Author: Eelco de Groot
Date: 13:07:00 12/28/05
Go up one level in this thread
Hello Vasik, Being just a weak 1300 clubplayer, I think I nevertheless would agree with you that White is better and I would not like to have to play with the black pieces in this position. The main characteristic of the position seems to me that Black has very few plausible moves (even looking superficially) and White has many? If you had some sort of static evaluator that could count the number of superficially plausible moves somehow, that would give White a headstart here. No idea if that could be constructed though in a static eval but with a 1 ply search plus qsearch it would be different already? For Black I see only plausible moves Qg5, Qh5, Rh6 (backward Rookmoves should maybe get a penalty unless they attack something or defend an attacked piece, in this case the Rh6 defends f6 but the pawn is already well protected. The black bishops can go to the backrank but maybe that also should not count, unless there they attack something or defend something that needs defending. pawn e6 can go forward to e5, but that gives up two very important fields on d5 and f5 for the the White Knight on e3. Practically every other Black move loses the piece or creates a double pawn after Queen exchange etc. I could do some sort of similar calculation for White but I think it is obvious that White has many more plausible choices for every single piece. Even if you discount moves backward for pieces other than Knights, every piece from White can still move. Well, you asked for some "static" evaluation of the position, I tried to give one. But I don't know if it is possible to implement such a "plausible mobility" evaluator... Best Regards, Eelco [D]8/1b2b1k1/pp1ppp2/nPq5/P1P1P3/2QRNPP1/8/1N2KB1r b - - 0 1 Pro Deo 1.1 Vulcan sees only an equal position, 0.13 for Black: 00:00:00.2 -0,43 1 448 axb5 cxb5 00:00:00.3 0,90 1 450 Rh2 00:00:00.3 -0,48 2 873 Rh2 Bg2 00:00:00.3 -0,15 2 1827 Kg8 Kd1 00:00:00.3 -0,13 2 3583 Qg5 Ng4 00:00:00.3 0,51 3 5748 Qg5 Kd1 Qxg3 00:00:00.3 0,51 4 9247 Qg5 Kd1 Qxg3 00:00:00.3 0,55 5 20287 Qg5 Kd1 Qxg3 Nd2 00:00:00.4 0,82 6 76759 Qg5 Qc2 Qxg3+ Qf2 Qh3 bxa6 00:00:00.6 0,38 7 287769 Qg5 g4 Qh4+ Kd1 Qf2 Nd2 Kf8 00:00:00.7 0,43 8 505674 Qg5 g4 Qh4+ Kd1 Qf2 Nd2 Kf8 Rd4 00:00:01.7 0,14 9 1492438 Qg5 g4 Qf4 Qd2 Kg8 Qe2 axb5 cxb5 Rh2 00:00:05.4 0,08 10 5722665 Qg5 g4 Qh4+ Kd1 Qf2 Nd2 Kf8 Qd4 axb5 cxb5 00:00:13.4 0,08 11 14995976 Qg5 g4 Qf4 Nd2 axb5 cxb5 d5 exd5 Bb4 Qd4 Qg3+ Kd1 00:00:43.8 0,01 12 50888700 Qg5 g4 Ba8 Kd1 Nb7 Rd2 Nc5 bxa6 Bc6 a7 Qf4 Kc1 Nxa4 00:01:56.4 0,12 13 138173359 Qg5 g4 Ba8 Qb2 00:03:58.5 0,10 14 288890040 Qg5 g4 Ba8 Qd2 Nb7 Nd1 Nc5 Qxg5+ fxg5 00:13:22.2 0,16 15 982663119 Qg5 g4 Ba8 Qc2 Nb7 Qg2 Qh6 g5 fxg5 Ng4 Qh4+ Kd1 00:47:24.2 0,13 16 3488705002 Qg5 g4 Ba8 Nd1
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.