Editing 1800: Chess Notation
Warning: You are not logged in. Your IP address will be publicly visible if you make any edits. If you log in or create an account, your edits will be attributed to your username, along with other benefits.
The edit can be undone.
Please check the comparison below to verify that this is what you want to do, and then save the changes below to finish undoing the edit.
Latest revision | Your text | ||
Line 8: | Line 8: | ||
==Explanation== | ==Explanation== | ||
− | + | {{incomplete|Please change this comment when editing this page and not remove it too fast.}} | |
− | |||
− | + | [[Cueball]] begins a conversation with [[White Hat]] with the declaration that he will be scoring his conversations using chess notation. | |
− | |||
− | + | Given the caption, Cueball believes that this is a draw conversation since White Hat doesn't care. | |
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | + | The double question marks at the end of the title text indicates that [[Cueball]]'s decision to score his conversations using chess notation was a 'blunder'. | |
− | |||
− | == | + | === Chess notation (and annotation) === |
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
{{w|Chess}} players and critics use certain {{w|chess notation|notations}} to write down chess games in a very short fashion (for example the {{w|Forsyth–Edwards Notation}}, which is both computer- and human-readable). In addition, ''{{w|chess annotation symbols}}'' like ! and !? help to comment certain moves in a similarly short fashion. That way it is possible to print or discuss a chess game (or a chess opening) in a limited space, for example in printed reference manuals. | {{w|Chess}} players and critics use certain {{w|chess notation|notations}} to write down chess games in a very short fashion (for example the {{w|Forsyth–Edwards Notation}}, which is both computer- and human-readable). In addition, ''{{w|chess annotation symbols}}'' like ! and !? help to comment certain moves in a similarly short fashion. That way it is possible to print or discuss a chess game (or a chess opening) in a limited space, for example in printed reference manuals. | ||
Line 45: | Line 31: | ||
'''??''' – {{w|blunder (chess)|blunder}}: Exceptionally bad move, usually designates a move that turns a winning position into a draw, or a draw into a losing position.<br/> | '''??''' – {{w|blunder (chess)|blunder}}: Exceptionally bad move, usually designates a move that turns a winning position into a draw, or a draw into a losing position.<br/> | ||
− | The score of the "white" player is always given first, followed by the score of the "black" player. Possible | + | The score of the "white" player is always given first, followed by the score of the "black" player. Possible notations for the game outcome are:<br/> |
− | + | 1-0 - A win (for white) <br/> | |
− | 1-0 | + | 0-1 - A loss (for white) <br/> |
− | 0-1 | + | ½-½ - a draw <br/> |
− | |||
Because every chess game begins by moving a white piece, the following can be observed: When Cueball ends a conversation with 1-0, | Because every chess game begins by moving a white piece, the following can be observed: When Cueball ends a conversation with 1-0, | ||
Line 56: | Line 41: | ||
=== Draws in chess === | === Draws in chess === | ||
− | A chess game can be won (and lost for the other party) or {{w|draw (chess)|drawn}}. It should be noted that draws most commonly occur by {{w|Draw by agreement|agreement}}, or | + | A chess game can be won (and lost for the other party) or {{w|draw (chess)|drawn}}. It should be noted that draws most commonly occur by {{w|Draw by agreement|agreement}}, or by {{w|stalemate}}. A stalemate is a situation where the opponent's king is not in check, but none of the opponent's pieces can be moved in a legal way. In a human conversation, what amounts to a draw, and what amounts to a stalemate? |
If agreed draws should be allowed (and under which circumstances) is a matter of some discussion among chess players, thus adding another point to Randall's comic. For example, some tournament rules (e.g. the so-called "{{w|Draw by agreement#Only theoretical draws allowed (Sofia Rules)|Sofia Rules}}") do not allow a draw to be offered directly - any player has first to announce the intention of drawing to the arbiter (referee), who then decides if the position should be played out further or not. | If agreed draws should be allowed (and under which circumstances) is a matter of some discussion among chess players, thus adding another point to Randall's comic. For example, some tournament rules (e.g. the so-called "{{w|Draw by agreement#Only theoretical draws allowed (Sofia Rules)|Sofia Rules}}") do not allow a draw to be offered directly - any player has first to announce the intention of drawing to the arbiter (referee), who then decides if the position should be played out further or not. | ||
The official chess rules offer some ways the concept of a "draw" could be applied to a human conversation. According to the {{w|World Chess Federation}} (FIDE) rules, a draw can occur: | The official chess rules offer some ways the concept of a "draw" could be applied to a human conversation. According to the {{w|World Chess Federation}} (FIDE) rules, a draw can occur: | ||
− | #by agreement. Any player can offer a draw when it is | + | #by agreement. Any player can offer a draw when it is his turn to move. |
#by stalemate. As explained above: The king is not in check, but no legal moves are available. | #by stalemate. As explained above: The king is not in check, but no legal moves are available. | ||
− | #when the same position (with the same possible legal moves) occurs at least three times, with the same player having the same possibilities of moving | + | #when the same position (with the same possible legal moves) occurs at least three times, with the same player having the same possibilities of moving his pieces. This draw must be requested by the player. According to the FIDE rule 9.6, the arbiter himself declares the game drawn when the same position occurs five times. |
− | #when 50 moves have passed without a capture or a pawn move. Again, the draw occurs only upon request. | + | #when 50 moves have passed without a capture or a pawn move. Again, the draw occurs only upon request. Analogous to FIDE rule 9.6, the arbiter declares the game drawn when 75 moves have passed, again without a request by either player. |
− | #when one of the players has used up | + | #when one of the players has used up his time, but his opponent has not enough material to mate. For example, king and pawn mate against a king in certain situations, while king against king leads to a draw by the 50-move-rule. |
#when both players have used up their time, but the arbiter cannot determine who did so first. This is impossible with modern electronic chess clocks, though. | #when both players have used up their time, but the arbiter cannot determine who did so first. This is impossible with modern electronic chess clocks, though. | ||
− | #upon request, when the opponent does not play seriously and attempts to win the game by timeout | + | #upon request, when the opponent does not play seriously, and attempts to win the game by timeout. |
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
=== Chess games and conversations === | === Chess games and conversations === | ||
− | + | Chess games and human conversations do have some things in common: | |
− | + | *The outcome fully depends on the behaviour of the partner/opponent. | |
− | |||
− | |||
− | *The outcome fully depends on the | ||
*As in chess, there is no certainty that a certain statement will have the desired effect. The opponent can always react in a surprising way. | *As in chess, there is no certainty that a certain statement will have the desired effect. The opponent can always react in a surprising way. | ||
− | + | *The question of what is considered a good move (or statement) can only be answered in a subjective way. Chess engines though use algorithms to assess the position; and they can calculate the value of different possible moves. In human conversations, social norms help avoid making bad moves. | |
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | *The question of what is considered a good move (or statement) can only be answered in a subjective way. Chess engines though use algorithms to assess the position | ||
*It is difficult to win against an experienced, alert partner or opponent. Competent exploitation of the opponent's errors is often the only way to win. | *It is difficult to win against an experienced, alert partner or opponent. Competent exploitation of the opponent's errors is often the only way to win. | ||
− | *In both, you will try to find moves that make your win more probable, while avoiding deleterious moves. Due to inadequate computing power, it is hitherto impossible to calculate all possible ways a chess game (or a conversation) could play out | + | *In both, you will try to find moves that make your win more probable, while avoiding deleterious moves. Due to inadequate computing power, it is hitherto impossible to calculate all possible ways a chess game (or a conversation) could play out. Therefore it is impossible to design a path that leads to a guaranteed outcome - except when the situation has been simplified enough. There are handbooks to play endgames, explaining how to secure either a win or a draw, no matter the capability of the opponent. Nowadays, computer-generated {{w|endgame tablebase}}s exist for six-piece and seven-piece endgames. Those for six pieces are freely available and are about 1 terabyte large. |
− | + | Differences: | |
− | + | *Both chess games and conversations are turn-based, but people's statements sometimes last an eternity or even longer. | |
− | *Both chess games and conversations are turn-based, but | + | *Especially in heated conversations, draws are extremely rare. |
− | *Especially in | ||
*It is difficult to judge the winner of a conversation. | *It is difficult to judge the winner of a conversation. | ||
− | + | *Chess games are extremely constrained by a set of rules. | |
− | *Chess games are extremely constrained by a set of rules. | + | |
+ | ==Transcript== | ||
+ | :[Cueball and White Hat facing each other.] | ||
+ | :Cueball: I've decided to score all my conversations using chess win-loss notation. | ||
+ | :White Hat: I don't know or care what that means. | ||
+ | :Cueball: Fine. | ||
+ | :White Hat: Fine. | ||
+ | |||
+ | :[Caption below the frame:] | ||
+ | :½–½ | ||
{{comic discussion}} | {{comic discussion}} | ||
Line 105: | Line 83: | ||
[[Category:Comics featuring White Hat]] | [[Category:Comics featuring White Hat]] | ||
[[Category:Chess]] | [[Category:Chess]] | ||
− |