|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 2 OF 2 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
| May-16-16 | | TheFocus: Happy birthday, David Forsyth. |
|
| May-26-18 | | zanzibar: Not everybody recognized the usefulness of FEN notation immediately: <
J.A. — The Forsyth notation is of little use, for it does not record the moves, and does not indicate any particular square. It describes the position of the above diagram thus :— 5 Kt 3 K 3 p 2 p 4 P 5 P k 3 R 2 p l R P P 3 b 1 p Kt 3 p 4 B 5 B 2. >
tBOP v13 N645 (May 23, 1891) 544/576 (19) |
|
May-27-18
 | | offramp: So what was Edwards' contribution to FEN? |
|
| May-27-18 | | Retireborn: <offramp> According to Wiki, "Steven J. Edwards extended it to support use by computers" - they don't say when, but I assume it was around 100 years after Forsyth. My 1992 Hooper & Whyld just call it Forsyth notation. Likely it's become FEN because that's a more speakable acronym than FN, unless one is French, possibly. |
|
May-27-18
| | offramp: <Retireborn: ...Likely it's become FEN because that's a more speakable acronym than FN, unless one is French, possibly.> LOL, too true. If the guy's name had begun with a consonant, FN wouldn't have been renamed. But what if it had been Unwin or Urusov?
Would the world of chess have been ready to accept fun notation? |
|
| May-27-18 | | Retireborn: Let's just be grateful that it wasn't FECK or something even worse. |
|
| May-27-18 | | zanzibar: Having deftly stayed about the fray, I'm afraid I now do stray... A picture of Forsyth, and a valuable pointer to further info, comes from C.N. 5051 . The referenced BCM article is found here:
https://books.google.com/books?id=K... So, it appears that Forsyth's contribution is confined to that between the "lines", i.e. the positional part. Which means that Edwards contributed the <"w - - 0 1"> part of the equation. And that means, in my estimation, that simply characterizing his contribution as an extension for computers is lacking. Due credit should be given for specifying castling rights, e.p. lanes, and fifty-move count not as just facilitating computer dictates, but as actually conveying important information also needed by those mobile water ballons. (Aside- did any early problem compositions ever use castling, or ep captures? What was the first examples of a problem needing such an enhancement for the solve?) |
|
May-27-18
| | offramp: Um, question at the back here, Mr Zamzibar, from an actual mobile water balloon: Did the first Forsyth Notation have forward slashes ("/s" :-)) between ranks? They are absent in some examples given earlier. |
|
| May-27-18 | | Retireborn: <z> There's a famous puzzle by Shinkman (1887) which intends castling, unfortunately it's not quite perfect; https://timkr.home.xs4all.nl/chess2... |
|
| May-27-18 | | zanzibar: Dear Sir offranp:
Sorry, my BCM link would better have been:
https://books.google.com/books?id=K... (Inconvenient having to edit out the query in the url by hand, but I go the extra km) If you read this you'll see the exchange of letters between Mr. Forsyth and a Mr. Rayner where they hashed out the notation a little - generally agreeing the /'s were a capital idea. I wonder a little who, exactly, introduced the important improvement. It would be nice to have someone post the scans of the original Glasgow newspaper columns giving genesis of the notation's public introduction. |
|
| May-27-18 | | Retireborn: Apparently Sam Loyd also did several castling problems back in the 19th C. |
|
| May-27-18 | | zanzibar: <RB> so, was it just assumed that if the pieces look OK, that castling was allowed? PS- I think the Glasgow Weekly Herald deserves the credit for introducing the /'s, if my reading is correct/?/ |
|
| May-27-18 | | zanzibar: PPS- I have to play through that game yielding Shinkman's problem! Whoowee! |
|
| May-27-18 | | Retireborn: <z> According to Krabbe, castling in studies and problems is assumed to be legal, unless you can prove (by retrograde analysis) that it is illegal. And that's a whole brain-scrambling field in itself.... |
|
May-28-18
| | offramp: One of those odd things: unintended alliteration: <zanzibar: ...characterizing his contribution as an extension for computers is lacking. Due credit should be given for specifying castling rights....> |
|
Jun-10-22
 | | Sally Simpson: The Glasgow Herald 12th Sept. 1896 has a small article mentioning David Forsyth has invented an opening, the new move is 4.Bb2 1. e4 e5 2. Bc4 Bc5 3. b4 Bxb4 4. Bb2
click for larger viewI cannot (yet) find any game with it being played. The piece says White usually follows up with f4. |
|
| Jun-10-22 | | Retireborn: Geoff, Megabase 2021 has just one(!) example of that, and appropriately enough it's a Scottish game:- [Event "SCO-ch 118th"]
[Site "Edinburgh"]
[Date "2011.07.10"]
[Round "2"]
[White "Rabindra, Paul"]
[Black "Zamvar, Vipin"]
[Result "0-1"]
[ECO "C23"]
[PlyCount "42"]
[EventDate "2011.07.09"]
[EventType "swiss"]
[EventRounds "9"]
[EventCountry "SCO"]
[SourceTitle "CBM 143 Extra"]
[Source "ChessBase"]
[SourceDate "2011.08.29"]
[SourceVersion "1"]
[SourceVersionDate "2011.08.29"]
[SourceQuality "1"]
1. e4 e5 2. Bc4 Bc5 3. b4 Bxb4 4. Bb2 d6 5. f4 Nc6 6. Nf3 Nf6 7. Qe2 exf4 8.
O-O O-O 9. c3 Ba5 10. d4 Re8 11. Bxf7+ Kxf7 12. Ng5+ Kg8 13. Rxf4 h6 14. Nh3 g5
15. Rf1 Bxh3 16. gxh3 Rxe4 17. Qd3 Rf4 18. Nd2 Qe7 19. Nf3 Qe4 20. Qb5 Rxf3 21.
Rfe1 Qd5 0-1 |
|
Jun-10-22
| | Sally Simpson: Thanks Retireborn,
So that was the wee nag I got when I first saw it in print. I knew there was something going on in my tiny brain...and I knew I would see one because I knew one was out there. I was at that congress! I bet someone showed it to me. After 4...d6 I would have gone 5.Qf3 and if 5...Nf6 6. Qb3. Submit it so we have it here. |
|
| Jun-11-22 | | Retireborn: I will have a go. |
|
Jun-11-22
| | Sally Simpson: Good luck with that Retireborn.
If you do not get it 100% correct (including the onsite foibles) then the Victorian school teachers will appear and thrash the living daylights out of you. (and the source, for the sake of world wide peace do not forget the exact source. ) |
|
| Jun-11-22 | | Retireborn: LOL. Well I've submitted the pgn as you see it below, with the Source "Chessbase", who knows if it will pass muster? |
|
Jun-11-22
| | Sally Simpson: Just Chessbase?
Oh Boy are you in trouble. What did I say '...do not forget the exact source.' Chessbase the site or Chessbase the CD.
You are doomed. |
|
| Jun-11-22 | | Z free or die: <[SourceTitle "CBM 143 Extra"]> Wondering about this tag lead me here...
https://shop.chessbase.com/en/produ...
* * * * *
Also - I'd like to find a writeup somewhere on the web about the CB <SourceQuality> tag - as it might make for interesting reading. Haven't found it yet though. . |
|
| Jun-11-22 | | Retireborn: <Z> In Chessbase, SourceTitle always refers to the commercial product the game was originally in. Chessbase has three categories of Source quality, High, Normal, and Low. And High (1) is the default for pretty much everything they sell. In other words it's "trust us"! |
|
| Jun-12-22 | | Z free or die: Thanks <Reti(R)eborn> for the explanation. I somewhat gathers that general impression for the <SourceQuality> tag from the various examples I saw on the net. So, my recommendation would be to condense the various <CB> tags into the <CG> source tag for better comportment, e.g. using your example: < [Source "Chessbase (2011.08.29) / CBM 143 extra"] > Seems best to omit the general default SourceQuality unless it is low, then I'd append something like this... < [Source "Chessbase ... / Quality (low)"] > That's my z-recommendation - your mileage may vary! Thx again. |
|
 |
|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 2 OF 2 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
Kibitzing
