Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: Passed Pawn Evaluation

Author: Eugenio Castillo

Date: 16:37:58 04/28/98

Go up one level in this thread


On April 28, 1998 at 16:45:03, Jon Dart wrote:

>I do all of the things you mentioned, plus I have some
>special code to evaluate multiple passers (sometimes the
>opposing king could catch one of them, but not both), plus I
>now have code like Crafty's to score "outside" passed pawns.
>
>The real problem is the magnitude of the scores. In the
>endgame, it is fairly safe to give a big score for passed
>pawns, especially if you have the knowledge items mentioned
>above.
>
>In the middlegame, it is a lot trickier. Sometimes
>an advanced passed pawn is just deadly, and eventually the
>side that has it will pile enough pieces on it or around
>it to force it through to queening, or force the opponent
>to sac something to take it off.  I get killed this way
>pretty often
>
>Other times, the program pushes up a pawn to the 6th, and
>eventually loses it.
>
>If you push up the passed pawn scoring too high, you will
>find your program giving up material to force a passer,
>and sometimes it will win that way, and sometimes it will
>lose.
>
>I currently value passed pawns a little more highly as
>material decreases, but the scores are not very big until
>the endgame is reached.
>
>--Jon
>
>On April 27, 1998 at 18:41:28, Stuart Cracraft wrote:
>
>>What do people generally do to handle passwd pawn
>>evaluation?
>>
>>A few things that could be considered:
>>
>>   - square-of-the-pawn logic applicable for passed pawn?
>>   - squares in front of the passed pawn (especially queening
>>     square) controlled by whom?
>>   - passed pawn's rank
>>   - passed pawn's progress blocked by an enemy piece on same file.
>>   - phase of game's effect on value of passed pawn
>>
>>But what about prioritizing and valuing all of these? I'm looking
>>mostly for guidelines and rules-of-thumb as I haven't seen too much
>>in the literature about passed pawns handling
>>
>>--Stuart

I think passedpawns evaluations must be different depending of the
endgame type. It's not the same to be in_square (GNU concept) in an KP
endgame than in a KRP one. Weak pawns could be more "weak" in KP etc....

In my program I use some special endgame rutines for KP, KRP and another
one for more pieces (I think this three groups are the most important).
Often ocurrs that after a piece change you fall in a simple lose KP
position (and one move before it was a draw), the difference between a
program who identify this and one who don't do it is great in endgames.

Eugenio.



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.