This reminds me a funny story Bill Goichberg told me about a player in one of his tournaments years ago that would keep score with different color pencils. There would be a specific color for each piece. If I recall correctly, Bill said the player wrote out the moves long hand such as; 1. Pawn to King Four.
BMR (Before Mon Roi) I wrote the time every 5 moves, and sometimes even more often if a particular move took a long time. I wouldn’t consider putting a mark or an annotation by a played move note taking. It doesn’t help me in looking forward, but later on I can look back at the move marked.
I’ll occasionally annotate one of my own moves with a “?” if I think I’ve messed up, just so I can see later on whether Fritz agrees with my hunch. And I’ll sometimes underline one of my moves to remind myself later where I had to make a particularly difficult decision during the game. Is this forgivable?
I have God-awful handwriting, and one of the ways I try to make my notation sheets legible is by using multiple colored pens. So a few months back when I was shopping for school supplies, I came across a Sarasa set of 10 different colored felt pens, coupled with 10 black ones, each set with a small plastic “carrying case”. I, of course, could not pass up the offer, and bought all 20, lugging them around with me to and from classes. While I rarely use many-colors during class (I usually limit myself to two or three), I decided to bust out the 10-color set at the last chess tournament I went to. Suffice it to say, I got many comments as to why the heck my notation sheet was so colorful – some thought it was because I was taking some sort of notes (good moves/bad moves) or for different pieces. They were surprised when I explained that in using many colors, I basically force myself to slow down before writing a move, usually ensuring that I don’t scribble an illegible line down calling it “notation”. I’d like to think after these 10 different colors that I’ve recorded some of the most colorful chess games on USCF stationary.
That’s what I thought. Previous discussions of this rule have gone along those lines–you know, all those “move first, then record” discussions.
And yet, as sloan and Ron Suarez rightly point out, the rule does say “…as an aid to memory”. So, are there problems with recording something that has already happened?
I think it is just a badly worded rule. (Sorry Tim) Any note is really and aid to memory. That is what a note is for. The rule doesn’t specify that the note has to help with your game, just that it cannot aid your memory. So even notes like Get Milk, Hamburger and Ice Cream according to the rule are forbidden.
Maybe that is intentional with the rule because the paranoid could say that those are coded notes etc.
Maybe the rule should just read.
20C. Use of notes prohibited, except for actual recording of the moves, draw offers and clock times, and the header information normally found on a scoresheet.
So does that mean players can not write slow down at the top of the score sheet before the game? I’ve seen kids or the parents write such things on the score sheet before hand.
Maret, I mean to say that the rule saying, “…as an aid to memory…” applies in the use of analysis and planning for the game. I agree with you and Tim. I am saying that putting a “?” or a “!” on a move does not help in a person’s analysis of the game situation.
I have put a “?” after one of my moves, 2 or 3 moves later when that one move proved to be very faulty. I put the mark there for my future use after the game. I even had an opponent smile in empathy when I did this. I see nothing wrong with that.
Now, as Rob points out there can be times when a person might be attempting to game his opponent. Writing derogatory comments about the opponent or his play, putting a “?” or “??” after an opponent’s move (or even your own) can all be used as a tool to aggravate your opponent. This is gaming. It is not the use of notes as an aid to memory to help in the analysis and play of a chess game.
But technically, you are using that as an aid to memory. You’re using it so that after the game, you’ll remember which move to examine in more detail. You’re not trying to remember something during the game, but you are aiding your memory afterward. As worded, I’d say the rule prohibits this.
By this logic, writing the moves themselves down is an aid to memory for use after the game. Therefore actually writing the moves themselves down would be prohibited by the rules…
Understand that the intent is for anything written to not be used during the game as an aid to memory. The whole process of noting down the game score, header information and game times down is nothing more than an aid to memory for after the game. If it wasn’t then why keep score in the first place?
From a rules standpoint there is no need to look over the game afterwards. Writing the moves down during the game is a record that can be used for handling disputes and claims. Without that record you cannot verify the 50-move rule, three-fold repetition, reaching time control, the correct location for the pieces on the board, or which pieces should even be on the board.
In the early days of tournament play (mid-1800’s) players usually did not write down their moves moves. The game scores we have from casual play and tournament games were recorded by amateurs, newspaper reporters, and biographers. Many of the great historical brilliancies would have gone unnoticed but for fawning fans who breathlessly recorded every move of their heroes. A curious facet of those days was the awe of the masters’ memory of their games and their ability to do memory feats and play simultaneous games. We need to remember that this was an era in education where rote learning and memorization of poems and lists of information was a norm in the schools.
With the advent of serious tournament play and the use of chess clocks, there needed to be a means to prove how many moves were made for the given time control. The masters of the era were probably annoyed at first at the need to use clocks and write their moves down as needless distractions. The organizers wanted the game scores to produce tournament books to publicize their event and make extra money. Newspapers also published some games for the benefit of their interested readers. In our era of instant information, we tend to take all of this for granted but it was a big deal for amateurs of that day to have access to “secrets” of the masters. A novelty could be played for months or even years.
The writing of notes on the side during a game should be looked on as not just a memory aid but also as an aid to analysis. Having notes written down to refer to is like having a book opened or using a computer to help clarify a position. A weird/funny story comes to mind. There used to be a very odd player in Pittsburgh who used to bring a roll of toilet paper to his tournament game. During the round he would hunch over the tiny sheets of tissue writing his analysis down. When the TD told him he wasn’t allowed to do that, he spent the next 15 minutes meticulously tearing the tissue into tiny little bits so that no one could see what he wrote down. He left the pile on the table. No one touched it until the disgusted TD game around with a garbge can and swept the mess away. The odd little guy, who had other quirks and major hygeine issues, was rarely seen in tournaments after this.
Judging from what I’ve heard so far, the rule could use some re-write. The problem lies in the “…as an aid to memory.” Perhaps that might change to “…as an aid to analysis” and become more specific and more accurate.
I don’t see a problem with using ? or !, other than gaming your opponent, and there are other rules to cover that. I also don’t see a problem with what I used to do, which was circle a move that seemed pivotal and that I wanted to revisit after the game. I also don’t see a problem with marking instances of position repetition, although that’s not necessary; you can stop the clock and find them on the scoresheet if you need them.
None of this is an aid to analysis – thinking forward about your game. All of this is an aid to memory, though.
Or one could simply get rid of “as an aid to memory” in the phrase. Therefore the only legally allowed information on a score sheet is: moves, clock times, “normal header information.” In its strictest interpretation, one can then annotate the sheet later, on one’s time outside the game.
In its loosest interpretation, as Tim pointed out early on, the TD may or may not enforce such a claim. He might consider an underline, a check mark, or an annotation as a “note” not prescribed by the rule. Or he might exercise common sense and realize this isn’t a “note” proscribed by the rule. Either interpretation may be found to be correct, depending on if one is playing top board in the U.S. Championship, or a casual club quad.
(At least until such time as a USCF-level appeal gives direction on how it must be interpreted.)
But the ‘straight and narrow’ way to comply would be: Record your moves. Record clock times if you wish. Record regular header information. Period.
(And if clock times are used to help remember where a position lies… who will know that?)
No contradiction, at all. The first part of the rule says you can’t write anything down as an aid to memory. The second part gives explicit exceptions to this rule. Of course writing down the moves is contrary to the first part of the rule - that’s why the second part is necessary!
:mrgreen: