Author: Daniel Clausen
Date: 08:16:10 11/10/03
Go up one level in this thread
On November 10, 2003 at 11:09:34, Mike Hood wrote: [snip] >The main problem with this idea is that sacrifices are normally bad, rarely >good; and if a sacrifice IS good, a deep search is needed to find the benefits. >So a lot of computational time will be spent on searching for something that in >99.9% of positions isn't there. But I can imagine many positions where an equal material exchange (like both queens) lead to an endgame, which would be worth investigating more. It won't happen as long as both queens are on the board though and once they're gone, it's too late to calculate whether we're not in a won or lost pawn ending. So while this example might not be a good example (since it's a sacrifice), the general idea might have something. Sargon
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.