12 Apr 07
Originally posted by ih8sensYou are absolutely correct.... it can't always be measured in points.
If you check out that game I just finished (posted in the 1-0 tournament thread), it shows very clearly that material can't be measured in points. Tempo, position.. often more important.
I'd like to think that game won't end in a draw though...
12 Apr 07
Originally posted by ChessJesterI think you are missing the point (no pun intended). The only use for points was an attempt to assign relative values to the pieces. But points don't mean squat. A rook and a pawn is equal in point value to a two bishops, or a bishop and a knight. While the points are equal, I would rather have two tactical pieces over the rook and a pawn. So that really isn't an equal trade.
You are absolutely correct.... it can't always be measured in points.
A bishop and a knight are each assigned 3 point values. In the early game, a knight is more valuable many times, whereas the opposite is true in the end game. So equivent points, but not equivilent value.
Based on points two rooks is more valuable than a queen. This one is a little closer to call. In some instances, I would rather have the queen, but I wouldn't hesitate to play two rooks against a queen.
Do you see my point (again, no pun intended)?
13 Apr 07
Originally posted by shortcircuitYeah. Totally. Ive heard it all before. And actually, I think the pieces have values relative to the stage of the game. And most games have endgames that don't get drawn in a perpetual middle game, so therefore you have to remember that the board will eventually become open. Look at the board and attempt to force the position into one that favours your forces, and if they are more diverse then they will be more valuabe in an endgame scenario. Sure there are scenarios where both rooks are trapped in the corners and don't mean squat, so you have to be aware of what stage the game is at and how quickly those pieces can become active. So if you are going to trade your queen for 2 rooks you have to be sure that your rooks can enter the battle as quickly as possible in order to secure active play and positional supremecy.
I think you are missing the point (no pun intended). The only use for points was an attempt to assign relative values to the pieces. But points don't mean squat. A rook and a pawn is equal in point value to a two bishops, or a bishop and a knight. While the points are equal, I would rather have two tactical pieces over the rook and a pawn. So that reall ...[text shortened]... hesitate to play two rooks against a queen.
Do you see my point (again, no pun intended)?
Also, in an endgame the pawn is more valuable so you might want to have a rook and one pawn which can promote rather than two minor pieces that cannot promote.
The points are a generalization and thats all I was using them for.
13 Apr 07
Originally posted by ChessJesterWell played ChessJester, my prediction is that you'll get some more rating points out of this tourney.
Game 3391728
There we go, I think I have a slight advantage, in material at least Q+N+B = 15 pts and 2R+2B = 16 pts... plus I should be able to stay a pawn up... but black has a nasty attack I think... it will be a nail biter
Such a shame to blunder this game. I was really looking forward to playing on...
I think part of me thought i was still mucking around on the analysis board, PLUS i had evaluated this move as losing yesterday. Angry angry angry.
Please excuse me while i go outside and grind my teeth loudly...
13 Apr 07
Originally posted by MarsanWow, you resigned!? Well thanks and good game!
Well played ChessJester, my prediction is that you'll get some more rating points out of this tourney.
Such a shame to blunder this game. I was really looking forward to playing on...
I think part of me thought i was still mucking around on the analysis board, PLUS i had evaluated this move as losing yesterday. Angry angry angry.
Please excuse me while i go outside and grind my teeth loudly...
I thought you might have just overlooked the weak back rank when you made your last move there... almost a shame it didn't play out really. Oh well, thanks for the game! 🙂
14 Apr 07
Originally posted by EmLaskertaking forever... oh well, i guess that's to be expected.
cough...Game 3389588