Author: Uri Blass
Date: 13:56:54 08/28/01
Go up one level in this thread
On August 28, 2001 at 15:34:30, Peter Berger wrote: >On August 28, 2001 at 11:58:02, Dieter Buerssner wrote: > >> >>However, I don't totally agree, that this is a King safety problem. For many >>depths, Kd6 and Ke8 have almost the same score (or have the same score). Sure, >>fiddling a little bit at KS-values will make Yace "find" the correct move >>muchearlier. I actually lowered some time ago some "K-advance-penalty". But I >>had the feeling, that this makes Yace weaker after some time, so I put back the >>old values. >> >>Also, this position may be a bit unusual, and not fitting some heuristics used >>in many chess programs. Usually programs come out of book, in castled position, >>or with a closed center. Neither is the case here. >> >>BTW. An material only eval, never switches away from Kd6. > >I agree and never said anything else. You won't want your engine to play Ke8 >here though and lose in about 5 moves if it can be avoided - it definitely is a >king safety problem ( why else would the engine prefer Ke8 anyway ? ) It is an >exception of the usual rule No If it is exception to the usual rule only because of tactics then chess knowledge in the evaluation cannot help. I guess that most programs that find Ke8 with no problem simply do not know the rule that king in the centre of the board is bad and they may fail in other positions (see Ed's post). If it is a chess knowledge problem there should be a positional rule that explains why Ke8 is bad and you should explain the positional reason that Ke8 is bad or not claiming that it is a king safety 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.