From: "Jeroen J.-W. Tiggelman" HDETUD2 TUDELFT NL> Date: 20 may 1996 Subject: Re: Meijin Match No.3 & Shogi Notation NOTE: Regardless of what impression my below comments are going to suggest, I want first and foremost say "thanks for the explanation" to the previous poster. However, I have the feeling that things would have better been phrased more neutrally. It is my eternal opinion that informative descriptions and personal opinions had best be separated. George Fernandez wrote: > This is NOT a good notation system for western players. It is This is NOT a good opening sentence for an informative posting. ;-) > is NOT a good notation system for western players; Thirdly, to explain the > system COMPLETELY; and Fourthly, my primary reason, to explain the correct I wonder if you would compile the information proper in this posting concisely and submit this to the set of available files of Shogi-L's? (Perhaps it is not entirely courteous to ask you to do more work when you have been so kind to spend a lot of time on it already, but neither does it seem to be courteous to go and cut up the information you supplied and rework it without offering you first. ;-)) It seems to me that this would be much simpler than having this type of flamewar every now and then.. > The true japanese system works well BECAUSE the kanji characters > take-up only ONE space each. I'm certain that Shogi Renmei or Shogi Sekai > would not consider using TWENTY "kana"[hiragana or katakana] characters to > describe a single move!(see example below). And this is exactly what happens > when you try to convert this system to English. (...) > At present, when using the true japanese system(with kanji) there is > a maximum of 7 characters needed to write or convey ANY move. Likewise, the > longest possible move in standard western notation uses 7 characters. The > japanese system without kanji can use up to 26 characters! (...) > Imagine the kind of margins you would need to use this notation on a > regular basis! AND the additional time it would take our few dedicated shogi > promoters and editors, worldwide, to type in such a game score. Allow me to observe that I think you are carried away by the defense of your opinion a little. I grant you that this notation would not be very suitable for a magazine; however, Shogi-L isn't one. As a matter of fact, I almost replied to the other article asking Reijer to put the moves on separate lines that this practice can be put down to his excellent editorship of the Dutch Shogi Alliance's (if that's the right term ;-)) quarterly for quite some time, but that line breaks are quite inexpensive on the 'net. :-) Similarly, I grant you that it may be less typing to use the Western notation, but the issue being whether people are allowed to use a notation they are used to instead of one to which they are not used here, I think the observation about how much _time_ it takes, is quite inapplicable. In my eyes, any game score that uses a column for each player's moves is quite close to ideal. :-) > [2] There are 3 types of moves: "-" or nothing = Moves to; "*" or "'" = > Drops at; and "x" = Captures at. The middle one surprised me: I had assumed "is dropped at". Which illustrates that your explication is very useful indeed. ;-) > There are NO exeptions. All moves comply with the system. This can be looked upon as a big plus, but it need not be. See below. ;-) Also, it matters at which point you say "no exceptions" (i.e., after how many rules, and how formulated), for a technical argument.. > Two special notes: 1. When both a [3a] AND a [3b] must be given the > [3a]direction is always said first. This is a VERY difficult aspect of the > japanese system. In Mr. Horiguchi's 1993 booklet, titled, "The rules of To tell you the truth, I do not see what is so difficult about this precedence rule.. > shogi", he needed 8 Diagrams and 8 pages to explain the many possibilities > and correct description of each! 2. When a capture or a re-capture occurs I am not impressed by this argument. How much diagrams one needs to explain anything depends much more on how visual one wants to make it than the complexity of the system. Technically, no diagram would be _needed_ at all. ;-) ;-) A more relevant observation in my eyes is the amount of information crammed into the diagrams used. To be honest, I think these are quite comparable; and to speak my mind I believe that direction like "the right one" or "the left one" are from the conceptual way we look at a game position much _better_ than "the one on 4c". After all, the concept of "left" and "right" take a lot less processing than locating a certain square (not that it's _that_ hard ;-)), IMO... > at the same square as the previous move[i.e. 16.P-2d, Px2d; or 16.... Px2d > 17.Bx2d] a special word or character["DO" or "DOU"] is used, followed by the > capturing piece, instead of a normal(complete) move. And allow me to say that Mr. Iwakura's game score was one of the first in that system I ever played through, and I was surprised how much _simpler_ this using "Do" was: it allowed me to see the entire exchange from a single glance at the game score at once. Note how I am talking primarily of the _interpretation_ of the game score, and not the construction of it -- the issue being whether it can be any problem to _read_ such game scores from people who'd rather post them that way. ;-) However, I find it hard to believe that it is so difficult (when you are playing a game, which is with me usually rather an intense activity at least) to regard your move as a "take-back" than a "capture on a particular field". In fact, I believe it's conceptually easier. > (c) If by chance, there was another Gold at 4b(42), then it would be: 52 Kin > Agaru, instead of 52 Kin Hidari. In the remote possibility that > additionally, a third Gold was present at 6a(61), then it would be 52 Kin > Hidari Agaru. You got it? This is really no problem at all to me.. The leaving out of redundant information may yield a less uniform system, but in my eyes it simplifies greatly. And it looks as if it takes on the average _less_ concepts (I don't care about the lettering much ;-)) for the move.. (This holds for the other "exceptions" as well. Alternatively, one could easily formulate the rules in the most extensive notation, then add that any superfluous notation may be left out, which isn't much of an "exception" in my eyes. As for the idea that it _must_ be left out, I don't think anyone would be very adamant on that, except that it _simplifies_. This is _the same_ with the "international notation" which you can view as giving the initial field, _but_ leaving it out when it is redundant, and which also optionally leaves out the default move "-".) > Please file this away someplace and enjoy using it as a guide to > help you in future shogi discussions with japanese players, as I do. A well-meant "thnak you" to you once again: Thank you! > However, as far as notation "for the masses" goes, it is NOT practical. I see no evidence for this. If you want to teach chess players, yes.. > In the Shogi-L forum(and throughout the US and Europe), there is an > overwhelming preference for the standard western notation. I too strongly How do you know? My impression from the list is that people do not really care much. > favor staying with it and greatly appreciate the fact that this is one area > where we have overcome many language barriers. Given that the Kanji on the pieces present a "language barrier" for about three games, I don't see why the 'composite symbols' "Fu", "Kei", etc. should be so difficult.. > Some American players have TRIED to use this system already and the > results were terrible! Usually, while in byoyomi, they would start to draw > lines to show in which direction the pieces were moving. Oftentimes whole I am afraid I value the simple reasoning given above over this type of circumstantial evidence (my opinion). > sequences were wrong, because, for example they would mistake 3c(33) for > 7g(77). As a result, my time was usually wasted trying to re-construct the This example seems to apply to both notations equally. > purposes. Additionally, when we DID find a good game, we STILL had to > convert it to the standard western notation for publication. This, as I said above, does not seem to applicable here. And I don't think that you will publish any downloaded game score unedited. And a simple program to convert the notation shouldn't take a whole lot of programming. (Of course, I do a lot of programming.. ;-)) Regards, Jeroen Tiggelman crmbjti hdetud2 tudelft nl