Author: Uri Blass
Date: 03:39:35 01/21/02
Go up one level in this thread
On January 21, 2002 at 06:19:56, Torstein Hall wrote: >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 > >Is the Bishop pair a special case? Theyb are better in about 80-90% of all >practical games.I think that should score 7p together if a bishp is 3. I prefer bishop, knight and pawn and not 2 bishops It may be interesting to do comp-comp games to check if I am right(white play without knight at b1 bishop at c1 and pawn at a2 black plays without 2 bishops(c8,f8) I expect black to have better chances. 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.