Computer Chess Club Archives

Search

Messages

Subject: Re: likelihood instead of pawnunits? + chess knowledge

Author: Ingo Lindam

Date: 16:50:05 10/25/02

Go up one level in this thread

On October 25, 2002 at 13:14:28, José Carlos wrote:

>  Sounds interesting, but a real example (even if it is simple) would help. The
>idea alone is not useful, and has been suggested in the past.
>
>  José C.

Hello Jose,

two very very very simple patterns might be

(P+,P=,P-)(Pe4,Pg4,Nf5,pe5,pg5) = (0.5,0.3,0.2)
(P+,P=,P-)(Pf3,Pg4,Nh2,pg5)     = (0.2,0.29,0.51)

these are just two as I said very very simple pattern you might derive or
"check" by your chessbase.

Best regards,
Ingo

• Re: likelihood instead of pawnunits? + chess knowledge Bob Durrett 12:55:30 10/26/02
  • Re: likelihood instead of pawnunits? + chess knowledge Ingo Lindam 14:01:08 10/27/02
    • Re: likelihood instead of pawnunits? + chess knowledge Bob Durrett 17:21:34 10/27/02
      • Re: likelihood instead of pawnunits? + chess knowledge Ingo Lindam 06:02:25 10/28/02
        • Re: likelihood instead of pawnunits? + chess knowledge Bob Durrett 07:49:07 10/28/02
      • Re: likelihood instead of pawnunits? + chess knowledge Ingo Lindam 05:15:28 10/28/02
• Re: likelihood instead of pawnunits? + chess knowledge Bob Durrett 07:28:07 10/26/02
  • Re: likelihood instead of pawnunits? + chess knowledge Ingo Lindam 11:33:13 10/26/02
    • Re: likelihood instead of pawnunits? + chess knowledge Bob Durrett 12:22:44 10/26/02
• Re: likelihood instead of pawnunits? + chess knowledge José Carlos 04:40:16 10/26/02
  • Re: likelihood instead of pawnunits? + chess knowledge Ingo Lindam 10:49:07 10/26/02

This page took 0.01 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.