Author: Dave Gomboc
Date: 23:27:33 05/04/98
Go up one level in this thread
On May 03, 1998 at 13:13:28, Don Dailey wrote: >In my chess program tests have shown that there is a small window >of score differences I must honor to squeeze the most strength out of >the program when it comes to the difference between bishop and knight. >For my program it seems to be that bishops and knights score the same, >(but I have a significant bishop pair bonus.) Also a knight pair >penalty is useful, because if both sides have a bishop and knight >then trading one off for the other is no big deal (depending of course >on other factors.) The worst case is having 2 knights vs 2 bishops. >A master once told me this was pretty much like being down a pawn! You might want to check with a few more masters. In some positions this is true, but I think it's just wrong in general. 2 knights is often better than a bishop and a knight, and 2Ns can be much stronger than 2Bs if the game is closed or semi-closed. Perhaps it is only that the chess software is avoiding such positions? Of course, if at least one of the knights doesn't have a good outpost, the player with the Bs certainly might have a large advantage. Typically the player who is trading their bishops off can guarantee some compensating activity or pawn structure in their stead though, so it seems unrealistic to assume "other things being equal" here. I guess that since whatever form of compensation that might be acquired will be dealt with by a separate component of the evaluation function, so I am coming around to the idea that it makes sense to evaluate 2Bs much higher than 2Ns to begin with. :-) I guess I will think about it. Dave Gomboc CFC 2129
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.