Author: Uri Blass
Date: 01:05:00 05/02/02
Go up one level in this thread
On May 01, 2002 at 19:18:15, Peter Berger wrote: >On May 01, 2002 at 10:51:41, Uri Blass wrote: > >>I do not think that the word sacrifice is correct here. >> >>4 pawns is considered to be more than a piece so the player that sacrificed was >>yace but it seemed that yace was outsearched because yace evaluats the position >>at move 26 also as better for hiarcs. >> >>There are 2 possibilities: >> >>1)Yace was lucky to be outsearched and got a winning position that it did not >>understand. >> >>2)Hiarcs blundered some moves after getting a big advantage by winning 4 pawns >>for a piece. >> > >As both engines agreed for some time on evaluation 1.) is somehow closer to the >truth . I definitely disagree with your assessment about piece value though. In >middlegame ceteris paribus I'd take the piece over the pawns any time. > >Peter piece is usually better than 3 pawns in the middle game but here we are talking about 4 pawns. I do not think that piece is usually better than 4 pawns in the middle game. It is possible to check it by comp-comp game when one program plays without a piece and another program plays without 4 pawns. Suppose that white plays without a2,b2,c2,d2 and black plays without the bishop c8. Do you expect white to win the game? I remember that I did some comp-comp games in similiar conditions(it is possible that I removed different pawns and different piece) and the side without the 4 pawns scored less than 50%. 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.