Author: Francis Monkman
Date: 04:54:14 05/29/99
Go up one level in this thread
On May 29, 1999 at 07:18:28, allan johnson wrote: >On May 28, 1999 at 23:28:50, Joe Koss wrote: >>how large does 'n' have to be before it is enough compensation for a pawn? >Joe I don't believe there is a complete or definitive answer to your question. >To my mind certain players extract advantages from a sacrifice better than >others mainly because they read the position better.Mobility of your pieces >enables you to atack and threaten your opponents pieces and King safety. > Of course this is no guarantee you will be successful especially if your >opponent defends accurately. > Time pressures too plays a huge role in determining many outcomes as well. >.So in my humble opinion it's never easy deciding whether to sac a piece for >mobility unless you are absolutely sure that somewhere down the line you >gain an advantage.Then of course if this is the situation the sac move is not > deemed a genuine sac.Sigh this is getting rather complicated isn't it? >I wonder what other people think? >Allan I'm sure this often becomes a 'horizon' problem for searches, although I assume extensions should cover most such cases. Another thing, somewhat related -- human players (certainly GMs) value a piece according to its potential (latent or apparent) -- do any programs weight the 'usual' material values in such a way? Francis Francis
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.