Check out Atomic Chess, our featured variant for November, 2024.


[ Help | Earliest Comments | Latest Comments ]
[ List All Subjects of Discussion | Create New Subject of Discussion ]
[ List Earliest Comments Only For Pages | Games | Rated Pages | Rated Games | Subjects of Discussion ]

Single Comment

Aberg variation of Capablanca's Chess. Different setup and castling rules. (10x8, Cells: 80) [All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]
H.G.Muller wrote on Wed, Apr 23, 2008 09:38 PM UTC:
Well, this is basically how I got the empirical values I quoted. Except
that so far I only did it for opening positions, so the values are all
opening values. But, like I said, they don't seem to change a lot during
the game. For the complete list of exchanges that I tried, see
http://z13.invisionfree.com/Gothic_Chess_Forum/index.php?showtopic=389&st=1
.

Compensating with Pawns is kind of difficult, though. The Pawn value is
the most variable of all pieces, and the most non-additive. You have
passers, defended passers, edge Pawns, backward Pawns isolated Pawns,
Pawns of the King's Pawn shield. One can be worth more than twice as much
as the other. And the problem is that deleting a Pawn in the opening, you
don't know where it is going to end up on the average. In addition, in
the opening you have all kinds of compensation for deleting a Pawn, in
terms of acceleration of development. In the end-game position I gave, at
least you know which type of Pawn the extra Pawn (c5) is. I would be
inclined to count that as the 'average Pawn', and deleting it does not
significantly weaken your Pawn structure.

But in general, it is much more reliable to try Queen vs 3 minors or vs 2
Rooks. That way you get relative piece values that are not very sensitive
to the value of the Pawns that you used to 'equalize'.