Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 35
  1. #16
    Monster of the deep Kevin Bonham's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    37,846
    Quote Originally Posted by KidPoker
    This reminds me of a query I've always had - is it legal to bring in a piece of paper and write up all one's calculations on paper?
    No, this is what is meant by "notes".

  2. #17
    CC International Master
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    1,184
    I'm giving new meaning to the ! annotation simply because i believe too many good moves are seen as normal moves. For instance in that game against Tony.D I gave Ba6 an ! due to it exploiting my last move in the best way possible and with my lack of theory on winawer french i thought this was an excellent idea from Tony. Ofcourse this does not always apply since often mistakes are easy to exploit blunders etc. I also gave g5 a ! because it closed down all whites play in an unusual but the best way to do it.

    On another note I believe people should get Exclaimation marks etc for moves they didn't make.
    I wonder whether there would be a significant change in performance if a tournament was held were notes made during you game were legal an experiment could ensue perhaps.

  3. #18
    CC International Master Miranda's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Melbourne
    Posts
    1,047
    Hm.. i think that ?! means bad move, but has an upside, while !? means it looks like a good move but on further analysis the opponent could exploit it.

    Instead of putting ????????? next to most of my moves, I just put YOU PLAYED STUPIDLY, MIRANDA down the bottom of the scoresheet
    It's time for man to enter the Solar System - Dan Quayle

  4. #19
    . eclectic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    .
    Posts
    2,840
    why isn't the recording of clock times considered notetaking for the purposes of time managment analysis?
    .

  5. #20
    Account Suspended
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    928
    Quote Originally Posted by eclectic
    why isn't the recording of clock times considered notetaking for the purposes of time managment analysis?
    The recording of time is important for the following reason.

    1) recording of time is the writing of facts, not analysis. Some scoresheets actually have a time column in the scoresheet.

    2) for a clock failure, this has actually occured to me, but since I had recorded the clocks every move, the clocks were reset instead of the arbiter splitting the remaining time evenly possibly.

  6. #21
    CC International Master Miranda's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Melbourne
    Posts
    1,047
    Yeah, but recording time takes so long. I usually only record it every 10 moves or so in a big tourney, but usually not at all!
    It's time for man to enter the Solar System - Dan Quayle

  7. #22
    CC Grandmaster ER's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Melbourne - Australia
    Posts
    11,869
    Quote Originally Posted by CameronD
    The recording of time is important for the following reason.

    1) recording of time is the writing of facts, not analysis. Some scoresheets actually have a time column in the scoresheet.

    2) for a clock failure, this has actually occured to me, but since I had recorded the clocks every move, the clocks were reset instead of the arbiter splitting the remaining time evenly possibly.


    extremely useful advice! Particularly No 2! thanks!!!!
    You won't believe it, I keep on asking players of various strengths for the purpose of recording times on the scoresheet, and never got an answer as clear and informative as this!!!
    and it had to come from someone who claims CHESS IS NOT A SPORT!!!
    PS and a bloody Swansea supporter too
    CAGLES!
    Last edited by ER; 30-10-2008 at 09:48 AM.
    ACF 3118316
    FIDE 3201457

    https://aus2020.chesschamp.net/

  8. #23
    CC Grandmaster ER's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Melbourne - Australia
    Posts
    11,869

    defacing scoresheets is a punishable offence!

    Quote Originally Posted by Miranda
    Yeah, but recording time takes so long. I usually only record it every 10 moves or so in a big tourney, but usually not at all!
    it certainly takes shorter time than writing STUPID MOVE MIRANDA on your scoresheet (defacing scoresheets it's illegal action and should be punished by having to write I WILL NEVER WRITE STUPID MOVE MIRANDA ON MY SCORESHEET AGAIN 100 times, signed by your parents)! Try it!
    Cheers and good luck!
    ACF 3118316
    FIDE 3201457

    https://aus2020.chesschamp.net/

  9. #24
    CC International Master Miranda's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Melbourne
    Posts
    1,047
    Defacing scoresheets - pfft

    I just find writing the time distracting
    It's time for man to enter the Solar System - Dan Quayle

  10. #25
    Monster of the deep Kevin Bonham's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    37,846
    *bump*

    Should a player get an ! or !! for a move if it was objectively good or brilliant but they actually didn't understand why and failed to follow up correctly?

    See my 15.Bh3 for an example:

    http://www.chesschat.org/showthread....l=1#post432166

    An excellent move but I didn't calculate correctly when I played it and therefore followed it up incorrectly.

  11. #26
    CC Grandmaster Capablanca-Fan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Atlanta, GA (formerly Brisbane, and before that Wellington, NZ)
    Posts
    19,590
    Quote Originally Posted by Kevin Bonham View Post
    Thought I'd start a thread about the use of annotation marks. I'm interested in people's comments about some issues to see if there is, or isn't, any degree of consensus about these issues. I'll give some sample questions and some comments on them, but in some cases my own views aren't too clear.

    Can a move deserve !!! or ???
    Two is enough.

    Quote Originally Posted by Kevin Bonham View Post
    Is "blundering" a pawn in the opening (say 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 a6) deserving of "??". Is it the consequences of the move, or the stupidity of the move, that determine whether something is a "blunder"? Is a move that loses outright, but only to a very brilliant combination most players would never see, a "blunder"? (I tend to use ?? for anything that changes a non-lost position into a clearly lost one, with some lenience when annotating games by juniors.)
    Black can regain the P with 3. Nxe5 Qe7, but his Q will be badly misplaced and lose even more time. Should certainly be a "?".

    I think missing a mate in one or two, say, but still winning easily deserves "?" but not "??".

    Quote Originally Posted by Kevin Bonham View Post
    Should a player get an ! or !! for a move if it was objectively good or brilliant but they actually didn't understand why and failed to follow up correctly?

    See my 15.Bh3 for an example:

    http://www.chesschat.org/showthread....l=1#post432166

    An excellent move but I didn't calculate correctly when I played it and therefore followed it up incorrectly.
    If not followed up properly, then give the move in question "!" and the faulty follow-up "?".

    In the opening or middlegame, "??" for loss of a piece; in the endgame, for the loss of a P if that means going into a position that is easy for the opponent to win. "??" is probably merited for going to an easily lost P endgame from an endgame that would otherwise be very hard to win, if it could be won at all.

    Another question is the opposite: a combination with a series of great and hard-to-see moves that had to be foreseen. My preference would be only one "!!" in the series, and the others "!". The question is, should the "!!" go to the first move in the series, which wouldn't have been played without seeing the great follow-up moves, or to the most ingenious of these moves?
    Last edited by Capablanca-Fan; 21-11-2017 at 06:39 AM.
    “The destructive capacity of the individual, however vicious, is small; of the state, however well-intentioned, almost limitless. Expand the state and that destructive capacity necessarily expands, too, pari passu.”—Paul Johnson, Modern Times, 1983.

  12. #27
    CC Grandmaster
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Melbourne, Australia
    Posts
    12,963
    Quote Originally Posted by Kevin Bonham View Post
    *bump*

    Should a player get an ! or !! for a move if it was objectively good or brilliant but they actually didn't understand why and failed to follow up correctly?

    See my 15.Bh3 for an example:

    http://www.chesschat.org/showthread....l=1#post432166

    An excellent move but I didn't calculate correctly when I played it and therefore followed it up incorrectly.
    As far as I understand, !? !? etc is based on the position rather than what player was thinking. There are some tricky ones though such as !??
    Interested in Chess Lessons?
    Email webbaron!@gmail.com for more Info!

  13. #28
    Monster of the deep Kevin Bonham's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    37,846
    Quote Originally Posted by MichaelBaron View Post
    As far as I understand, !? !? etc is based on the position rather than what player was thinking. There are some tricky ones though such as !??
    As I mentioned in post 1 I can understand "??!" but I really have no idea what "!??" even means.

  14. #29
    Monster of the deep Kevin Bonham's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    37,846
    Quote Originally Posted by Capablanca-Fan View Post
    Another question is the opposite: a combination with a series of great and hard-to-see moves that had to be foreseen. My preference would be only one "!!" in the series, and the others "!". The question is, should the "!!" go to the first move in the series, which wouldn't have been played without seeing the great follow-up moves, or to the most ingenious of these moves?
    I think this often depends on what kind of move the setting-up move is. If it is an otherwise losing sacrifice annotators might be more inclined to give it "!!" but if it is just some positional move that would otherwise not cause much damage they might be more reluctant. Probably if the setting-up move requires seeing the brilliant idea then it deserves the "!!".

  15. #30
    CC Grandmaster
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Melbourne, Australia
    Posts
    12,963
    Quote Originally Posted by Kevin Bonham View Post
    As I mentioned in post 1 I can understand "??!" but I really have no idea what "!??" even means.
    !?? - an interesting idea that is objectively bad
    Interested in Chess Lessons?
    Email webbaron!@gmail.com for more Info!

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •