Computer Chess Club Archives




Subject: Re: Static evaluation after the "Positional/Real Sacrifice"

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
>>>>Could other programmers post similar information? I believe that even an
>>>>overall static evaluation would be interesting.
>>>>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 ?
>>>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.