Author: Vincent Diepeveen
Date: 10:23:04 12/03/99
Go up one level in this thread
On December 03, 1999 at 10:15:58, Robert Hyatt wrote: >On December 03, 1999 at 09:21:29, Ulrich Tuerke wrote: > >>On December 03, 1999 at 09:13:48, Dusan Dobes wrote: >> >>>On December 03, 1999 at 08:49:19, Andrew Williams wrote: >>> >>>>Over the last few days, I have been fascinated by the discussions on CCC >>>>about positional sacrifices. Some of the discussion has centred on the value >>>>assigned to the attack that is obtained after the sacrifice and I was wondering >>>>how other programs evaluated the position after Hossa's sac: >>>> >>>>r3q1k1/ppp1rp2/2n1b2Q/8/2P5/3B4/PPP2RPP/5RK1 b - - 0 2 >>>> >>>>This is after 1. Bxh6 gxh6 2. Qxh6 from the original position posted by >>>>Peter McKenzie. PostModernist's static evaluation of the position is presented >>>>below. Essentially, it thinks that White is winning by 0.71. The ATTACKTOTAL >>>>score is generated by analyzing the squares around the King to see how many of >>>>them are attacked and what sorts of pieces are attacking them. Please note that >>>>not all the factors that contribute to PM's score are included in the output >>>>below. >>>> >>>>Could other programmers post similar information? I believe that even an >>>>overall static evaluation would be interesting. >>>> >>>>Cheers >>>> >>>>Andrew Williams >>> >>>Phalanx XXI static evaluation scores this position as +3.05 for white. >>>Material gives -1.5, black king safety +5.76. >> >>You say that this large value is given without search and without static >>exchange evaluation. I think that this is a very daring evaluation. Isn't it ? >> >>Uli >>> >>>Dusan Dobes > > >I don't think "daring" is the word for it. :) I've heart past years a good term for it by Frans Morsch: "anti-kasparov"
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.