Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: please answer this question too!

Author: martin fierz

Date: 12:55:36 03/23/04

Go up one level in this thread


On March 23, 2004 at 14:56:04, Mridul Muralidharan wrote:

>On March 23, 2004 at 11:31:18, martin fierz 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.  :-)
>>
>>no, no. the exchange is valued too highly by most programs!
>>
>>>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.
>>
>>perhaps you should change your definition a bit. the pawn on f2 is virtually
>>blocked too, and the pawn on c4 is rather blocked and with it the one on c3. in
>>any case, the f2-pawn should be recognizable as blocked.
>>to evaluate my bishops, i use a sum of c1*(blocked pawns on that color) +
>>c2*(unblocked pawns on that color). i think that is a better way of doing it.
>>still it's not good, because as said, the g1-bishop would be just fine on a3 or
>>on f4.
>>
>>>As so often, Gothmog's eval proves to be the worst of them all.
>>no!!! as i said you asked the wrong question! you didn't even answer the right
>>question yourself, and all others won't answer it either as i know them... the
>>right question is:
>>
>>***************************************************************
>>"please give me your static eval with bishop on g1, c1 and a3".
>>***************************************************************
>>
>>my answer is "-0.49 (g1), -0.51(c1), -0.35(a3)."
>>
>>as you can see, my answer is always about the same, and for example ridiculous
>>in that g1 is preferred over c1 (reason: the rook's mobility is smaller for
>>Bc1).
>>
>>i will bet another beer (you owe me one IIRC) that most of the people who
>>answered your post (and of who you think they are evaluating this better) have
>>similar problems. e.g. the position with the bishop on c1/a3 is roughly equal
>>(well, with the Ba3 you in fact immediately win a pawn, but just philosophically
>>speaking, white has little to fear with a pawn for the exchange and the bishop
>>pair) and all those guys who gave a big negative score for white will still be
>>giving a big negative score for white (because nobody is realizing that the
>>g1-bishop is the big problem, they just think exchange=2 pawns), and gothmog's
>>eval will be the superior one.
>>
>>let's see whether somebody answers my question above. if they do, you will be
>>very much happier about gothmog's eval again.
>>
>>cheers
>>  martin
>
>
>Hmm , I think you lost a beer ;)

not at all :-)
the bet would have been "most of those who answered tord's post". of these, only
richard has given the baron's eval for Bc1 / Bg1 - no real difference there. so
up to now it's 1 who doesn't understand to 0 who understand. you came later and
don't count :-)
anyway, tord didn't accept the bet i think...

>My engine evaluates the positions as follows :
>
>Bishop on g1 -> -1318
>Bishop on c1 -> -874
>Bishop on a3 -> -500

nice!

cheers
  martin



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.