Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 19:30:12 06/07/01
Go up one level in this thread
On June 07, 2001 at 20:16:50, Rich Van Gaasbeck wrote: >What characteristics of the Stonewall Attack make it difficult for computer's to >defend against? > >Are there other openings that share the same characteristics? > >It would seem that if there are many non-stonewall positions that are difficult >to play, that adding anti-stonewall code would really be an endless task of >adding special case code for each difficult-to-handle pattern. The Stonewall offers the computer the following problems: 1. A useless queen bishop, trapped/blocked by the pawn at e6 that can't move due to the d4/f4 white pawns. 2. Very difficult path access to get pieces over to the kingside, if the program waits until the last minute. Everything has to funnel in thru a couple of squares and that means if you wait too long, it is over. 3. Nothing obvious to do which often encourages the computer to swing to the queenside, particularly if white offers a pawn over there to get the queen on the wrong side of the board. 4. While all that goes on, white places his pieces on squares so that even though they are not threatening _right now_ they are positioned to quickly reach vital squares when needed. If the computer doesn't see this 'build-up' and take action soon enough to offset the threat, then it loses, and very easily. 5. Often after black's queen goes to the wrong side, a kingside pawn advance by white is decisive in opening lines for the rooks while black gobbles pawns on the wrong side until it finally sees the trouble too late.
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.