Author: Uri Blass
Date: 08:13:25 03/23/04
Go up one level in this thread
On March 23, 2004 at 10:50:21, Peter Fendrich wrote: >On March 23, 2004 at 10:41:32, Uri Blass wrote: > >>On March 23, 2004 at 10:14:05, Tord Romstad wrote: >> >>>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. >> >> >>Movei never evaluate bad bishops(it only use the number of legal moves for >>mobility evaluation so it indirectly evaluates bishop g1 as bad). >> >> >> It's >>>depressing to think about how many clock cycles I spend misevaluating >>>positions so badly. >>> >>>Tord >> >>I do not thik that Gothmog's evaluation is so bad. >>After all Gothmog won the game and I guess that Arasan's evaluation is probably >>worse later in the game(same for movei that evaluate the endgame when arasan >>bishop cannot stop the passed pawns as better for arasan). >> >>Uri > >Without really knowing, I think that Goth's real strength is in the search and >not that much the evaluation. It can't be that bad of cource but I imagine it's >not in the same legue as the search. > >/Peter I see that I was wrong and arasan had a knight that could not stop the passed panws and not a bishop and the fact that gothmog captured the bishop caused my mistake. I also see that arasan could not stop the passed pawn because of poor play in the endgame. I thought that if gothmog won the endgame then probably movei's evaluation was not correct but it seems that arasan simply started to blunder by 61...a5 when movei clearly can see that the score drops after that move. Uri
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.