Author: José Carlos
Date: 06:19:09 02/18/02
Go up one level in this thread
On February 18, 2002 at 00:30:08, Uri Blass wrote: >On February 17, 2002 at 23:45:59, Miguel A. Ballicora wrote: > >>On February 17, 2002 at 15:04:54, Uri Blass wrote: >> >>>On February 17, 2002 at 14:17:42, Dan Andersson wrote: >>> >>>>Opposite bishops in a rook endgame are usually considered a boon for the one >>>>with an advantage. And also for queen endgames. And note that in rook endgames >>>>r+b > r+n unless there are significant structural damage. And Q+N > Q+B. >>> >>>I heard that opinion about R+B vs R+N and Q+N vs Q+B but based on my experience >>>I doubt if it is correct. >>> >>>I also read in kapablanca's book that positions like the following is a clear >>>advantage for white but when I tried comp-comp games I did not get clear >>>advantage for white(I am not sure if it is the exact position but the idea is >>>clear) >> >>Which speaks about the weaknesses of the computers in the endgame phase. >> >>Regards, >>Miguel > >Or about the weakness of the static evaluation of kapablanca. > >Uri Yes, that's true, Capablanca proved many times not being able to understand endgames... José C.
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.