When annotating chess games, commentators frequently use question marks and exclamation points to denote a move as bad or good. The symbols normally used are "??", "?", "?!", "!?", "!", and "!!". The corresponding symbol is juxtaposed in the text immediately after the move (e.g. Re7? or Kh1!?, see algebraic chess notation).
Use of these annotation symbols is always somewhat subjective, as different annotators use the same symbols differently. Moreover, an annotator's use of symbols is often influenced by the player's strength: a positional misjudgment that an annotator might give a "??" if played by a strong grandmaster might pass unremarked if played by a beginner. Annotators' use of punctuation also tends to be influenced by the result of the game; in the 11th game of the 1972 World Championship, Spassky played a very surprising move, 14.Nb1, retreating the knight to its initial square. Spassky won the game, and the annotators invariably gave the move two exclamation points. Edmar Mednis observes that if Spassky had lost the game, the move would likely have been given two question marks instead.[1]
|
| This article uses algebraic notation to describe chess moves. |
Move symbols in increasing effectiveness of the move:
The double question mark "??" indicates a blunder, a very bad mistake. Typical moves which receive double question marks are those that overlook that the queen is under attack or overlook a checkmate. Whether a single or double question mark is used often depends on the player's strength. For instance, if a beginner makes a serious strategic error (for instance, allowing doubled pawns or exchanging into a lost endgame) or overlooks a tactical sequence, this might be explained by the beginner's lack of skill, and be given only one question mark. If a master were to make the same move, some annotators might use the double question mark to indicate that one would never expect a player of the master's strength to make such a weak move.
A single question mark "?" after a move indicates that the annotator thinks that the move is a poor one that should not be played. However, the nature of the mistake may be more strategic than tactical in nature; or, in some cases, the move receiving a question mark may be one that is difficult to find a refutation for.
This symbol is similar to the "!?" (below) but usually indicates that the annotator believes the move to be objectively bad, albeit hard to refute. The "?!" is also often used instead of a "?" to indicate that the move is not all bad. A sacrifice leading to a dangerous attack which the opponent should be able to defend against if he plays well may receive a "?!". Alternatively, this may denote a move that is truly bad, but sets up an attractive trap.
The "!?" is one of the more controversial symbols. Different books have slightly varying definitions. Among the definitions are "interesting, but perhaps not the best move", "move deserving attention", "enterprising move" and "risky move". Usually it indicates that the move leads to exciting or wild play and that the move is probably good. It is also often used when a player sets a cunning trap in a lost position. Typical moves receiving a "!?" are those involving speculative sacrifices or dangerous attacks which might turn out to be strategically deficient.
Andrew Soltis jokingly called "!?" the symbol of the lazy annotator who finds a move interesting but cannot be bothered to work out whether it is good or bad.[2]
While question marks indicate bad moves, exclamation points ("!") indicate good moves—especially ones which are surprising or involve particular skill. Hence annotators are usually somewhat conservative with the use of this symbol; for example, they would not annotate a game thus: 1.e4! c5! 2.Nf3! d6! 3.d4! cxd4! 4.Nxd4! Nf6! 5.Nc3! All the moves of this main-line Sicilian Defence are good ones, but the players have demonstrated little skill by simply following well-known opening theory.
Once the players start making good choices when faced with difficult decisions, however, a few moves may receive exclamation points from annotators. Typical moves receiving exclamation points are strong opening novelties, well-timed breakthroughs, sound sacrifices, and moves that avoid falling into traps.
The double exclamation point ("‼") is used to praise a move which the annotator thinks really shows the player's skill. Such moves are usually hard to find. These may include sound sacrifices of large amounts of material and moves that at first glance seem very counter-intuitive.
There are some systems which use these symbols in different ways.
In his 1992 book Secrets of Rook Endings and other books in the series (Secrets of Minor-Piece Endings and Secrets of Pawnless Endings), John Nunn uses these symbols in a more specific way in the context of endgames where the optimal line of play can be determined with certainty:
This convention has been used in some later works, such as Fundamental Chess Endings and Secrets of Pawn Endings by Karsten Müller and Frank Lamprecht, but it can be safely assumed the convention is not being used unless there is a specific note otherwise. The Nunn convention cannot be used to annotate full games because the exact evaluation of a position is generally impractical to compute.
In 1959, Euwe and Hooper made the same use of the question mark, "... a decisive error...".[3]
German grandmaster Robert Hübner prefers an even more specific and restrained use of move evaluation symbols: "I have attached question marks to the moves which change a winning position into a drawn game, or a drawn position into a losing one, according to my judgment; a move which changes a winning game into a losing one deserves two question marks [...] I have distributed question marks in brackets to moves which are obviously inaccurate and significantly increase the difficulty of the player's task [...] There are no exclamation marks, as they serve no useful purpose. The best move should be mentioned in the analysis in any case; an exclamation mark can only serve to indicate the personal excitement of the commentator."[4]
When the solution to a certain chess problem is given, there are also some conventions that have become a common practice:
It is unclear who (if anyone) has an advantage. This is often used when a position is highly asymmetrical, such as Black having a ruined pawn structure but dangerous active piece-play.
This symbol indicates that whoever is down in material has compensation for the material.
This symbol indicates that the annotator believes that White and Black have equal chances.
This symbol indicates that White (Black) has slightly better chances.
This symbol indicates that White (Black) has much better chances. It is often written as ± for White advantage, ∓ for Black advantage; the other similar symbols can be written in that style too.
This symbol indicates that White (Black) has a winning advantage.
Some annotators put together even more question marks and exclamation points. For example "???" or "????" might indicate a truly ghastly move, too horrid to give a mere "??", for example, 1.f3? e5 2.g4??? Qh4# (Fool's Mate); an extraordinarily brilliant move might receive "!!!" or even "!!!!";[5] and a fascinating but probably unsound move might receive "?!?" or "!?!". However, use of such symbols is not common.
There are some other symbols used in multilingual publications such as the Chess Informant and Encyclopaedia of Chess Openings. These include:
○: Indicates more territory (space) owned by one player.
↑: Indicates an advantage in initiative.
↑↑: Indicates a lead in development. Also written ↻.
⇄: Indicates that the player has counterplay.
∇: Indicates the opponent's plan this defends against.
Δ: Indicates the future plan this move supports.
|
|
|||||