Author: Tony Werten
Date: 04:15:20 01/06/06
Go up one level in this thread
On January 06, 2006 at 06:53:05, Gerd Isenberg wrote: >On January 06, 2006 at 05:27:53, Tony Werten wrote: > >>On January 06, 2006 at 03:04:55, Gerd Isenberg wrote: >> >>>>BUT make sure You don't count the B-pawn as a candidate in this case (or you'll >>>>think you have 2 passed pawns (b and c) >>>> >>>>Tony >>>> >>> >>>Yes, but here the candidate is stronger than the passer itself - considering the >>>square of the black king ;-) >> >>Your succesfull attemp on deliberately missing the point is noted ;) > >I agree that there should be no additive cumulation of the c-passer and the >b-candidate evaluation. The fact that the candidate is outside the square of the >black king is appropriate to evaluate this particular position as won for white. > > >> >>BTW did you know that a special rook-pawn evaluation function which swaps the >>score twice when called for black, will make your engine give away pawns ? >> >>The score will NOT rise. The score is -BAD, but don't worry, with all these >>extra pawns, you can still force a draw. >> >>Until one of the pawns promotes, and the rook-pawn evaluator isn't called >>anymore and the score is plain BAD :( >> > >Hmm - has this something to do with our recent game ;-) :)) The only reason I had a draw against Fruit in a simular endgame was that we both had 1 rook and 1 pawn. Whenever XiniX would throw something away (either the pawn or the rook) or let the pawn promote, the rook-pawn evaluator wouldn't be called and it would see that the position was bad. Against IsiChess, there where too many pawns on the board that could be given away without an immediate loss :( I'll try to have a normal game against you next time ( didn't work for the last few times ) Tony > >Cheers, >Gerd > >>Tony >> >>> >>>> >>>>[D]6k1/8/p7/5ppp/1PP5/5P1P/8/6K1 w - -
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.