Author: Eddie
Date: 11:10:53 09/12/00
Go up one level in this thread
On September 12, 2000 at 13:45:08, José de Jesús García Ruvalcaba wrote: >On September 12, 2000 at 03:43:00, Eddie wrote: > >>On September 11, 2000 at 19:33:08, Frederic Friedel wrote: >> >>>On September 11, 2000 at 16:35:37, Eddie wrote: >>> >>>>Very good Freddy! :)) I have always written my games in descriptive notation. >>>> Go Freddy go! I like the sound of this .... :)) >>> >>>You should go for the full monty and use the fifteenth-century notation as found >>>in Repetición de Amores E Arte de Axedrez by Lucena. Here's an example: >>> >>>"Jugar del peon del rey a IIII casas, que se entiende contando de donde esta el >>>rey". >>> >>>In algebraic we simply write "e4". >> >>Freddy, >> >>You're a genius man!! The discriptive will work fine thanks! Much nicer than >>the algebraic, and we won't even compare it with your "pig latin" ! :)) I >>always had a problem understanding "pig latin" ..... :)) > > What do you mean bi "pig latin"? The above quote is in somewhat old Spanish, >and I have no trouble understanding it. >José. Jose, bi "pig latin"? It has nothing to with with being bi :)) Now what I meant by "pig latin" is just a term or phrase one may use, when speaking to one another ..... sort of like, if you're talking the difference in algebraic or descpriptive notation. I really prefer the descriptive, always have. Just what you get used to from the start ...... Algebraic v.s. Descriptive, plain and simple, not "pig latin" thrown in to make it harder to comprehend! :)) That would make it a possibility of three notations .... much too difficult I think .....
This page took 0 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.