I do that so that it makes it easier to follow a single line through all the variations (and sometimes sub-variations). Otherwise I find people tend to get lost when reading through analysis without the use of a program. The color I use means nothing so far as the quality of the line; I choose it for readability & ease on the eyes.
Chess Article / Game Notation Colors ...
Sort:
Oldest
Thank you for your reply. May I suggest that each variation needs to be expressed in a breakout type tree format. Hope that makes sense. See, if you're viewing moves 1 - 8 before the first variation then moves 8... (Black to move) starts the variation then perhaps listing this part of the variation in a separate column will further both the ease of reading it and the understanding of it, expecially if it continues further into the game, say with moves 15 - 19. Of course, the moves in the first variation may be of the color blue, without any further meaning by use of color. However, when you inject another sub variation into the first variation, say with the color red, without the color having any other meaning than this is a sub variation, then you're confusing the reader.
It is obvious that the writers intentions are all good. However, the reader really doesn't know which variation is preferred by the writer when you do things that way, nor what is really being pointed out. Better will be utiizing columns and perhaps an expression of thought about the variation even with one or two words as: "Fair approach" , "Good line" , "Best Strategy". For with this type of annotation or brief commentary, will make the learning easier.
Your further response will be appreciated.
Well I'm not 100% sure what a "breakout type tree format" is, so maybe you could illustrate the idea for me? meanwhile, here's an example of a recent case where I used color (hope this cut & paste works!) and the style of annotation that the author (IM Ashot Nadanian) used:
13...axb5
Black could have also tried 13...h6. After 14.dxe6! (But not 14.Nd6+? Kf8 15.Qc7 g6 and the king escapes to h7) 14...hxg5 15.Nd6+ Kf8! (15...Ke7? loses after 16.Nf5+ Kd8 17.exd7 Bxd7 18.Qb6+) 16.exd7 Bxd7 and White is forced to give perpetual check.
Also was possible 13...Qxh2 14.Nf4 Ngf6 15.Bxd7+ Bxd7 16.Nd6+ Ke7 (A nice checkmate occurs after 16...Kf8? 17.Nc8+ Kg8 18.Ne7+ Kf8 19.Neg6+ Kg8 20.Qf8+ Rxf8 21.Ne7#) 17.Nxb7+ Ke8 18.Nd6+ Ke7 with perpetual check.
To Licenser:
Yes, that type of description is much preferred. Because it is much easier to follow the writers thinking.
By the way, are you quoting from a game article which I've been reviewing recently? The article by WGM Natalia Pogonina on: "Must-know: Middlegame". Look at Ms. Pogonina's descriptive lines to know what I was speaking about earlier.
Here I am trying to understand what this sparkling young lady is pointing out in her chess line writing notes, I am unsure which lines she prefers. Perhaps there's a way for her to learn about this forum thread. If she see's the way you've recently commented then she'll improve her ability to communicate her obviously strong knowledge to others about this wonderful and entertaining game.
On break-out tree format, suppose:
1. PK4 PK5 or 1. ---- PB6
2. KF3 KF6 2. PG3 BB7
I'm giving a very simple example to demo my point. In addition, please keep in mind that this program for writing in this forum does not easily allow me to navigate the writing space which will make it easier to create a more detailed example of what I speak of. However, the above will server the purpose of getting your mind understanding what I speak about.
Notice that their are two columns above. Notice even at move #1 their is a suggested variation for black. Black can follow the original line starting with PK5, but they also can choose to follow the line starting with PB6. Now I know I am being simple here, but if you think about what I speak of carefully then you can easily see how simple it is to follow a column of moves per variation. And this does not matter even if there'd be a 3rd or 4th variation of a particular move. Furthermore, in the column of each variation their can be a note indicating what a writer is trying to point out by demonstrating the particular line. See, even using your method, which is much clearer to the reader (thank you), you say: "But not 14.Nd6+? Kf8 15.Qc7 g6 and the king escapes to h7". If this was a line presented in column format then the annotation can be place at the end of the column.
I think you get the idea. Think about a spreadsheet. You've got columns and rows. Well, what I am suggesting is to use one set of columns for one particular complete line of White and Black pieces. Another set of columns for a variation at any point in the main line of play. Written comments can appear in appropriate white space locations.
"By the way, are you quoting from a game article which I've been reviewing recently?" Yes - see the link under IM Nadanian's name in post #4 above.
I get now the break-out tree format, like the old MCOs used to have. Maybe they still do, I haven't looked at one in years.
To Licenser:
As the process of learning continues, what is: "like the old MCOs" mean? I have no idea what is an MCO. 
MCO = Modern Chess Openings. They were (are?) a series of editions begun waaay many years ago, a compilation of opening presented in columnar format, like the breakout tree format Phoenix700 mentions above. They were considered THE authority in openings for along time, before the advent of databases, etc.
Hello: Re: a chess article. Game notation is displayed. Variations are shown in different color fonts. Nice idea. But how is the viewer supposed to know what is being taught by the variation? See you can watch the lines of the variation, but it is hard to determine what is being shown. Is there some kind of reason why some variations are in blue and some are in red? Does the font color of the variation mean good or bad lines of play?