Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: u2600 Club Rating List - Jan 25

Author: KarinsDad

Date: 11:05:40 01/26/99

Go up one level in this thread


On January 26, 1999 at 13:26:59, Andrew Williams wrote:

[snip]

>>
>>Once the rooks and queens are removed from the board, the only piece that can
>>simultaneously attack a pawn and the square in front of the pawn is the king
>>(and this only from 3 squares unless the pawn checks the king). Hence, there is
>>a threshold where the remaining pieces can either attack the pawn, or the
>> square
>>in front of the pawn, but not both simultaneously. Therefore, at least two
>>pieces must be used together to attack a pawn and the nature of the game changes
>>accordingly.
>
>Thanks for this. Can you imagine that I had never thought of it this way! Are
>you a strong player by the way? For that matter, is anyone else in the U2600
>club any good as a player? (I'm useless).

Hey, exchange of ideas is the name of the game here. No problemo.

I don't think that my program counts in the U2600 club. It is currently in the
U1000 club. I'm pretty feeble at chess as well. I can understand the concepts,
but cannot implement them consistency. I tend to play a 2400 level combination
followed by a 900 level blunder. In fact, I would estimate that 60% of the games
I lose (playing people 400 points above me or less), I have at least an
advantage at some point in the game, but I either blunder or gradually let it
disintegrate. It's really frustrating. I think I have Lasker's disease where
your opponent gets the pyschological edge because you are winning.

>
>
>>
>>Also, an open file becomes less useful when the rooks and queen are gone, so
>>those bonus points for having a half or fully open file should go away at that
>>point.
>>
>>Does your pawn structure take into account open diagonals for bishop and queen?
>>A harder concept to really understand and implement.
>
>No. It's one of those things that I think would be nice to have, but not
>nice enough to justify the time spent calculating it. PostModernist is an
>*extremely* inefficient program, so things like this are out of my reach at
>the moment.
>

Well, you are a lot further along than I am. Keep at it!

[snip]

>Good luck,
>
>Andrew

Same to you :)

KarinsDad



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.