Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: Evaluating Pinned Pieces

Author: Tom Likens

Date: 07:44:05 05/20/04

Go up one level in this thread


On May 19, 2004 at 17:08:38, Will Singleton wrote:

>On May 19, 2004 at 15:40:35, Tom Likens wrote:
>
>>
>>Afternoon all,
>>
>>I've been reworking some of the evaluation elements of my engine
>>and one of the items I wanted to modify is the scoring of pinned
>>pieces.  So with that in mind I thought I'd share some my thoughts
>>on the subject (and maybe obtain a few new ideas in the process).
>>
>>Currently, I'm including this items my pinned pieces evaluator.
>>
>>1. If one side is pinning a piece *and* has the right to move, then use
>>   the SEE function to determine if the piece can be profitably captured.
>>
>>2. If a piece is "absolutely" pinned (a Nimzowitsch term) penalize it.
>>   An absolute pinned piece can't move at all (e.g. a knight pinned to
>>   the king by an enemy bishop would be an absolute pin, whereas
>>   a bishop pinned to the king by a queen would not be since the bishop
>>   could move along the diagonal of the pin).
>>
>>3. If the piece is absolutely pinned and the attacking piece's value is
>>   less than the value of the pinned piece (regardless of who has the
>>   move) penalize the defender a percentage of the difference between
>>   the attacking piece and the pinned piece.
>>
>>4. If the attacker has a queen/rook, queen/bishop or rook/rook battery
>>   attacking the pinned piece then increase the penalty.
>>
>>5. If multiple pieces are pinned increase the penalties. Also if multiple
>>   pieces are pinned then accessed the pinned side some percentage
>>   of the *largest* pinned piece from either 1 or 3 above.
>>
>>As I mentioned earlier, I'd be interested in how others handle pinned
>>pieces.  I'd also be interested in just hearing thoughts on the above and
>>if I've missed anything obvious.
>>
>>cheers,
>>--tom
>
>I tried using a pin detector in my see(), but it didn't seem to help so I
>dropped it.  With respect to your item (1) above, the qsearch should handle that
>case.

I had the same experience.  It seemed to be a natural extension to
SEE but the payoff wasn't really there.  The only caveat to this is
that I tried it a long time ago when my qsearch was *much* simpler,
so it might payoff now.  It won't go in this version of the program,
but I may experiment with it and see if it's worthwhile for inclusion
in a future release.

--tom



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.