Author: Sune Fischer
Date: 07:30:15 01/01/03
Go up one level in this thread
On January 01, 2003 at 08:48:39, Omid David Tabibi wrote: > r1bqk1nr/pppp1ppp/2n5/2b1p3/1PB1P3/5N2/P1PP1PPP/RNBQK2R b KQkq b3 0 4 > >The Evans Gambit, arising after 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.b4, is a good >example of positional material sacrifice. By sacrificing his b pawn, white gains >a number if precious tempos, thus seizing the opening initiative. While the 4.b4 >gambit might not be better than the other 4th moves here, it usually reaches a >balanced position in which white has enough compensation for the sacrificed >pawn. So your saying that _usually_ white gets _enough compensation_, so the position should ideally be evaluated at 0.00? To put it in a different way, how often is this played by the top players, is it sound, or is it a patzer gambit? Actually, I would be a bit worried if my program showed 0.00 or advantage for white :) My guesstimate would be 0.30-0.50 advantage for black is the "correct" evaluation, ie there _is_ compensation for the pawn, but it is doubtfull if there is _enough_. -S. >Now let us see how the top engines evaluate this position. There is not much >tactics involved here, so this gives us a good opportunity to compare the >programs' evaluation (their chess knowledge). > >In the table below, the evaluation of each engine is recorded after 1 minute >analysis (since the evaluation is largely positional, no significant score >change was noticed from one ply to another, so most probably even deeper >searches will not change the result): > > >Engine Score >------ ----- >Junior 7 0.06 >Fritz 7 -0.41 >Shredder 6.02 -0.33 >Chess Tiger 14 -0.82 (Gambit Tiger 2 also produced the same score) >Hiarcs 8 -0.84 >Crafty 19.1 -0.81 > > >Interesting points: > > - Junior 7 was the only program who evaluated the position realistically. > > - Gambit Tiger 2 which is tuned for sacrificial play, did not evaluate > the position differently from Chess Tiger 14. > > - Hiarcs 8 which is said to incorporate the most chess knowledge, displays > the least chess understanding in this position! (Conclusion: more chess > knowledge does not necessarily mean better evaluation.) > >Omid. > >P.S. An analysis of Fritz 8 and Shredder 7 will be appreciated.
This page took 0.03 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.