Author: Andrei Fortuna
Date: 02:31:27 07/04/03
Go up one level in this thread
On July 04, 2003 at 03:53:14, margolies,marc wrote: > >Didactic(teacher's) comments about pawn moves will not solve the problemof >evaluation of tempi. When the great masters of chess taught this -to bring out >peices only-, they taught novices. a strong player must be aware of when to >break such a rule and not yield to it. Moreover, opening theory has been >transformed from the time of this advice. I agree with the last part. I agree also that there is the notion of "tempi" but it is hard to include it in a chess program and I believe that if you have more tempi your search should find some way to turn them into some other kind of advantage in a few plies of search. Otherwise what good would it be if you are ahead in developement if you cannot use it to get some advantages from the position ? Why did you say "didactical comments" above ? I don't quite understand it. >And while piece play is clear >development, often pieces work well behind a 'pawn screen.' Yes but sometimes after you push pawns too much your whole position might crumble to dust due especially to those advances. >[...] >And I do not think development is always enough; pieces should be on good >squares. How do you define good squares for piece placement ? Programatically I mean. >Of course this can be examined as a tactical calculation- no EVAL >necessary. I don't understand this sentence. Andrei
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.