Author: Peter McKenzie
Date: 10:30:28 12/03/99
Go up one level in this thread
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 Yes, its been a cool discussion. Almost an information overload :-) >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 Lambchop thinks white is winning by 0.22. >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 > > > >SCORE ANALYSIS >BLACK to move > >MATERIAL -137 (Positive means WHITE has more material) W:19086 B:19223 >Game stage M >Actual moves played: 1 (halfMoves=1) > >Fifty move counter: 0 > >r=547 # # # q=1040 # k=15939 # > >o=103 o=106 o=103 # r=565 o=94 # # > > # # n=346 # b=346 # # Q=1022 > > # # # # # # # # > > # # P=101 # # # # # > > # # # B=344 # # # # > >P=103 P=103 P=98 # # R=553 P=103 P=115 > > # # # # # R=555 K=15993 # > > >HCW=1 HCB=1 >cannotCW=1 cannotCB=1 >CCRW=0 CCRB=0 > >Piece Bonuses White=4 Piece Bonuses Black=-34 > >KINGEXPOSURE WHITE=3 KINGEXPOSURE BLACK=16 >DANGERSQUARES WHITE=0 DANGERSQUARES BLACK=5 >ATTACKINGFORCE WHITE=21 ATTACKINGFORCE BLACK=0 >ATTACKTOTAL WHITE=240 ATTACKTOTAL BLACK=0 > > >EVALUATION : 71 (positive means WHITE is winning) Static evaluation: 0.22 King Safety score: 1.1, I don't have a further breakdown of it. Alot of my king safety bonus is based on attacking squares around the enemy king. I suspect I'm not scoring the 'bare' black king highly enough. Currently I'm only penalising the absense of the g pawn. I think I should increase this penalty because there is no h pawn as well. I'd like a more generic pattern for a bare king, but haven't decided upon it yet. Perhaps just a count of the number of friendly pieces around the king would be good. By 'around' the king, I was thinking of the 3 squares directly in front, and also probably the 3 squares in front of those. In this position, there is only 1 such friendly piece which is clearly pretty bad. 2 friendly pieces isn't very good either but 3 seems ok. cheers, Peter
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.