Author: Bob Durrett
Date: 13:23:36 01/10/04
Go up one level in this thread
On January 10, 2004 at 16:17:24, Bob Durrett wrote: >On January 10, 2004 at 16:10:50, Reinhard Scharnagl wrote: > >>On January 10, 2004 at 15:42:23, Bob Durrett wrote: >> >>>On January 10, 2004 at 12:51:37, Reinhard Scharnagl wrote: >>> >>>>On January 10, 2004 at 12:45:19, Bob Durrett wrote: >>>> >>>>[:::] >>>> >>>>>The technical issue of how piece values can be properly estimated is very >>>>>interesting to me. >>>>> >>>>>In "ordinary" chess, the amount of human experience is measured in the millions >>>>>of games and so there is plenty of data available to estimate piece values for >>>>>human vs human games. >>>>> >>>>>For a new variant of chess where a new piece is to be used, there will not >>>>>initially be the extremely large database from which to draw piece valuation >>>>>estimates and such large databases may be a long time in coming. >>>>> >>>>>This begs the following question: "What would be a practical way to develop >>>>>information which could be used to get better piece valuations? >>>>> >>>>>Having a large amount of data provides two benefits: First, it makes >>>>>statistical evaluation feasible. Secondly, it provides many examples which could >>>>>be studied individually to improve our understanding of this topic. >>>>> >>>>>Engine versus engine experiments may be a practical solution. The time limits >>>>>might be blitz or faster and still give useful data. [Slow time limits provide >>>>>smaller databases in a given amount of time but may give better data.] >>>>> >>>>>The difficulty might be in deciding how to analyze the data to glean the desired >>>>>"piece valuations." Generally, piece valuations depend on a number of things >>>>>such as whether in opening, middlegame, endgame among many other things. >>>>> >>>>>Incidentally, my guess is that the overarching strategic concepts of "ordinary >>>>>chess" would still apply to chess variants as long as the variant is reasonably >>>>>close to the original. What "reasonably" might be is unclear. >>>> >>>>Hello Bob, >>>> >>>>did you have seen the pages on my web site on this theme? Some pages nearly from >>>>[http://www.rescon.de/Compu/schachansatz1_e.html]. >>>> >>>>Regards, Reinhard. >> >>>I just looked at it. The translation could use a little improvement. >> >>Well, I am not an english expert. So suggestions for text corrections or >>improvements allways will be welcomed. I would be happy, when all the native >>english speaking chess enthusiasts also would try to provide a second language >>on their pages (best german of course, the most frequently spoken language in >>europe). >> >>>I guess I was hoping for twenty pages. >> >>The detail evaluation will be published when also the Smirf engine will have >>been published for a while before. Therefore - you are right - the really most >>interesting might still be hidden. >> >>>Nevertheless, your page is interesting. >> >>Happy to hear this, because I know of my theories to be a little exotic. >> >>Regards, Reinhard. > >I misspoke! That unobtrusive litte "More" in the bottom right corner just >caught my attention! : ) > >Bob D. I am having trouble with that webpage. Whenever I tried to get the visitor's page, my Browser just ignored me. Oh Well, Chess is just a game after all. : ( Bob D.
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.