brucec@iddic.UUCP (Bruce W. Cheney) (09/21/84)
I vote that both notations be posted. "Thanks" to guys posting them. The newspaper prints the results, but not the games, Chess Life will have all the details .... 6 months from the end of the match, so this is the best and fastest method of getting the info. I was so happy when I read the net today: A CONTROVERSIAL SUBJECT IN NET.CHESS !!!! THIS COULD TURN INTO NET.CHESS.FLAME !!!! I just can't pass up the opportunity, so here goes: Algebraic Notation is sooooo superior to Descriptive..... How superior is it? Well, let's just say that those who use DN are the same kind of people still using slide rules instead of calculators (and probably clip them on their belts, too!). As a tournament player, a postal player, a tournament director, a newsletter editor, a computer chess 'hacker', and a radio-chess player, I have found in each one of these situations when it comes to a choice between AN and DN, AN wins every time. Here's why: In AN each square has ONE and ONLY ONE "address". Therefore it is very easy to keep accurate and unambiguous game scores. As a TD and newsletter editor, I have reviewed the games from USCF tournaments both for legal squabbles and possible publication. I shudder each time I see a DN scoresheet because 9 times out of 10 there are so many mistakes in notation that the game is unreadable. This isn't just a characteristic of the lower rated players either, I've seen it in games by masters and experts. (although the HIGHER rated a person is, the less likely he/shes uses DN) After I've found the one readable DN game, then I have to type it. Try typing a DN game, then try an AN game, proofread both before counter-flaming. regards, brucec (Bruce W. Cheney, Tektronix, Wilsonville, OR)