Author: Andrew Williams
Date: 08:13:11 12/03/99
Go up one level in this thread
On December 03, 1999 at 10:09:31, Jon Dart wrote: >This is Arasan 5.3's score: > >material score = 114 >white pawn score = -4 >black pawn score = -3 >outside pawn score = 3 >king safety(w) proximity = 0 cover = -31 mlevel = 10 >battery (b): score = -20 mate= 0 stack = 0 >battery (b): score = -24 mate= 0 stack = 1 >king safety(b) proximity = -65 cover = -72 mlevel = 10 >net king safety score = 101 >total score = 0.42 > I'd say that Black's King is significantly less "covered" than White's. >(The scores are based on 1 pawn = 64 units. "proximity" is >a measure of closeness of enemy pieces, "cover" of the >king's pawn cover, "mlevel" of the opponent's material >level. "battery" measures danger from rooks/queens >on an open file near the king). > >Arasan generally doesn't give monster scores for king safety/ >danger. 101 (about +1.5 pawns) is a pretty high score here. > >King safety is very tricky. Here is a position my program had >recently against zippy (GnuChess): > >r1bq1r1k/ppp3pB/2nb2Qp/3pp2N/3P4/2P2N2/PP3PPP/R4RK1 b - - 0 1 > Wow! That really is a good position for this sort of thing. I'm not too unhappy with PM's overall evaluation of +0.35 for White. My "ATTACKTOTAL" score for this position is 0.59, which seems a bit on the high side, because, as you say, the attack isn't going anywhere. Thanks for the position. >Arasan thinks White has a fine attack going, but in fact there >is really nothing he can do (Crafty doesn't like this position >for White because the bishop's position triggers its "trapped >bishop" penalty - and it is in danger, but that's another issue). > >--Jon Andrew
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.