Author: Uri Blass
Date: 07:12:28 01/20/02
Go up one level in this thread
On January 20, 2002 at 09:41:48, David Rasmussen wrote: >On January 20, 2002 at 09:29:24, Severi Salminen wrote: > >>On January 20, 2002 at 09:01:50, David Rasmussen wrote: >> >>>There must be a value system of material that takes care of all special cases. >>> >>>1,3,3,5,9: >>> >>>Has the following problems: >>>3 pawns for bishop or knight is almost always a bad idea. >>>2 knights/bishops for rook and pawn is almost always a bad idea. >>>2 rooks for queen is often not a good idea. >>>3 knights/bishops for a queens is often not a good idea. Then again, often it is >>>:) >>> >>>What is your best bet? >> >>And sometimes a Bishop is better than a knight. So: >> >>P=1, B>N>3*P, R+P>2*B, Q>2*R and Q>3*B. >> >>So maybe P=1, N=3.2, B=3.4, R=6, Q=13? >> >>Severi > >I don't want to score bishop higher than knight. It depends on dynamic factors >that should be in evaluation anyway. I just want to avoid extra code to evaluate >special cases, as Crafty does. I think it is possible. > >/David There is no answer for your questions. It is even not possible to know what is the meaning of P=1 because the value of the pawn is dependent in the square of the pawn. If you do not use piece square table for pawns then your program may be weak If you use piece square table for pawns than P=1 is eqvivalent to P=1.2 when you only change the piece square table for the pawns. 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.