Upgrade to Chess.com Premium!

What does the $ after analysis mean?


  • 3 years ago · Quote · #1

    vowles_23

    Hey, I was just wondering what the dollar sign followed by a number means in analysis, e.g.

    ({11:+3.78} 13. ... Rf8 14. Rxe6 g6 15. Re2 Nd5 16. Rde1 Qb6 17. Qa3 O-O-O 18. Rxe7 Nxe7 19. Rxe7 Qxd4 20. Nxf7 $18)


  • 3 years ago · Quote · #2

    kco

    you've won the lotto !

  • 3 years ago · Quote · #3

    vowles_23

    kco wrote:

    you've won the lotto !


    Haha, it was a matter of time until this comment came up :)

  • 3 years ago · Quote · #4

    kco

    were you using the rybka ? I have no idea. 

  • 3 years ago · Quote · #5

    jjeffrey

    Thanks vowles.  I've wondered the same thing.  You will often see those lines of analysis in Tactics Trainer, when you click on View Analysis & Source, for example http://www.chess.com/tactics/view_source.html?id=40743&t=1220649286

    I always assumed it was something like the depth of search (# of half-moves) that the computer was using during it's analysis.  Hopefully someone can confirm or deny this.

  • 3 years ago · Quote · #6

    BorgQueen

    I would assume it was depth too.

  • 3 years ago · Quote · #7

    BorgQueen

    Wow, you learn something new every day!

  • 3 years ago · Quote · #8

    sapientdust

    RetGuvvie98, chess.com could easily display $18 as +- and $19 as -+. That's what Scid and other tools do for me when I import PGN with NAGs.

    Having said that though, they don't seem to understand PGN very well or care about supporting it properly. I found a bug in their PGN parser for the embedded chess widget on blog pages where Recursive Annotation Variations of a certain kind (which are supposed to be nestable to any level) worked two levels deep and failed three levels deep, and after hours of explaining the issue to them, they just said "it's not a bug" and couldn't say why it was not valid PGN. This was after I pointed them to the spec and the exact paragraph that governs the Recursive Annotation Variations. Multiple emails in the long chain of back and forth were concerned with trying to get the non-technical support person to see that the opening and closing parentheses don't have to all be on one line! The support person thought that since there were three closing parentheses ')))' on one line, and there was only 1 opening '(' before those on the same line, that it must be illegal, despite my explaining that the opening parentheses were on previous lines and that newlines are ignored.

    That's when I decided to stop wasting my time reporting bugs and to downgrade my membership from diamond. Not that they cared in the slightest.

  • 3 years ago · Quote · #9

    sapientdust

    Yeah, they do have many excellent videos, which I do miss, but I've been enjoying videos at ICC. They have a much smaller selection, with less frequent updates, but I've found Dan Heisman's videos truly superb.

    Downgrading may have been extreme, but I feel like losing a customer is the only thing they really care about. They didn't actually express any care or say anything to try to dissuade me though, when I said was going to downgrade.

    Their customer service is pretty lousy in general. There are lots of forum threads like this one and this one and this one with suggestions that they can't be bothered to respond to (even just to say thanks for the suggestion or that they don't think it's a good idea), and then when I've reported a problem, like this one I reported in the forums (where the support person asks me some questions and never responds again after I answer them). Other issues I reported through their support system have gotten the same kind of terrible support that you expect out of a free service.

    When the last support nightmare happened, I just decided that I don't feel right supporting them anymore.

  • 3 years ago · Quote · #10

    vowles_23

    RetGuvvie98 wrote:

    you will find out more, by learning more about portable game notation.

    PGN.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Portable_Game_Notation

     

    NAGs are    Numeric Annotation Glyphs - a code set up to facilitate computer use for evaluating positions.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Numeric_Annotation_Glyphs

     

    A Numeric Annotation Glyph is composed of a dollar sign character ("$") immediately followed by one or more digit characters. Each NAG then has a specific meaning and often a standard typographical representation. The meanings first defined stemmed from the use of specific typographic symbols when annotators were commenting upon chess games; most especially in Chess Informant [2] publications. The objective was to devise an alternative representation of these symbols which could be incorporated in the simple computer file format proposed as the PGN standard. This mechanism allowed often sophisticated typography to be expressed using the simple ASCII character set.

    Since its inception there has been no attempt to further formalize or standardize the meaning of the undefined 115 NAGs

     

    $18:  white has a decisive advantage  + -

    $19:  Black has a decisive advantage  - +

     

    I hope this helps you understand better as you work with the analysis lines provided.

    tactics moderator


    Thankyou very much Ret!

  • 2 years ago · Quote · #11

    superiorbeing

    what about $10

  • 2 years ago · Quote · #12

    TheMouse2

    $10 =drawish position or even




Back to Top

Post your reply: