Author: Uri Blass
Date: 10:45:06 06/10/01
Go up one level in this thread
On June 10, 2001 at 12:58:09, Rafael Andrist wrote: >On June 09, 2001 at 17:34:56, Uri Blass wrote: > >>>>I believe that your program overevaluate pawns so you may try to reduce the >>>>value of pawns. >>> >>>Yes, I know that I give a little bit to big bonuses for passers etc. The pawn >>>value itself is not the problem. I don't think that a bishop is really more >>>worth than 3 pawns. >> >>I believe that a bishop in most of the cases worth more than 3 pawns(3 pawns may >>draw often against a bishop but they also may lose often against a bishop and >>cases when they can win are rare if there are no advanced passed pawns but in >>this case your program may see other positional bonuses). >> >>I know that one of the changes in Junior6 relative to Junior5 was to reduce the >>value of the pawn. >> >>I guess that giving pawns and passed pawns 80% of the value that you give them >>can help your program to get better results in games. >> >>Uri > >In an endgame PPP vs. B in most of the cases the side with the pawns will win. >- if the pawns are connected, you have no chance to stop them Not truth It depends on the situation Here are examples: [D]8/5kP1/5P2/4PK2/8/8/b7/8 w - - 0 1 The pawns are connected but it is a draw. [D]2b1k3/pp3ppp/8/8/8/8/PPPPPPPP/4K3 w - - 0 1 White pawns are connected and I prefer to be black. <snipped> >If I would simply reduce the pawn values, my program would also often sacrifice >pawns for positional reasons. If you are afraid of wrong sacrifices you can reduce the positional values of your program and avoid the problem. Uri
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.