At the small size I want, I’d need a stencil cutting machine. If I double the size, carving a rubber eraser would be better, IMHO.
They do make rubber stamp maker machine, but somehow that feels overkill. 
So, this is what it looks like at the end.
White to Move and Lose!
The straight line angular King’s crown makes it easy to draw. Maybe I can use a pastel highlighter to color the squares? Otherwise, I’m pretty happy with it. No problem hand drawing the pieces.
I still don’t understand why you want to draw. For keeping a log/protocol/journal? For snail mail chess?
Yes. That’s it, exactly!
I guess I’m just the kind of old fashioned guy who prefers analog over digital. 
1 Like
So, here’s the proof of concept.
Diagram 1: I have just sacrificed my Rook to a pawn. (I hate Rooks!)
Diagram 2: WtM2. What is the winning move? (I love Rooks!)
7.5 mm squares on Leuchtturm. Drawn in 0.5 mm 2B pencil.
Nf6+ seems the winning move to me.
1 Like
That’s correct! Here’s the page that I write on it.
Here’s the game
We’re rated 750 and 450. Quite low!
Looks like I got it nicely done this time. I use 7 mm DotGrid, with Zebra Mildliner (gentle).
Black to Mate in 7.
I processed the color to gray to see how it’d be printed with On-demand books. Originally, it’s Lilac .
Still not sure how people will react with hand drawn diagrams, though?
So, I now have several sizes, from tiny to large. Witness the drawn figures with Black/White accents on the top figures. That’s doable with large enough grid (7 mm to 8 mm).
1… RxB+ 2 NxR QxN+ 3 Kd2 Qe2+ 4 Kc1 Qe1+ 5 Qd1 QxQ#
Edit: was Mate in 5, but I was wrong. Oops!
The pieces above the board are drawn as a mix of black and white. That can cause confusion.
I fear that a high percentage of the readers will frown upon hand-drawn diagrams. I personally find them very readable but I think many others won’t like it.
I haven’t figured out the solution (yet!) But I guess some sacrifices are needed.
1 Like
Is this really a miss? The computer thinks so, but I like my Qb3 well enough since it leads to nice Bishop Sac tactics!
Black helps by making a few mistakes!
I managed to win the game without losing any pawns! 
1 Like
I don’t see the bishop sacrifice moves. That doesn’t mean they aren’t there, I just don’t see them.
The AI says there’s only one good move? I can’t believe that.
But Qb3 doesn’t seem good to me. But perhaps you wanted to break open b6 and b7. But in that case the move suggested by the AI would’ve been good. Especially as you can do it only in that turn (en passant has to be done immediately).
1 Like
You made a little mistake in the solution of your last diagram: It’s 1. … RxB+ not RxN+. But I got the idea 
1 Like
Oops. Fixed.
BxP. PxP. Pb6, cutting off bishop. Material wise, it’s even. However, it’s very annoying to play against it, so hopefully Black makes some mistakes. (He did)
Then maneuver the Knight to b3, where the Queen is.
I got some nice tactics out of it, including mate in 4 with all my pawns surviving.
Whereas, I still can’t figure out computer’s tactics, no matter how much I tried to understand it.
Mating is still more important, but with so many pawns available, why not recreate starting position?
I think the computer has no tactics at all but calculates a few turns in advance and makes a algorithmic judgement and then takes a random move out of the - let’s say - 8 best moves. It’s not taking always the best move and it’s not planning. So the gameplay feels “computerish”.
1 Like
Ignore the computer evaluation. I believe this is mate in 10. Black premove!
Yep. The computer is wrong! 
a4.
If bxa4:
b3. b2. b1=Q. Qa1. QxP. Qa6?. Qc6. Rb7. Qc8#.
See N2
If not bxa4:
a3. a2. a1=Q. Qa6. Qc6. Rb7. Qc8#.
N2:
Timing is tricky, but it’s possible with this variation, I think?
a4. (bxa4) b3. b2. b1=Q. Qe4. Rf5. Qg4. Rh5#.
So, Mate in 8.
Turns out trying to write multi-level steps of chess moves in a linear fashion isn’t too easy.
This is the game:
I missed the mate in game, though I still win.
The lower diagram has a mistake: It should be HGF…, not ABC…
And for the multiple levels: Maybe experiment with trees, for example like used in a directory tree. But don’t connect turn 3 with turn 3, rather start lines from turn 2 to different turns 3 (at least imho).
1 Like
Oops. You’re right. Also, there’s an errand square highlighted outside the board.
The tree structure you mention is like file directory structure, right? I thought about that. A deeply nested move will be too wide. Also, the thing is, I won’t know whether some positions will have alternative moves before I get there, so may be nesting prematurely. In fact, that’s why I chose what I did.
Traditionally, of course, this is done via parentheses. Unfortunately, it’s too confusing for me to go through without a board.
But I’ll try the indented approach, and see if that helps. Thanks.
1 Like
I think you’re right that the file indentation method will be clearest. Too bad it takes too much space. I tried it using compressed technique and it’s confusing, even with lines.
Your recommendation may be really clear that it may not need any lines at all. However, it will add 2 extra spaces.
Note: the indented moves refer to previous diagram, not the one shown on this page. 
1 Like
