12

I'm curious about why the symbols O-O and O-O-O are used for castling in algebraic notation. Why not use the consistent and logical Kg1/Kc1 for White and Kg8/Kc8 for Black? Why adopt the less than obvious O-O and O-O-O from descriptive notation?

Rewan Demontay
  • 16,942
  • 4
  • 65
  • 109
Jim Davis
  • 121
  • 1
  • 3
  • 2
    0-0 and 0-0-0 are more "obvious" if you realize it's the number of squares the rook moves. (Comment, because it's really not a full answer.) – Ghotir Mar 10 '17 at 19:44
  • 1
    BTW, it should be 0-0 (with the number zero, not the letter O). Only in PGN it has to be the letter. – user1583209 Mar 10 '17 at 21:30
  • 8
    According to wikipedia this notation was introduced in 1811 by Johann Allgaier as 0-0r, 0-0l. The current notation with 0-0-0 was added in 1837 by Aaron Alexandre. – user1583209 Mar 10 '17 at 21:33
  • Better would be CQ and CK, instead of Kc1 and Kg1. – Fred Knight Sep 15 '17 at 09:45

5 Answers5

16

The castling notation was invented by Johann Allgaier and used for the first time in his 1811 2nd edition of his Neue theoretisch-praktische Anweisung zum Schachspiel.

He didn't explain why he came up with it.

Allgaier (and algebraic notation in general) used digit-0. The use of letter-O is an anglo-saxon oddity.

Queeg
  • 694
  • 5
  • 12
  • I always thought of the kingside notation as being a couple of circles with a line between, representing the bottoms of the king and rook, and the queenside notation was a "bigger" version of that. I've never thought there was any relation to the number zero. – supercat Aug 23 '18 at 23:19
  • @supercat there is no relation to the number zero it is the letter 'oh' and pronounced oh-oh or oh-oh-oh never zero-zero or zerozerozero like the movie title. – edwina oliver Feb 19 '20 at 17:01
  • @edwinaoliver I don't think so. For instance, Spanish uses 0-0-0 ("cero-cero-cero") – David Dec 10 '20 at 15:26
8

A notation like Kg1 would give the impression that only the king is moved. At the very least, it is not obvious that castling moves the rook as well.

Glorfindel
  • 24,745
  • 6
  • 67
  • 114
5

The point is to make it obvious it's a castling move. It's important because that's the only time in a game that you can move two pieces.

Note that computers represent the moves as Kc1 and Kg1, so both ways work. O-O and O-O-O are easier for humans to read.

ABCD
  • 22,419
  • 2
  • 43
  • 82
1

In my opinion, 0-0 and 0-0-0 are used to differentiate castling from ordinary king moves. The castling maneuver then stands out in the game notation, as opposed to say Kc8 which appears - on the surface anyway - to be an ordinary, one square, king move ... until you look closer to see if the king is actually moving more than one square. It also helps to clearly indicate king-side (short) or queen-side (long) castling at a glance.

I think at least as compared to things like ?! or !? it makes a lot of sense.

Oddly, it's the only carry-over from the Descriptive (P-K4) to Algebraic (e4) notation.

tripleee
  • 113
  • 4
Joe Quimby
  • 89
  • 2
-1

Kg1/Kg8 or Kc1/Kc8 are Singular moves where the King only moves during the Game . Since before the Algebraic Notation Descriptive Notation was used which was quite cumbersome & lengthy Algebraic was a short hand . Why 0-0 & 0-0-0 was exactly used is quite inexplicable but this is the only move in International Chess where two pieces are moving simultaneously . In K-side Castling K is moving two squares and in Q-side Castling it is moving three Squares .

So it might have seen an innovative way of recording the Castling move since King is the most important piece in a Chess Game 0-0/0-0-0 was a royal move indicating King is going inside the castle and the Battle Begins .

Seth Projnabrata
  • 1,973
  • 7
  • 13