Author: José de Jesús García Ruvalcaba
Date: 12:19:58 09/09/00
Go up one level in this thread
On September 09, 2000 at 12:33:08, Ricardo Gibert wrote: >On September 09, 2000 at 08:44:57, Antonio Dieguez wrote: > >>On September 09, 2000 at 02:13:19, Ricardo Gibert wrote: >> >>>On September 08, 2000 at 19:05:20, Antonio Dieguez wrote: >>> >>>>just for fun, can you do a search with your program in the initial position? >>>> >>>>rnbqkbnr/pppppppp/8/8/8/8/PPPPPPPP/RNBQKBNR w KQkq - 0 1 >>>> >>>>here is for amyan, unrealistic evals? 1/3 of a pawn just for one piece more >>>>developed hum... may be better something a bit exponential? >>>> >>>>[2] -0.01 87 e2e4 e7e5 >>>>[3] +0.35 426 e2e4 g8f6 b1c3 >>>>[4] -0.01 2021 d2d4 d7d5 g1f3 g8f6 >>>>[5] +0.32 7746 e2e4 e7e5 g1f3 g8f6 b1c3 >>>>[6] +0.12 24010 e2e4 e7e5 g1f3 g8f6 f1c4 b8c6 >>>>[7] +0.30 63896 e2e4 e7e5 g1f3 g8f6 b1c3 b8c6 d2d4 e5d4 f3d4 >>>>[8] +0.16 282830 e2e4 e7e5 g1f3 g8f6 f1c4 f6e4 d2d3 e4d6 f3e5 >>>>[9] +0.27 1086340 e2e4 e7e6 b1c3 g8f6 g1e2 f8b4 e4e5 f6d5 d2d4 >>>> >>>>just me. >> >>hello >> >>>Theoretically it should be about 1/6th of a pawn. If White is 1/3rd of a pawn >>>better than "even", then Black is 1/3rd of a pawn worse than "even" or in other >>>words, White is 2/3rds of a pawn better than Black, which can't be right. >> >>no, +1/3 for white means white is 1/3 of a pawn better than black. > >Are you sure? Lets say I am White. We are in the beginning position. I have the >advantage, since it is my turn to move. Now if I drop a tempo, then it is now >you who are effectively playing White and now you have the advantage. > >This different from the situation of my being a pawn up. Now If I drop a clear >pawn, you do not assume the advantage of being a pawn up. The material is now >equal. I would have to drop 2 pawns for the roles to be reversed. Do you see how >it is different? > Hi Ricardo, your reasoning is wrong! But since you are a very smart guy fully capable of finding out why, I will not spoil it for you. José. >Now consider what happens when White wins a clear pawn. His advantage of the >move does not disappear, he then has the pawn PLUS the advantage of being White. >If he were only exactly a pawn up, White would have to drop a ½ tempo. Do you >now see why some say a pawn is worth about 2½ tempos? I think it is worth about >3, but I can see why there is the alternative interpretation. > >>very ugly speak this way about chess anyway :) >> >>>With White being 1/6th of a pawn better than "even", then Black is 1/6th of a >>>pawn worse than even, so now White is now 1/3rd of a pawn better than Black, >>>which is what you would expect. I remember some guy on ICC reported .17 with one >>>of the commercial programs, which is consistent with 1/6th of a pawn. >> >>.17 doens't seem rare, i will implement an exponential function for development >>and also for king danger patterns. May be the average between x and x^2, or >>something like that. >> >>>With the eval oscillating with odd or even depth, you should be getting a ½ >>>tempo better on odd ply and zero on even ply. You're showing instead about 1 >>>tempo better on even ply and about a ½ tempo better on odd ply. >> >>hey, in the initial position white plays and wins! >>ok I get it but is not so simple. >> >>>All this assumes a pawn is worth 3 tempos, but some would say it is worth only >>>2½ pawns. Take your pick. >> >>mmmh...
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.