from India).

Sadly, the P&R lost their funding for the summer program, and my school system did not have a chess program (not back in the 70's). I went many years without playing very often. I started playing again occasionally while I was in college and finished runner-up the two years we had tournaments.

I would encourage you to fuel your chilren's interest in it. At the same time, I don't believe interests should be shoved down children's throats. Winning mattered to me, but at first I thought people were letting me win, which irritated me. I think it matters to children that you put forth your best effort, but give them a chance at the same time.

Posted by Zero (Member # 3619) on :

Ahh, don't intimidate me, lol. I didn't know I was facing a champ.

philocinemas vs Zero
1. e4 e5
2. Nf3 Nf6
3. Nc3 Nc6
4. Bc4 Be7
5. Ng5 0-0
6. 0-0 d6
7. h3 h6
8. Nf3 Be6
9. d3 d5
10. Bb5 d4
11. Ne2 Bd6
12. Bxc6 bxc6
13. Ng3 Rb8
14. Nh2 Bb4
15. Nh5 Nxh5
16. Qxh5 Rb5

Posted by philocinemas (Member # 8108) on :

That was 20 years ago. I don't play very often nowadays - and hardly ever against people.

Posted by MrsBrown (Member # 5195) on :

No worries; you earned bragging rights. I brag on my boy!

My husband plays with our son, Smith, often. Smith practically begs us to play. My husband takes away his queen and both rooks, and gives hints along the way. He's a good teacher.

For some reason Smith is okay with losing to his dad, but not to me. Next time I'll be sure to do my handicap at the start.

Posted by philocinemas (Member # 8108) on :

Limiting your thinking time is another way to handicap yourself.

Posted by Zero (Member # 3619) on :

philocinemas vs Zero
1. e4 e5
2. Nf3 Nf6
3. Nc3 Nc6
4. Bc4 Be7
5. Ng5 0-0
6. 0-0 d6
7. h3 h6
8. Nf3 Be6
9. d3 d5
10. Bb5 d4
11. Ne2 Bd6
12. Bxc6 bxc6
13. Ng3 Rb8
14. Nh2 Bb4
15. Nh5 Nxh5
16. Qxh5 Rb5
17. a3 Bd6

Posted by philocinemas (Member # 8108) on :

BTW, Zero, I'm leaving for vacation on the 21st, and my wife would be pissed if I took my chess board with me. So we'll have to take a break for about a week then.

Posted by Zero (Member # 3619) on :

No problem, friend. You've been more than patient with me.

Posted by Zero (Member # 3619) on :

philocinemas v Zero
1. e4 e5
2. Nf3 Nf6
3. Nc3 Nc6
4. Bc4 Be7
5. Ng5 0-0
6. 0-0 d6
7. h3 h6
8. Nf3 Be6
9. d3 d5
10. Bb5 d4
11. Ne2 Bd6
12. Bxc6 bxc6
13. Ng3 Rb8
14. Nh2 Bb4
15. Nh5 Nxh5
16. Qxh5 Rb5
17. a3 Bd6
18. b4 c5

Posted by philocinemas (Member # 8108) on :

(Comments edited - due to philocinemas being a loud mouth moron who gives away key strategies because he can't keep his hands off of the keyboard) - no moves were changed in any way in the editing of this post.

philocinemas v Zero
1. e4 e5
2. Nf3 Nf6
3. Nc3 Nc6
4. Bc4 Be7
5. Ng5 0-0
6. 0-0 d6
7. h3 h6
8. Nf3 Be6
9. d3 d5
10. Bb5 d4
11. Ne2 Bd6
12. Bxc6 bxc6
13. Ng3 Rb8
14. Nh2 Bb4
15. Nh5 Nxh5
16. Qxh5 Rb5
17. a3 Bd6
18. b4 c5
19. Bd2

[This message has been edited by philocinemas (edited November 19, 2008).]

Posted by philocinemas (Member # 8108) on :

I should just shut up and play.

[This message has been edited by philocinemas (edited November 19, 2008).]

Posted by philocinemas (Member # 8108) on :

Are you still there?

[This message has been edited by philocinemas (edited November 19, 2008).]

Posted by Zero (Member # 3619) on :

Yes I'm still here. I've been traveling a lot and taking care of various business/personal things lately - so I've been kept away from a chessboard.

But don't worry, I'm still thinking about our game. And I must say I'm flattered that you respect my ches splaying. Thanks for the compliment. I think you may be the better player, but glad to know we're somewhat on the same level.

Again, sincere apologies for my schedule, travel, etc. And thanks for the complimnt.

Posted by philocinemas (Member # 8108) on :

No problem; it was forbidden for me to play chess during my family's vacation. And my compliment to you was well deserved.

Posted by philocinemas (Member # 8108) on :

duh-duh-duuh-duh

dana-duh-duuh-duuh

chchchchchch-chchchchchch

Anyone have a guess where this is from?
Hint: circa 1974

Posted by philocinemas (Member # 8108) on :

Hey, Zero.

I guess no one is watching our game anymore. Do you have any guesses as to where the duh-duh's are from? I'm actually just posting this to remind you that it's your move, but I'm trying to be subtle.

Posted by Zero (Member # 3619) on :

Yeah I have a hard time with instrumentation being written in word form. I do it too ... I'll be chatting witha friend and have a song in my head and just type it out sometimes. "Dun, dun, dunna nunna nuna ... dun, dun, dunna nunna na!"

But it's a language that's rather hard to interpret.

Anyway, I must say you've been exeplary with your patience and I promise you that vary shortly I'll be finished with this circuit of business travels and work - and then I'll be able to continue the game unimpeded. Unfortunately I don't have a travelling chessboard

Posted by philocinemas (Member # 8108) on :

It's alright about the traveling - just didn't know if you had forgotten our game or if something had happened to you.

The music notation is from The Six-Million Dollar Man slow-mo track.

When do you think you'll get back in town?

Posted by Patrick James (Member # 7847) on :

Zero was writing the music to Iron Man. No? Do I get a second guess?

Sorry for sticking my nose in here. Sounded like an invitation was printed above.

quote:
I guess no one is watching our game anymore.

Posted by philocinemas (Member # 8108) on :

Patrick James, doesn't Iron Man go - duuh-duh duh-duh-duh, duuh-duh duh-duh-duh?

Posted by philocinemas (Member # 8108) on :

Part of Zero's sounds like I Love Rock N' Roll by Joan Jett & the Blackhearts, but I don't think it is. It does sound familiar though, especially the last part. Is it 80's?

Posted by Zero (Member # 3619) on :

I don't remember. But try this one:

nunna nunna nunna nunna nunna nunna nunna nunna, nuh nuh!

Posted by Kathleen Dalton Woodbury (Member # 59) on :

Batman. I think you need a comma after the fourth nunna, though.

Posted by Robert Nowall (Member # 2764) on :

I always wanted to know who put the bop in the bop shoo-wop shoo-wop...I mean it from the bottom of my boogity-boogity-boogity shoo...

Posted by LAJD (Member # 8070) on :

The open door/key in ignition on my car plays the opening riff from Star Wars.
Ding! Ding! dadada Ding Ding....

See someone is still watching this. Although I have to admit its like picking at a hangnail for me. I really shouldn't but I just have to look! You guys are funny.

LOL

Leslie

Posted by Patrick James (Member # 7847) on :

Well, it just goes to show that there are people crazier then me on this forum.

boom, boom, boom, boom-ba-boom, boom, boom, boom.

Posted by philocinemas (Member # 8108) on :

My first memory of chess is actually from on old TV series called Family Affair which I watched as a toddler. There was a butler, named Mr. French, played by Sebastian Cabot, who went on to narrate The early Winnie the Pooh movies.

Anyway, he played chess by mail with a friend in England. I don't remember if this was an ongoing thing or just one episode, but for some reason it stood out in my mind. Each move must have taken about a month back in those days.

I tried this once while I was in college, before the Internet, and we got through about 5 moves before we decided to call it quits. My opponent was the most intelligent person I have ever known. He was attending a college in Nevada where only 15 to 20 students were accepted each year and sheep-herding was part of the required curriculum.

Posted by Robert Nowall (Member # 2764) on :

I was in a chess club in high school---I was good, but not that good compared to the Grand Masters. (For one thing, I've never got the hang of "resigning," and usually played the games out to the end, even when they were lost.)

As for our noises-off contest, I'll see your boom-boom-boom-ba-boom, and raise you a-wimoweh, a-wimoweh, a-wimoweh, a-wimoweh...

Posted by Zero (Member # 3619) on :

As soon as this weekend is over I'll be back to life as normal. hallelujah!

Posted by MrsBrown (Member # 5195) on :

My 4 year old son likes to take the king and then keep playing; whoever gets ALL the other guy's pieces wins. He plays both sides of the board if no one is available to play with him. And now he wants to go to a chess club. I didn't expect his fascination with the game to continue full steam...

Posted by philocinemas (Member # 8108) on :

As a child, I would also play against myself. I would almost always win from the opposite side I started on.

[This message has been edited by philocinemas (edited December 14, 2008).]

Posted by Zero (Member # 3619) on :

OK travel is complete so we can get back on track, sorry again

Posted by philocinemas (Member # 8108) on :

Zero, I had anticipated that move as a possibility, and I am very tempted to respond with a move of my own. However, I am not in front of my chessboard at this moment, and I'd be afraid to make a grave mistake at this juncture of the game. I will be working late tonight, so don't expect a move until after 8PM.

Posted by Patrick James (Member # 7847) on :

Robert"In the village, the peaceful..."
Sorry, about messing around in your chess thread, guys...
Boom-boom, chunk. Boom-boom, chunk...

Posted by Zero (Member # 3619) on :

phil,

Don't worry about it. Take all the time you need, lord knows I did.

everyone else,

Feel free to "mess around" - I like it. It keeps me entertained.

Posted by Robert Nowall (Member # 2764) on :

I'll start another post.

Posted by philocinemas (Member # 8108) on :

The game is afoot!

I am making an explosive move.

Posted by Zero (Member # 3619) on :

Ah-ha!

Posted by philocinemas (Member # 8108) on :

I'm surprised you did not choose en passant.

Posted by Zero (Member # 3619) on :

So am I.

No, actually, I forgot about that rule. However, after looking at it a second time, I stand by my move of Rb7

Posted by philocinemas (Member # 8108) on :

Both had their advantages and disadvantages.

Posted by Zero (Member # 3619) on :

Ah ha, I had predicted that move.... now here's hoping I didn't overlook anything vital.

Posted by philocinemas (Member # 8108) on :

Excellent move. I'm taking my time to consider my options.

Posted by philocinemas (Member # 8108) on :

Zero, I commend you on an excellent move. I've looked at all my options in great detail. I had one move that would have given me a remote chance of coming out on top (depending on your response). However, I have decided to take the safer route (dxc4). This puts me one piece up, but without my queen. I am fairly confident that this move will eventually put us in stalemate. Please look this over - if you think you have a chance to break through my defense, we can continue. I honestly do not see how you could do it without sacrificing more king's row pieces or taking the greater part of next year. Please take your time and let me know what you decide - I don't want to pressure you either way.

Posted by Zero (Member # 3619) on :

I think the defense can be broken. Either way, give me a little bit of time to consider my move. I want to fight this out to the end. But props for the clever move.

Posted by Zero (Member # 3619) on :

OK I'm going to do it, I think it's a winable position.

Posted by philocinemas (Member # 8108) on :

Assuming that you just took my queen, here is my response:

Posted by Zero (Member # 3619) on :

You probably predicted this move.

Posted by philocinemas (Member # 8108) on :

Yes, as I am sure you predicted mine (it it the f-file rook to e1)

1. e4 e5
2. Nf3 Nf6
3. Nc3 Nc6
4. Bc4 Be7
5. Ng5 0-0
6. 0-0 d6
7. h3 h6
8. Nf3 Be6
9. d3 d5
10. Bb5 d4
11. Ne2 Bd6
12. Bxc6 bxc6
13. Ng3 Rb8
14. Nh2 Bb4
15. Nh5 Nxh5
16. Qxh5 Rb5
17. a3 Bd6
18. b4 c5
19. Bd2 cxb4
20. Bxb4 c5
21. c4 Rb7
22. Bd2 Rb3
23. Qf3 Bxc4
24. dxc4 Rxf3
25. Nxf3 f5
26. Rfe1

Posted by Zero (Member # 3619) on :

Sorry for the again delay. But today is the last day I work until after the holidays. So bear with me, please.

Posted by philocinemas (Member # 8108) on :

That's fine. I left for work at 7:30 AM and I just got home. Happy Holidays!?

Posted by Zero (Member # 3619) on :

Happy Christmas!!!!

Posted by philocinemas (Member # 8108) on :

And merry Christmas to you.

Posted by Zero (Member # 3619) on :

1. e4 e5
2. Nf3 Nf6
3. Nc3 Nc6
4. Bc4 Be7
5. Ng5 0-0
6. 0-0 d6
7. h3 h6
8. Nf3 Be6
9. d3 d5
10. Bb5 d4
11. Ne2 Bd6
12. Bxc6 bxc6
13. Ng3 Rb8
14. Nh2 Bb4
15. Nh5 Nxh5
16. Qxh5 Rb5
17. a3 Bd6
18. b4 c5
19. Bd2 cxb4
20. Bxb4 c5
21. c4 Rb7
22. Bd2 Rb3
23. Qf3 Bxc4
24. dxc4 Rxf3
25. Nxf3 f5
26. Rfe1 f4
27. Reb1 Qa8

Posted by philocinemas (Member # 8108) on :

1. e4 e5
2. Nf3 Nf6
3. Nc3 Nc6
4. Bc4 Be7
5. Ng5 0-0
6. 0-0 d6
7. h3 h6
8. Nf3 Be6
9. d3 d5
10. Bb5 d4
11. Ne2 Bd6
12. Bxc6 bxc6
13. Ng3 Rb8
14. Nh2 Bb4
15. Nh5 Nxh5
16. Qxh5 Rb5
17. a3 Bd6
18. b4 c5
19. Bd2 cxb4
20. Bxb4 c5
21. c4 Rb7
22. Bd2 Rb3
23. Qf3 Bxc4
24. dxc4 Rxf3
25. Nxf3 f5
26. Rfe1 f4
27. Reb1 Qa8
28. Re1

Posted by Zero (Member # 3619) on :

How was your Christmas?

Posted by Rommel Fenrir Wolf II (Member # 4199) on :

ok i dont get it.

i have read this many times and i dont get how to play.

maybe i have gone nuts, again.

RFW2nd

Posted by philocinemas (Member # 8108) on :

Here's a breakdown RFW2nd:

quote:
The new coding is pretty slick. The first letter (in caps) represents the piece you are moving. K=king, Q=queen, R=rook, N=knight, B=bishop, and for pawns there is no capital letter.
Then you add the tile that the piece is moving to. So if I am moving my bishop to c7, the move would be recorded as Bc7. If my piece takes another piece, this attack is marked by an x. So if my Bishop takes any piece on c7, the move would be recorded thusly "Bxc7". 1. The piece I move 2.the fact that he captures something and 3. his destination.
For pawn movements you just state the square the pawn moves to. So my first move was e4, so it's clearly a pawn move because it isn't preceded by a capital letter.
But... if a pawn captures a piece, the moves must include the column designation of the pawn I move (for example e, or a, or g) and then the x to indicate that I captured a piece, and of course the spot where it lands. So if my pawn is moving from e4 to capture a piece on d5 (doesn't matter what the piece is), it is recorded as "exd5"
And if I am putitng the king in check, I put a + at the end of the move. Bc5+ (bishop moves to c5 and checks the King), and when it is checkmate I put a # at the end. Bc5# (Bishop moves to c5 checkmate) or if you want to be really fancy Bxc5# (Bishop captures a piece on c5 and checkmates the King)

quote:
Algebraic chess notation has been around for a while, since 1737 when Phillip Stamma introduced it. Although it didn't catch on very quickly, gradually in the 19th Century, but nearly universally by the middle of the 20th Century. Figurine algebraic notation is language independent, when the players' browsers supports the unicode for chess figures: ♔, ♕, ♖, ♗, ♘, ♙, ♚, ♛, ♜, ♝, ♞, ♟
Other notations in algebraic notation. King side castle 0-0, Queen side castle 0-0-0, pawn promotion has the chosen piece noted after the move, eg, e8Q, en passant is treated differently according to whichever standard, the least ambiguous being the original file letter, an x indicating the capture, the coordinate location of the square to which the capturing pawn moves, optionally followed by e.p., exf6 e.p. End of game, 1-0 for white won, 0-1 for black won, ½-½ for a draw. Slight variations persist in all standards of algebraic chess notation.

The above information was provided by extrinsic and Zero. I would like to add that if identical pieces (i.e. R=Rook) could move to the same square, then you notate it with either the starting file (a-h) or starting rank (1-8). This occurred earlier when I had rooks on a1 and e1 and I was moving to b1. I had to let Zero know which rook I was moving, and I did so by notating R(rook)e(file it is on)b1(my destination).

Posted by Kathleen Dalton Woodbury (Member # 59) on :

Just so you know, philocinemas, I have looked at your explanatory post with MSIE, Google Chrome, and Firefox, and in all three this part:

quote:
when the players' browsers supports the unicode for chess figures: ♔, ♕, ♖, ♗, ♘, ♙, ♚, ♛, ♜, ♝, ♞, ♟

just shows a series of boxes/squares.

Edited to put the unicode in, instead of the boxes/squares.

[This message has been edited by Kathleen Dalton Woodbury (edited December 26, 2008).]

Posted by philocinemas (Member # 8108) on :

Thanks for trying. I was just quoting extrinsic and didn't edit out that part.

Posted by Zero (Member # 3619) on :

I wonder if Opera could do it.

Posted by philocinemas (Member # 8108) on :

Eh, what's Opera, doc?

Posted by Zero (Member # 3619) on :

Another browser.

Posted by Kathleen Dalton Woodbury (Member # 59) on :

philocinemas, maybe you have to be old to get that pun.

Anyway,

Posted by philocinemas (Member # 8108) on :

As another of my favorite characters would say, "Thanks for noticin'."

Posted by Zero (Member # 3619) on :

Wait, what's that from?

Posted by philocinemas (Member # 8108) on :

Zero, the first, What's Opera, Doc?, is the title of a famous Bugs Bunny (Looney Toons) cartoon - the only one that I am aware of where Bugs actually dies. Bugs looks up as Elmer carries him away and says "Well, what did you expect in an opera? A happy ending?"

The second reference was a common response from Eeyore, of Winnie the Pooh fame.

Posted by Robert Nowall (Member # 2764) on :

Thanks for the sour persimmons, cousin.

Posted by Patrick James (Member # 7847) on :

"I killed the Wabbit(to Flight of the Valkyrie), I killed the wabbit!"

Posted by philocinemas (Member # 8108) on :

Zero, I'm so sorry. I never saw that you had moved. All this time I was waiting for you and you must have been waiting for me. My apologies.
BTW, I just looked at the "boxes and squares" in the explanation above while on my work computer, and I can now see the pieces. I wonder if it has to do with the computer itself.

[This message has been edited by philocinemas (edited January 05, 2009).]

Posted by Zero (Member # 3619) on :

No sweat. I just figured you were taking some time off for the holidays. Cheers.

Posted by philocinemas (Member # 8108) on :

My Internet at home is down right now. Your move surprised me. I think I know what you are up to, but I am not going to be able to move until this evening. Hopefully, I'll get my Internet back up by then.

Posted by snapper (Member # 7299) on :

The grid system is from whites perspective, correct?

Posted by philocinemas (Member # 8108) on :

That's correct, snapper. If you are white, a1 will be in your bottom left corner.

Posted by philocinemas (Member # 8108) on :

Zero, excellent play. I believe you may have beaten me. Give me another day to look things over, but I think this might be the end.

Posted by philocinemas (Member # 8108) on :

All right, I have a possible defense, but it hangs by a thread. Here it goes.

Posted by Zero (Member # 3619) on :

Yes thanks for the very good game so far. My only advantage is that I have infinite time to consider everything. Were we playing in person, especially with a clock, you would have won a long time ago.

Posted by philocinemas (Member # 8108) on :

Somehow, I anticipated that move...

...and thanks for the compliment.

Posted by philocinemas (Member # 8108) on :

This should be interesting. I'm not sure what will happen next - too many variables...

Posted by philocinemas (Member # 8108) on :

Thanks for the compliment regarding my chess play. I have also enjoyed our game. Though, after it is over, I believe I will take a break from chess for a while. I knew about Howard Hughes and Melvin Dummar from a 1980 movie, Melvin and Howard. It was an OK movie, I'm not necessarily recommending it - though it was highly regarded by critics. I'm surprised by your move again. Ahh! I see what you're doing. You almost got me. I'm going to try to surprise you now.

Posted by Zero (Member # 3619) on :

I'm confused because my pawn already occupies f3. Unles syou mean you're taking it, in which case I don't know if it's with the pawn or the knight. I could choose for you...

j/k

Posted by philocinemas (Member # 8108) on :

I thought your pawn on f3 just took my pawn on g2.

[This message has been edited by philocinemas (edited January 20, 2009).]

Posted by Zero (Member # 3619) on :

Oh you're right. Sorry. I had taken the move back on my chess board a few days ago to reassess the position and I forgot to put it back.

Posted by philocinemas (Member # 8108) on :

I call that my Captain Kirk move.

Posted by monstewer (Member # 5883) on :

Looks a good game, you guys should check out gameknot.com Great chess site

I'll call that my Patrick Stewart move.

Posted by philocinemas (Member # 8108) on :

Here we go...

Posted by Patrick James (Member # 7847) on :

And another good move. How will the challenger respond.

For you folks who are just tuning in, welcome, you are watching an enraged Patrick Stewart and an out of sorts William Shatner battle. It was all started when there were two captains and only one captains chair then there was a comment about someone's mother, the rest is now history as they battle to the death.

Shatner's circling now... Looking for the right move to get his opponent to submit...

Posted by Zero (Member # 3619) on :

Haha! You crack me up.

Now where was I...

While William Shatner circles around, searching for any excuse to rip his shirt off, Patrick Stewart looks to take strategic advantage of his surroundings, relying on his (probably)superior IQ.

Posted by philocinemas (Member # 8108) on :

Hey now, let's not get personal - let's make this about Kirk and Picard (Not T.J. Hooker and Professor Xavier). My question is do you think Picard could have beaten Spock at chess?

Posted by Zero (Member # 3619) on :

No, but Data could.

Oh also on 36, which rook took d2?

[This message has been edited by Zero (edited January 22, 2009).]

Posted by philocinemas (Member # 8108) on :

Sorry, I forgot to notate which rook - it was the one on d1. I corrected it below.

Posted by satate (Member # 8082) on :

Hasn't someone won yet?

Posted by philocinemas (Member # 8108) on :

I'm predicting it will be over very soon.

Zero, I think I know what I was going to do next, but I don't have my board in front of me. I'm going to have to wait until tonight to move.

Posted by Zero (Member # 3619) on :

No problem. Usually you're the one waiting.

Posted by philocinemas (Member # 8108) on :

Zero, excellent game. I think I will go ahead and resign. Losing my rook will leave me without a chance to win, and my best hope would be for a stalemate, which would be hard to do when we have so much time to examine each move. I almost resigned after moving my bishop to d2 in move 38 - I realized I had made a big mistake within minutes after doing it. You could have moved your rook to h3 and ended the game there.

I'm curious, did you see my planned attack on your king? I was really hoping your queen would take my pawn on e4. I was going to move my rook to f1, hoping you'd move your queen to d3 to allow your pawn to advance. Then my bishop would take your pawn on h6. You would have had to sacrifice your queen or be in checkmate. C'est la vie.

Congratulations! It was a well-played game.

Posted by Patrick James (Member # 7847) on :

You guys are finished! Where am I gonna insert off topic interruptions!

Posted by Zero (Member # 3619) on :

Good game, and no I didn't see it. I know it's a good rule of thumb to keep your king not in the same column as the enemy's rook. And I thought I could simplify the game by trading rooks, so that was my plan. I also considered playing Kh8 just to get my king out of firing range. Though I thought the rook+bishop wasn't such a bad matachup against the queen. You could defend more places than me, for instance, however I did snipe a great many of your pawns. So your outlook was grim, but I've been known to blunder better positions than this in the past.

Posted by Zero (Member # 3619) on :

It began Oct 8th and ended Jan 27th, making it the longest game I've ever played at 81 days. And the slowest too, with an average of about 1 move per 2 days.

[This message has been edited by Zero (edited January 27, 2009).]

Posted by philocinemas (Member # 8108) on :

If we play again, let's do it on a site where we play out the entire game in one setting. But give me a few months to recover.

Posted by Zero (Member # 3619) on :

That sounds fun. I'm game with that. And no recovery necessary... my 1-turn-per-2-days rating is probably over 2000 while my play-in-one-sitting rating is probably somewhere around 1100 ... lol

Posted by philocinemas (Member # 8108) on :

I'm just going to take a break from chess for a little while. I've had a lot going on with my job and with writing, and I have a family to focus on as well. Give me about a month or so and maybe we can find a chess site to play on.

Posted by Zero (Member # 3619) on :

Sure thing. Maybe we can even let some fellow hatrackers observe the game.

Posted by satate (Member # 8082) on :

Congrats on winning Zero.

Posted by Patrick James (Member # 7847) on :

I definitely wanna be there to pester. No kibitzing, just off-topic nonsense, I swear. Hehe.

Posted by Zero (Member # 3619) on :

Thanks, Satate. ANd PJ, you'd better be there. I'm counting on the entertainment.

Posted by Zero (Member # 3619) on :

I'm up for another game any time, with anyone.

Posted by philocinemas (Member # 8108) on :

I might be up for a rematch, but I will probably be moving a little slower this time - my workload is sporadic.

Should we start a new thread?

BTW, I haven't played since our last game.

Posted by Zero (Member # 3619) on :

I have played every now and then (mostly stupid blitz games) so I'm up for a correspondence one.