Author: Tord Romstad
Date: 07:14:05 03/23/04
Go up one level in this thread
On March 23, 2004 at 09:11:14, martin fierz wrote: >On March 23, 2004 at 04:35:49, Tord Romstad wrote: >> >>How do other engines evaluate this position? > >IMO this question is not the right question to ask. i think gothmog is rather >good at giving up the exchange compared to other programs. That's a kind way to put it. :-) I would rather say that Gothmog values the exchange too little, and gives it up too often. It sacrifices the exchange more often than any other engine I have seen, and I am fairly sure it loses more games than it wins because of this. >it's static eval for >this position would be quite ok if the white bishop was on c1 for example, where >it's mobility is apparantly only very little bigger (one more square to go to). >therefore you have to ask not only what the static eval for the position is that >you gave, but also for the one with the bishop on c1. many engines will give >black a clear edge here because they are (too) materialistic. they will do this >in both positions. the really interesting question is whether any engine can >detect the HUGE difference between having the bishop on c1 or g1... One of the really embarassing things about Gothmog's eval of this position is that it doesn't even consider the bishop on g1 to be a bad biship. My bad bishop eval is based on the number of *blocked* pawns on squares of the bishop's colour. In the position we discuss, there are only two such pawns (on e3 and g3). Therefore Gothmog thinks that the g1 bishop isn't really that bad. It has limited mobility, but it should be easy to relocate it to a better square. As so often, Gothmog's eval proves to be the worst of them all. It's depressing to think about how many clock cycles I spend misevaluating positions so badly. Tord
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.