Author: Vincent Diepeveen
Date: 05:48:38 08/14/02
Go up one level in this thread
On August 14, 2002 at 07:21:54, Bas Hamstra wrote: >On August 14, 2002 at 06:43:31, Uri Blass wrote: > >>On August 14, 2002 at 05:37:32, Bas Hamstra wrote: >> >>>On August 13, 2002 at 15:18:04, Vincent Diepeveen wrote: >>> >>>>On August 13, 2002 at 07:23:38, Uri Blass wrote: >>>> >>>>>My definition for a sacrifice or blunder >>>>>is a move that lose material based on >>>>>the depth that programs can see. >>>>> >>>>>The definition of losing material is based on >>>>>the material values 1,3,3,5,9. >>>> >>>>with all respect but your table is outdated in advance. >>>> >>>> a) 2 rooks are weaker than a queen in 99.9% of all cases >>>> the computer sees 2 rooks for a queen >>> >>>With all the respect master, but this is an ancient point of view that does not >>>hold for computerchess at all. Two rooks can capture an isolated pawn and one >>>sole queen cannot prevent that. I say it's about even. Try to play an endgame >>>with a queen versus 2 rooks, with Diep against Tiger or Gandalf. >>> >>>Best regards, >>>Bas. >> >>I do not think that this is an ancient point of view(the opposite and the >>opinion is a new opinion that I find to be wrong). > >I see. That way you disagree with Vincent AND me, although we have opposing >opinions. Typical :-) You are of course not educated in chess theory. In dutch we have the word 'randdebiel' for your opinion. Uri's viewpoint is very clear. He has queen=10 and rook=5. The beginner books say all queen = 9 and rook = 5. The titled players like me are so convinced that a queen is much stronger than any other piece that they always want a queen. Same is true for beginners they are so busy moving with 1 piece that they focus completely upon it and simply games get decided before any move rook has been done. That's why beginners books mention queen = 9 and rook = 5 , simply to show that bringing into play the pieces is important. By the way the same beginner books use a quote from Max Euwe regarding kings in the endgame. It says a king is worth a rook in the endgame. I have to see the first program evaluating a king as +5.0 instead of +infinite :) >>Beginners usually learn that queen=9 and Rook=5. >>The values are not exactly correct but queen is equal less than 2 rooks. >>There are cases when the rooks cannot work together but these cases are the >>excption and they should be identified by evaluation. >> >>I think that the opinion of Bob Hyatt and Vincent Diepveen is wrong and maybe >>wrong material values is one of the reasons for the relative bad result of >>Crafty in the 1th division of Leo. > >I don't think so. Crafty is reasonably accurate in that respect. > > >Bas.
This page took 0 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.