Author: Robin Smith
Date: 19:55:43 01/21/02
Go up one level in this thread
On January 21, 2002 at 11:54:30, Rafael Andrist wrote: >On January 21, 2002 at 02:07:20, Robin Smith wrote: > >>On January 20, 2002 at 11:49:25, Rafael Andrist 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? >>>> >>>>/David >>> >>>I use 1,3,3,4.5,8.5 and several value corrections for bishops/knights depending >>>on the pawn structure. >> >>Trading a piece for three pawns is generally a bad idea, unless you get other >>compensation as well, unless in the ending. >> >>Robin > >If your opponent looses 3 pawns, he will have other weaknesses anyway. > >Rafael B. Andrist Not always. For example there are many positions in the Sicilian where white can sac a piece for blacks a,b&d pawns, but often white gets no other compensation and it is a bad idea. But if white can do this and at the same time keep black's king in the center .... Robin
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.