Author: Dann Corbit
Date: 19:46:41 09/21/04
Go up one level in this thread
On September 21, 2004 at 22:31:08, Stuart Cracraft wrote:
>On September 21, 2004 at 21:53:47, Dann Corbit wrote:
>
>>On September 21, 2004 at 19:41:42, Stuart Cracraft wrote:
>>[snip]
>>>// white knight
>>> {
>>> OFF, OFF, OFF, OFF, OFF, OFF, OFF, OFF, OFF, OFF,
>>> OFF, OFF, OFF, OFF, OFF, OFF, OFF, OFF, OFF, OFF,
>>> OFF, 64, 41, 60, 67, 67, 60, 41, 64, OFF,
>>> OFF, 48, 79, 91, 76, 76, 91, 79, 48, OFF,
>>> OFF, 57, 86, 95, 111, 111, 95, 86, 57, OFF,
>>> OFF, 77, 105, 123, 129, 129, 123, 105, 77, OFF,
>>> OFF, 99, 124, 129, 145, 145, 129, 124, 99, OFF,
>>> OFF , 79, 114, 116, 144, 144, 116, 114, 79, OFF,
>>> OFF, 53, 77, 108, 81, 81, 108, 77, 53, OFF,
>>> OFF, 0, 71, 73, 73, 73, 73, 71, 0, OFF,
>>> OFF, OFF, OFF, OFF, OFF, OFF, OFF, OFF, OFF, OFF,
>>> OFF, OFF, OFF, OFF, OFF, OFF, OFF, OFF, OFF, OFF
>>> },
>>
>>A value of 64 for A8 and H8 seems highly suspect to me. Similarly for A1 and H1
>>for the black knight.
>
>Originals in article are 1/100th.
Centipawns or millipawns -- whatever.
It's still a knight in a corner. A very bad place to put a knight.
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.