Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: Pawn Majorities - an interesting evaluation issue

Author: Ricardo Gibert

Date: 06:59:55 09/17/99

Go up one level in this thread


On September 17, 1999 at 09:14:57, Robert Hyatt wrote:

>On September 17, 1999 at 02:47:34, Ricardo Gibert wrote:
>
>>On September 16, 1999 at 23:59:25, Robert Hyatt wrote:
>>
>>>First, a little background.  I have been doing 'outside passed pawn' scoring
>>>for years now, because I got tired of seeing Crafty lose endings where it was
>>>a pawn up, and it traded down to the point where it was a king and pawns vs
>>>king and pawns ending, where the opponent had an outside passed pawn that made
>>>it an easy win...
>>
>>I was interested in a similar topic (for both middlegame & endgame), which is
>>why I posted the following several days ago:
>>
>>Are their any estimates of how many distinct pawn structures get examined by
>>computer programs over the course of a 5 minute blitz game?
>>
>>I wanted to make some approximate calculations of how much space a hashtable of
>>such pawn structures would take, but I got zero response.
>>
>
>I saw your post, but didn't want to think about the number.  :)  But when
>you think about it,you have 16 pawns that can be on almost any of 48 squares,
>so the number is huge.  Just not as huge as the entire chess tree...
>

That's the problem, the number is huge if you count all legal pawn structures,
but I was hoping that the average number of pawn structures that are examined by
a program over the course of a typical game would be a more practical number.
This is the number I need for my calculations.

>
>
>
>>Evaluating pawn structures for the endgame is tricky: W: Pa3,b2,c2; B: Pa5,b6.
>>1) Here White can Q a pawn. 2) Shift the a-pawn from a5 to b5 and now White
>>cannot Q a pawn without sacing a pawn and allowing Black to also Q! This can be
>>a problem with pawns on both sides of the board. Your pawn "majority" will let
>>you down. 3) If Blacks pawns are each advanced one square (B: Pa4, b5), then if
>>white tries to get a passed pawn, Black may Q ahead of White e.g 1 b3? (1 b4 is
>>less bad) 1...b4! and Black will Q an a-pawn well ahead of White. I'm assuming
>>of course, that other material on the board do not interfere.
>>
>
>I handle those cases with no problems, as far as the 'candidate passed pawn'
>detection goes.  ie white pawns on a2/b2/c2, black pawns on b5,b6 gets handled
>correctly and recognized as 'no viable candidate' although it is possible to
>sac a pawn to get a passer.  But then the 'pawn race' code is used to handle
>that case anyway.

A surpising number of masters do not realize this one (b5,b6). They just assume
if you "worsen" Blacks pawn structure, that Queening a pawn would not be more
difficult.

>
>>>
>>>OK... that was fairly easy to code using bitmaps...  and it has worked well.
>>>But once you get past that hurdle, you begin to see endings where you trade
>>>down to a pawn-up ending, but your opponent has a queen-side majority that
>>>turns into an outside passer outside the search horizon, and the same issue
>>>comes up again.
>>>
>>>I am working on addressing this now, and am looking for a discussion on what
>>>might be the best way to do this.
>>>
>>>I have completed a fairly accurate 'candidate passed pawn' analyzer.  It is
>>>in the EvaluatePawns() code so that it is all hashable and won't cost a fortune.
>>>
>>>All it does is simply look at each pawn that has no enemy pawn in front of it,
>>>and decides whether pushing that pawn can make a passer or not.  Again, not
>>>hard using bitmaps, and in studying the results, it looks reasonable.  My intent
>>>is to use this in the absense of any outside passed pawns for one side, to see
>>>if it has any potential outside passed pawns on that side of the board.  And
>>>for the usual 3 vs 2 queen-side majorities, it works cleanly and accurately.
>>>
>>>But what about 4 vs 3?  Where the passer ends up on the d-file, which might
>>>not be far enough away to cause problems.  Or what about 3 vs 3, where one
>>>side has pawns on a-b-c, the other side has pawns on b-c-d, and both end up
>>>with a passer although the abc passer will be more distant.
>>
>>Careful! It is very often possible to Q a pawn on almost any file and not just
>>the d-file by sacing material. This is sometimes relevant. Analogously, this can
>>also happen with 3 vs 2 and 2 vs 1.
>
>I'm really not trying to evaluate what can queen..  only that 'here is a
>candidate passer that will give the opponent trouble by decoying him to the
>off-side of the board to stop it while I gobble elsewhere...'  IE the classic
>outside passer taken to a more distant level..
>
>
>
>
>>
>>>
>>>I guess my question is, has anyone given any thought to this?  Or is anybody
>>>even dealing with pawn majorities at present?  I tend to not actually call this
>>>majority code any longer, because it is _really_ candidate passed pawn
>>>evaluation instead...
>>>
>>>My intention is to recognize that if the kings are on g1/g8, and white has
>>>the a-b-c pawns and black just has b-c pawns, that this is a nearly winning
>>>position.  I am going to do just like I do with outside passers, that is, have
>>>their value go up as material goes down, as they don't mean much with queens and
>>>pieces on the board...
>>>
>>>Any comments, suggestions, ideas, etc?
>>>
>>>Obviously necessary, yet I don't see any evidence that any program does much
>>>with this excepting for deep blue...
>>>
>>>Bob



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.