Author: Gerd Isenberg
Date: 13:23:03 08/03/04
Go up one level in this thread
On August 03, 2004 at 10:07:52, Reinhard Scharnagl wrote:
>On August 03, 2004 at 06:24:12, Ricardo Gibert wrote:
>
>>On August 03, 2004 at 05:48:15, Gerd Isenberg wrote:
>>
>>>On August 03, 2004 at 04:54:11, morphy wrote:
>>>
>>>>Why the valutation is always referred to the material advantage (where a pawn in
>>>>more is the unit) and we can't have a valutation in tems of percentage of
>>>>probability for winning and drawing?
>>>
>>>Maybe you find some answers at R. Scharnagl's SMIRF sites:
>>>
>>>http://www.chessbox.de/Compu/schachwert1_e.html
>>>and following.
>>
>>At this site, there is listing of piece valuations by C. Posthoff:
>>
>>Pawn 1.00
>>Knight 3.00
>>Bishop 3.00
>>King (100)
>>Rook 5.00
>>Queen 9.00
>>
>>Now it is possible for one side to have:
>>
>>9 Queens 9x9.00 = 81.00
>>2 Rooks 2x5.00 = 10.00
>>2 Bishops 2x3.00 = 6.00
>>2 Knights 2x3.00 = 6.00
>> Total = 103.00
>
>>Which means all these units are worth more than a King! :)
>>
>>The practical importance of this is negligible, but in theory, the King ought
>>be worth more than 103.00 I would think.
>
>The value of a king has been calculated, because of its positional influence.
>That aspects are not yet introduced on my page. But of course such influences
>are inverse proportional to the average piece exchange values (even then, if a
>king cannot be exchanged). Simply imagine a chess variant with a newly added
>piece looking like and moving like a king, but which could not be threatened
>by check but be captured instead. The value specified is for a clone like that.
Sorry Reinhard,
how much is a clone king worth in pawn units?
>We learn from that all, that the positional influences of pawns is far bigger
>than those from sliding pieces. The pawns are the soul of the game of chess
I heard that sentence before. Was it Lasker or Steinitz?
But from what do we learn that positional influence of pawns are far bigger?
Because a positional value of _one_ pawn compared to it's material value is much
bigger than for _one_ sliding piece, even without considering advanced passers?
maxPosValue(Pawn) maxPosValue(SomeSlidingPiece)
----------------- >> -----------------------------
materialVal(Pawn) materialVal(SomeSlidingPiece)
Thanks,
Gerd
>
>Reinhard.
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.