Latest Updates:
Page Index Toggle Pages: 1 [2] 
Topic Tools
Hot Topic (More than 10 Replies) Wikipedia article about Chess Piece Relative Value (Read 13600 times)
motörhead
Full Member
***
Offline


Here comes the bass, thunder
in the guts...

Posts: 226
Joined: 10/09/08
Re: Wikipedia article about Chess Piece Relative Value
Reply #9 - 08/25/14 at 19:18:00
Post Tools
Uhohspaghettio wrote on 08/24/14 at 23:30:30:
motörhead wrote on 08/24/14 at 13:13:25:
Bibs wrote on 08/24/14 at 11:50:03:
ErictheRed wrote on 08/24/14 at 02:17:00:
Why???


Absolutely.
At the risk of having been successfully trolled:
Why on earth?
Can you explain WHY? Your questions are all just bizarre.
Are you trying to improve? If so, Chernev and Reinfeld are helpful.




Come on folks. That's just loathy. What's on with you both?!
Do you have to much time to waste in a boring job or why are you picking on someone just posing a question here?
If you're not willing to communicate in a constructive way just stay away from the thread. But do not behave like Statler und Waldorf from the Muppet-Show...


You are evaluating the situation in an "absolutely primitive way of measure". Their response was constructive, your response is ridiculous and deconstructive. 

People feeding trolls (even unintentional trolling) do damage also.


Judge it as you like it. You feel being trolled after reading a question? Well, then do not throw away further time in answering it!

Who are you, who am I to judge whether a question is meant to troll or not?! 
I just read. And when I'm interested I may answer, given I have the time to do so.
As it was the case here. It seemed to me bing based on reasonable ground. Berliner is a reasonable source, at least as reasonable as Chernev or Reinfeld...

On the other hand: What the hec is constructive in simple and repeated WHY? 
You think it is constructive? Okay...
Why? Why on earth you think a Why is constructive? Why? Grin
  

A walk trough the ocean of most souls would scarcely get your feet wet.
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Marc Benford
Full Member
***
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 104
Joined: 07/17/13
Re: Wikipedia article about Chess Piece Relative Value
Reply #8 - 08/25/14 at 14:52:31
Post Tools
Thank you motörhead for your useful answer.

Firstly, when you said "one of the pawns is to be evaluated as "normal" and thus should be counted with the value 1. And only the second pawn on that certain file, the doubled pawn, should be counted with the lesser value", I agree with you, but the question is: which one of the two pawns is the "normal" pawn which should be counted with the value 1? and which one of the two pawns is the "sick" pawn which should be counted with a value of less than 1?

Secondly you said that the first f pawn and the first h pawn are each worth 1, which I believe is not correct. I think a pawn should be worth 1 only when it's connected. If a pawn is isolated, it should be worth slightly less than 1.
The first f pawn and the first h pawn are isolated. The second f pawn and the second h pawn are isolated and doubled.

Thirdly I don't think the value of the e pawn should be 1. It should receive a penalty for being isolated, and a bonus for being passed. And the bonus should probably be bigger than the penalty, so the e pawn should be worth slightly more than 1.



For the others who believe my questions are perfectly useless: if you don't like this thread you can just ignore it.
(I am not that stupid, I know that the value of every pawns and pieces are entirely dependant on the position.)
What I am asking for is somekind of average values of the pawns depending on if they are connected, isolated, doubled or passed.



What I am trying to figure out is, on average:
- What penalty should an isolated pawn receive?
- What penalty should a doubled pawn receive?
- What bonus should a passed pawn receive?
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
TonyRo
God Member
*****
Offline


I'm gonna crack your skull!

Posts: 1830
Location: Cleveland, OH
Joined: 11/26/07
Gender: Male
Re: Wikipedia article about Chess Piece Relative Value
Reply #7 - 08/25/14 at 13:26:51
Post Tools
ReneDescartes wrote on 08/24/14 at 23:43:28:


How many times better is chocolate than guacamole? I need an exact mathematical answer.



1/2 or smaller - Guacamole simply can't be beat, especially if you're a T1D like me.  Grin
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
ReneDescartes
God Member
*****
Offline


Qu'est-ce donc que je
suis? Une chose qui pense.

Posts: 1237
Joined: 05/17/10
Gender: Male
Re: Wikipedia article about Chess Piece Relative Value
Reply #6 - 08/24/14 at 23:43:28
Post Tools
Chess is not a numeric game. Do not be fooled by computers. All such values are approximate and relative to many things. Pieces do not have individual value; they have a "group value" (Lasker) dependent on their placement. All mathematical questions of this type have no exact answer. There are some rough equivalences--a bishop can usually draw three pawns in the endgame--and some principles--a center pawn is usually worth more than a wing pawn in the middlegame; that is all.

How many times better is chocolate than guacamole? I need an exact mathematical answer.

« Last Edit: 08/25/14 at 16:56:28 by ReneDescartes »  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Uhohspaghettio
God Member
*****
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 514
Joined: 02/23/11
Re: Wikipedia article about Chess Piece Relative Value
Reply #5 - 08/24/14 at 23:30:30
Post Tools
motörhead wrote on 08/24/14 at 13:13:25:
Bibs wrote on 08/24/14 at 11:50:03:
ErictheRed wrote on 08/24/14 at 02:17:00:
Why???


Absolutely.
At the risk of having been successfully trolled:
Why on earth?
Can you explain WHY? Your questions are all just bizarre.
Are you trying to improve? If so, Chernev and Reinfeld are helpful.




Come on folks. That's just loathy. What's on with you both?!
Do you have to much time to waste in a boring job or why are you picking on someone just posing a question here?
If you're not willing to communicate in a constructive way just stay away from the thread. But do not behave like Statler und Waldorf from the Muppet-Show...


You are evaluating the situation in an "absolutely primitive way of measure". Their response was constructive, your response is ridiculous and deconstructive. 

People feeding trolls (even unintentional trolling) do damage also.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
motörhead
Full Member
***
Offline


Here comes the bass, thunder
in the guts...

Posts: 226
Joined: 10/09/08
Re: Wikipedia article about Chess Piece Relative Value
Reply #4 - 08/24/14 at 13:13:25
Post Tools
Bibs wrote on 08/24/14 at 11:50:03:
ErictheRed wrote on 08/24/14 at 02:17:00:
Why???


Absolutely.
At the risk of having been successfully trolled:
Why on earth?
Can you explain WHY? Your questions are all just bizarre.
Are you trying to improve? If so, Chernev and Reinfeld are helpful.




Come on folks. That's just loathy. What's on with you both?!
Do you have to much time to waste in a boring job or why are you picking on someone just posing a question here?
If you're not willing to communicate in a constructive way just stay away from the thread. But do not behave like Statler und Waldorf from the Muppet-Show...
  

A walk trough the ocean of most souls would scarcely get your feet wet.
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Bibs
God Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 2338
Joined: 10/24/06
Re: Wikipedia article about Chess Piece Relative Value
Reply #3 - 08/24/14 at 11:50:03
Post Tools
ErictheRed wrote on 08/24/14 at 02:17:00:
Why???


Absolutely.
At the risk of having been successfully trolled:
Why on earth?
Can you explain WHY? Your questions are all just bizarre.
Are you trying to improve? If so, Chernev and Reinfeld are helpful.

  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
motörhead
Full Member
***
Offline


Here comes the bass, thunder
in the guts...

Posts: 226
Joined: 10/09/08
Re: Wikipedia article about Chess Piece Relative Value
Reply #2 - 08/24/14 at 08:57:54
Post Tools
Marc Benford wrote on 08/24/14 at 01:13:49:

Quote:
White's doubled pawns on the b-file are the best situation in the diagram, since advancing the pawns and exchanging can get them un-doubled and mobile. The doubled b-pawn is worth 0.75 points.
Are both the b2 pawn and the c3 pawn worth 0.75 each? Or is the b2 pawn worth 1 and the b3 pawn worth 0.75? Or is the b2 pawn worth 0.75 and the b3 pawn worth 1?


You know that the simple evaluation of a pawn with the value 1 is the absolutely primitive way of measure. Letting off other informations. For example an isolated Queen's pawn can both be strong and weak. Just depending on the very position of the pieces.
But okay. Let's look at in this most primitive sense of evaluation.
I think a doubled pawn changes a position in so far as in a normal pawn structure (with one pawn on each file) it adds a second pawn to a certain file (through an exchange of pieces).
That should mean that one of the pawns is to be evaluated as "normal" and thus should be counted with the value 1. And only the second pawn on that certain file, the doubled pawn, should be counted with the lesser value.
There is no reason to evaluate both pawns with lesser value, as one of the doubled pawns shows absolutely normal strength in the sense of pawn play. 

Marc Benford wrote on 08/24/14 at 01:13:49:

Quote:
White's doubled pawns on the b-file are the best situation in the diagram, since advancing the pawns and exchanging can get them un-doubled and mobile. [...] If the black pawn on a6 were on c6, it would not be possible to dissolve the doubled pawn.
I didn't quiet understand that. Could you show me this concretely with moves?

Well it depends how you look at it. In the striktest sense - no other pieces on the board - I don't know how Berliner would get it disolved in a senseful way. With Black showing best play White will no be able to un-double his pawns (without giving away one) in either situation.
But add a king an the fight against a6-b7 will be easier than against b7-c6. But then we are in endgame theory an it all depends on the very positions of the kings.
Add even more pieces and it will become most unclear. If you have a normal pawn majority for Black on the other wing (not shattered or doubled) the verdict may simply be that exchanges to a pure endgame would prefer Black...

Marc Benford wrote on 08/24/14 at 01:13:49:

Quote:
The doubled pawn on f2 is worth about 0.5 points.
And how much is the f3 pawn worth? Is the f2 pawn considered as an isolated exchangeable pawn or as an isolated inexangeable pawn?


In the primitve sense of countig the normal f-pawn is worth 1, the second f-pawn, the doubled one, shall be worth 0,5 acc to Berliner. In the very situation the f2-pawn is inexchangeable. How should Black proceed to get him off? 

Marc Benford wrote on 08/24/14 at 01:13:49:

Quote:
The second white pawn on the h-file is worth only 0.33 points
So the h3 pawn is worth 0.33. But how much is the h2 pawn worth?

If you take the primitive way to count and evaluate, then the value should be 1. In more complex terms of piece power pawns on the a- and h.files have lesser value, as they are only one armed. They can only exchange towards the center (e.g. h2xg3) but not to the rim (h2xi3...)

Marc Benford wrote on 08/24/14 at 01:13:49:

Extra question:
On the following diagram, how much would the e4 pawn be worth? I only need an approximation. (You can imagine that it is a late middlegame with also two or three pieces for each side, plus one King for each side.)

And what if it was on e3 instead?


If you take the primitive way to count and evaluate, then the value should be 1 in both cases. The real strength and value depends absolutely one the pieces you add to the scene.

  

A walk trough the ocean of most souls would scarcely get your feet wet.
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
ErictheRed
God Member
*****
Offline


USCF National Master

Posts: 2533
Location: USA
Joined: 10/02/05
Re: Wikipedia article about Chess Piece Relative Value
Reply #1 - 08/24/14 at 02:17:00
Post Tools
Why???
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Marc Benford
Full Member
***
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 104
Joined: 07/17/13
Wikipedia article about Chess Piece Relative Value
08/24/14 at 01:13:49
Post Tools
Hello.

I do not understand the second third of the "Hans Berliner's system" section of the Wikipedia article "Chess piece relative value":

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chess_piece_relative_value#Hans_Berliner.27s_system

Quote:
There are different types of doubled pawns; see the diagram. White's doubled pawns on the b-file are the best situation in the diagram, since advancing the pawns and exchanging can get them un-doubled and mobile. The doubled b-pawn is worth 0.75 points. If the black pawn on a6 were on c6, it would not be possible to dissolve the doubled pawn, and it would be worth only 0.5 points. The doubled pawn on f2 is worth about 0.5 points. The second white pawn on the h-file is worth only 0.33 points, and additional pawns on the file would be worth only 0.2 points (Berliner 1999:18–20).


* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
*

Could you explain me precisely how much is each pawn worth?




Quote:
White's doubled pawns on the b-file are the best situation in the diagram, since advancing the pawns and exchanging can get them un-doubled and mobile. The doubled b-pawn is worth 0.75 points.
Are both the b2 pawn and the c3 pawn worth 0.75 each? Or is the b2 pawn worth 1 and the b3 pawn worth 0.75? Or is the b2 pawn worth 0.75 and the b3 pawn worth 1?




Quote:
If the black pawn on a6 were on c6, it would not be possible to dissolve the doubled pawn, and it would be worth only 0.5 points.
Are both the b2 pawn and the c3 pawn worth 0.5 each? Or is the b2 pawn worth 1 and the b3 pawn worth 0.5? Or is the b2 pawn worth 0.5 and the b3 pawn worth 1?




Quote:
White's doubled pawns on the b-file are the best situation in the diagram, since advancing the pawns and exchanging can get them un-doubled and mobile. [...] If the black pawn on a6 were on c6, it would not be possible to dissolve the doubled pawn.
I didn't quiet understand that. Could you show me this concretely with moves?




Quote:
The doubled pawn on f2 is worth about 0.5 points.
And how much is the f3 pawn worth? Is the f2 pawn considered as an isolated exchangeable pawn or as an isolated inexangeable pawn?




Quote:
The second white pawn on the h-file is worth only 0.33 points
So the h3 pawn is worth 0.33. But how much is the h2 pawn worth?




Extra question:

On the following diagram, how much would the e4 pawn be worth? I only need an approximation. (You can imagine that it is a late middlegame with also two or three pieces for each side, plus one King for each side.)

* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
*

And what if it was on e3 instead?




Thanks in advance for your answers.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Page Index Toggle Pages: 1 [2] 
Topic Tools
Bookmarks: del.icio.us Digg Facebook Google Google+ Linked in reddit StumbleUpon Twitter Yahoo