> White is the name given to the player of the white pieces when there is
> no real name available.

>> White is the name given to the player of the white pieces when there is
>> no real name available.

> And sometimes when there is, by convention.

>> As a proper noun, it is capitalised.

>> White is the name given to the player of the white pieces when there is
>> no real name available.

> And sometimes when there is, by convention.

>> As a proper noun, it is capitalised.

> And "white" is a description of those pieces, so it's not capitalized.

> If we consider bishops, we can complicate the issue further. Since bishops
> can move only diagonally, each player has one bishop confined to
> the "white" squares on the board and one bishop confined to the "black"
> squares. Thus at the start of the game, the following bishops are part of
> the line-up:

> White's white Bishop (which is coloured "white")
> White's black Bishop (which is coloured "white")
> Black's white Bishop (which is coloured "black")
> Black's black Bishop (which is coloured "black")

> > And "white" is a description of those pieces, so it's not capitalized.

> Not always literally: I have a chess set made from light and dark maple of
> which White's pieces are cream-coloured and Black's pieces are dark
> brown. Since "the white bishop" means the bishop belonging to White, I
> think "White" (and "Black") should indeed be capitalised. Analogously,
> one refers to the "Arsenal striker" and not to the "arsenal striker".
> Moreover, the few chess books I have just glanced at capitalise the names
> of the pieces as well, though this may reflect the age of the books...

> If we consider bishops, we can complicate the issue further. Since bishops
> can move only diagonally, each player has one bishop confined to
> the "white" squares on the board and one bishop confined to the "black"
> squares. Thus at the start of the game, the following bishops are part of
> the line-up:

> White's white Bishop (which is coloured "white")
> White's black Bishop (which is coloured "white")
> Black's white Bishop (which is coloured "black")
> Black's black Bishop (which is coloured "black")

> As Andrew B. says, "light bishop" is more common.  I also see "light-
> square bishop" and "dark-square bishop".  Modern players have not
> overlooked the opportunity for TLAs.  In the KID, black fianchettoes
> his DSB.

> I think this convention applies more strongly to the pieces.  Whatever
> color they really are, they're still white and black.  A quick look at
> GB finds "black queen", "black Queen", and "Black Queen" on the first
> page, but no "Black queen".

> [snip what we agree on]

> --
> Jerry Friedman

> > >> As a proper noun, it is capitalised.

> > > And "white" is a description of those pieces, so it's not capitalized.

> > Not always literally: I have a chess set made from light and dark maple of
> > which White's pieces are cream-coloured and Black's pieces are dark
> > brown. Since "the white bishop" means the bishop belonging to White, I
> > think "White" (and "Black") should indeed be capitalised. Analogously,
> > one refers to the "Arsenal striker" and not to the "arsenal striker".
> > Moreover, the few chess books I have just glanced at capitalise the names
> > of the pieces as well, though this may reflect the age of the books...

> > If we consider bishops, we can complicate the issue further. Since bishops
> > can move only diagonally, each player has one bishop confined to
> > the "white" squares on the board and one bishop confined to the "black"
> > squares. Thus at the start of the game, the following bishops are part of
> > the line-up:

> > White's white Bishop (which is coloured "white")
> > White's black Bishop (which is coloured "white")
> > Black's white Bishop (which is coloured "black")
> > Black's black Bishop (which is coloured "black")

> As Andrew B. says, "light bishop" is more common.  I also see "light-
> square bishop" and "dark-square bishop".  Modern players have not
> overlooked the opportunity for TLAs.  In the KID, black fianchettoes
> his DSB.

> > Despite the fact that chess boards are available in different colour
> > combinations (mine is inlaid with light and dark maple to match the
> > pieces) one still refers to white squares and black squares, in this case
> > non-capitalised.

> I think this convention applies more strongly to the pieces.  Whatever
> color they really are, they're still white and black.  A quick look at
> GB finds "black queen", "black Queen", and "Black Queen" on the first
> page, but no "Black queen".

> I agree.  But if you accept this or the squares, why not accept it
> for the pieces?

>My own point of view is that in chess "white" and "black" are terms
>of art meaning "the lighter of the two colors" and "the darker of the
>two colors".

>"What color are the black pieces?" "They are dark brown."

>That seems perfectly reasonable to me.

>>Thu, 05 Nov 2009 19:04:47 +0100 from Leslie Danks
>><leslie.da...@aon.at>:
>>> I have a chess set made from light and dark maple of
>>> which White's pieces are cream-coloured and Black's pieces are dark
>>> brown. Since "the white bishop" means the bishop belonging to White, I
>>> think "White" (and "Black") should indeed be capitalised.

>>My own point of view is that in chess "white" and "black" are terms
>>of art meaning "the lighter of the two colors" and "the darker of the
>>two colors".

>>"What color are the black pieces?" "They are dark brown."

>>That seems perfectly reasonable to me.

>Perfectly reasonable to me, too.  I have noticed a wide range of color
>amongst black Americans.  Unlike chessmen, though, I've never seen a
>truly black one.

>My own point of view is that in chess "white" and "black" are terms
>of art meaning "the lighter of the two colors" and "the darker of the
>two colors".

>"What color are the black pieces?" "They are dark brown."

>That seems perfectly reasonable to me.

>On Fri, 6 Nov 2009 06:35:47 -0500, Stan Brown <the_stan_br...@fastmail.fm>
>wrote:

>>Thu, 05 Nov 2009 19:04:47 +0100 from Leslie Danks
>><leslie.da...@aon.at>:
>>> I have a chess set made from light and dark maple of
>>> which White's pieces are cream-coloured and Black's pieces are dark
>>> brown. Since "the white bishop" means the bishop belonging to White, I
>>> think "White" (and "Black") should indeed be capitalised.

>>My own point of view is that in chess "white" and "black" are terms
>>of art meaning "the lighter of the two colors" and "the darker of the
>>two colors".

>>"What color are the black pieces?" "They are dark brown."

>>That seems perfectly reasonable to me.

>And what about the Red Queen, in "Through the looking-glass"?

> I hope nobody else learned that!  It's the pieces now called black that
> could be red, and White always moves first.

>I hope nobody else learned that!  It's the pieces now called black that
>could be red, and White always moves first.

>> R.H. Draney:
>>> Did everyone else learn the same rule I did for remember whether
>>> red or black (or red or white) moves first when you don't have
>>> actual black and white pieces?..."fire before smoke", they'd say,
>>> and since smoke can be either black or white (cf. the College of
>>> Cardinals choosing a new Pope), that meant red always moves first
>>> if it's present.
>> I hope nobody else learned that!  It's the pieces now called black that
>> could be red, and White always moves first.

> I have an antique ivory chess set, originally the property of a
> great-grandfather, with red and white pieces.

>John Varela wrote:

>> I have an antique ivory chess set, originally the property of a
>> great-grandfather, with red and white pieces.

>It's a pity those scarlet-tusked elephants died out.

>>> R.H. Draney:
>>>> Did everyone else learn the same rule I did for remember whether red
>>>> or black (or red or white) moves first when you don't have actual
>>>> black and white pieces?..."fire before smoke", they'd say, and since
>>>> smoke can be either black or white (cf. the College of Cardinals
>>>> choosing a new Pope), that meant red always moves first if it's
>>>> present.
>>> I hope nobody else learned that!  It's the pieces now called black
>>> that could be red, and White always moves first.

>> I have an antique ivory chess set, originally the property of a
>> great-grandfather, with red and white pieces.

> It's a pity those scarlet-tusked elephants died out.

> I hope nobody else learned that!  It's the pieces now called black that
> could be red, and White always moves first.