Show absolute values of evals?

[revenant]

In the variations sidebar, should the numerical evals perhaps be shown as absolute values of material advantage/disadvantage for white?  (I.e. no change to the current system when we're on the white side of a problem but when we're on the black side if we're a rook up it would show as "-5.00".)

Once you get used to it, I find it becomes easier to be objective about a problem and comprehend the intricate possibilities available to both sides.  It also forestalls some of the confusion that can result when users are sharing variations back & forth for comparison and trying to come up with a best line overall.

Recent releases of Crafty display evals strictly as absolute values.  Apparently the programmer felt it was high time to make the changeover.  (What do other engines do?)  Chess Tempo could benefit as well.

Anybody else feel the way I do?  As a programmer type, I guess I'm probably in the minority and I wouldn't want to incite a user rebellion.  :-)

[texian]

i'm a relative newbie to CT and to analysis with Crafty of Fritz, but i agree that i'd like to see the numbers as well as other variations .. i haven't checked yet but it wouldn't surprise me if this is not already an added feature in the premium package .. i haven't purchased the premium package, but intend to ASAP .. i continue to explore its features and continue to be intrigued and impressed .. for example, one premium feature allows the export of a PGN file which provides analysis to our hearts content in the engine of our choice

[richard]

revenant: I think these days it is definitely more normal to have evals cast in terms of white's point of view (I think this is what you mean. If so, I'm not sure I'd call this absolute, as I'd call this a "relative to white" evaluation system).  Personally I've come to prefer seeing the eval in terms of the current playing moving as I don't have to remember which colour the mover is is to know if the mover is winning or losing when I see an eval (which is more important when I'm looking at the underlying output which doesn't make it quite as obvious who is black/white).  The UCI interface also outputs things this way so I don't have to do any transformations.  I don't think it would be that hard to add an option to the preferences to have the evals always seen in terms of whites position.

texian: Variations and evals are indeed part of the premium features, revenant is talking about the way the eval score is presented at the moment.

Regards,
Richard.

[revenant]

Thanks for the clarification, Richard.  I've only belatedly realized "absolute value" would be a silly term for the idea I was trying to get across, since in math the "absolute value" operation converts a negative value to a positive one.  D'oh!

In my comments at CT problems I think I may try the notation "W+2.12" to indicate that white has a two-pawn advantage, or "B+5.00" to indicate that black is up a rook.  Hopefully that will keep readers from getting confused.  That is, assuming anyone is reading.   ;-)

[andreacoda]

That is, assuming anyone is reading.   ;-)

Of course we are reading! 

Still wondering where Drahacik and Texian are, though, it has been a while since I heard from them!

Cheers,

Andrea

[angrypirate]

Personally I like the 'relative to white' way as well....

So if black is winning it would read -3.11

And if white was winning +3.11

I guess it is just preference, but to me it makes it 100% clear.