There is a useful page on wikipedia which describes different symbols used in chess annotation: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chess_annotation_symbolssoheil_hooshdaran wrote:This position is also evaluated as a +/- and I don't know why
Why is this position evaluated so?
-
- Posts: 1235
- Joined: Tue Jul 02, 2013 7:36 am
- Location: Hertfordshire
Re: Why is this position evaluated so?
-
- Posts: 3148
- Joined: Tue Nov 05, 2013 5:24 pm
Re: Why is this position evaluated so?
Which position are you referring to?Michael Flatt wrote:What is the source of this position?
Is it possible to identify the players involved ?
What actual words did the annotator use to describe and evaluate the position?
What was the final result, assuming that it was taken from an actual game?
I was quite busy since our morning, posting.
-
- Posts: 3148
- Joined: Tue Nov 05, 2013 5:24 pm
Re: Why is this position evaluated so?
I had been a tournament player since about 2000, so I didn't mean the symbolMichael Flatt wrote:There is a useful page on wikipedia which describes different symbols used in chess annotation: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chess_annotation_symbolssoheil_hooshdaran wrote:This position is also evaluated as a +/- and I don't know why
-
- Posts: 1235
- Joined: Tue Jul 02, 2013 7:36 am
- Location: Hertfordshire
Re: Why is this position evaluated so?
It would be helpful to see information on them all.soheil_hooshdaran wrote:Which position are you referring to?Michael Flatt wrote:What is the source of this position?
Is it possible to identify the players involved ?
What actual words did the annotator use to describe and evaluate the position?
What was the final result, assuming that it was taken from an actual game?
I was quite busy since our morning, posting.
Evidently someone has taken the trouble to research, comment and publish these positions and deserve recognition of their efforts. It's a simple courtesy to identify your sources.
-
- Posts: 3148
- Joined: Tue Nov 05, 2013 5:24 pm
Re: Why is this position evaluated so?
Yes.
They are from chess college3:technique by GM Grivas. And from analyzed variations
They are from chess college3:technique by GM Grivas. And from analyzed variations
-
- Posts: 5244
- Joined: Tue Mar 31, 2009 11:51 pm
- Location: Millom, Cumbria
Re: Why is this position evaluated so?
Bishop potentially superior to the Knight?soheil_hooshdaran wrote:I appreciate all your help.
This position is also evaluated as a +/- and I don't know why
Could someone please help me understand?
Black's isolated pawn on the b-file more vulnerable to attack than White's??
White's position just "looks" a bit easier to play......
"Set up your attacks so that when the fire is out, it isn't out!" (H N Pillsbury)
-
- Posts: 3148
- Joined: Tue Nov 05, 2013 5:24 pm
Re: Why is this position evaluated so?
White had this Bishop before.
They both have an isolated pawn.
Is chess really about "looks"?
They both have an isolated pawn.
Is chess really about "looks"?
-
- Posts: 3148
- Joined: Tue Nov 05, 2013 5:24 pm
Re: Why is this position evaluated so?
What is favorable about
?It is Black's turn
?It is Black's turn
-
- Posts: 5244
- Joined: Tue Mar 31, 2009 11:51 pm
- Location: Millom, Cumbria
Re: Why is this position evaluated so?
To a degree it probably is, yes!soheil_hooshdaran wrote:White had this Bishop before.
They both have an isolated pawn.
Is chess really about "looks"?
"Set up your attacks so that when the fire is out, it isn't out!" (H N Pillsbury)
-
- Posts: 1235
- Joined: Tue Jul 02, 2013 7:36 am
- Location: Hertfordshire
Re: Why is this position evaluated so?
Well, might I suggest that you read what GM Grivas has to say about these positions?soheil_hooshdaran wrote:Yes.
They are from chess college3:technique by GM Grivas. And from analyzed variations
His book, after all, is intended as a training manual and the reviews I have read and the extract I have seen suggest that he does explain what is going on.
Reference: http://www.gambitbooks.com/books/Chess_ ... nique.html
Download extract: http://www.gambitbooks.com/pdfs/Chess_C ... hnique.pdf
-
- Posts: 3148
- Joined: Tue Nov 05, 2013 5:24 pm
Re: Why is this position evaluated so?
Why is it that here White's chances are deemed better
But here
the comment says "the game would bee drawn, as neither side can improve their pieces?
But here
the comment says "the game would bee drawn, as neither side can improve their pieces?
-
- Posts: 3052
- Joined: Tue May 24, 2011 10:58 am
Re: Why is this position evaluated so?
Like all of these - you're meant to try and work that out A few obvious differences between those two positions, why they're significant takes work.
This sort of statement/evaluation etc is often reasonably open to question of course.
This sort of statement/evaluation etc is often reasonably open to question of course.
-
- Posts: 3148
- Joined: Tue Nov 05, 2013 5:24 pm
Re: Why is this position evaluated so?
Why is this position (with Black to move) evaluated as advantageous to White?
-
- Posts: 3052
- Joined: Tue May 24, 2011 10:58 am
Re: Why is this position evaluated so?
Well the odd thing with black's position isn't quite 'right' somehow I guess. The bishop still on f8, that pin on f6, d5/long term king not absolutely secure etc.
You'd probably have to analyse quite a bit to understand it mind. Or rope in a computer Stockfish thinks its ~+0.5 after c6, so not a big advantage.
You'd probably have to analyse quite a bit to understand it mind. Or rope in a computer Stockfish thinks its ~+0.5 after c6, so not a big advantage.
-
- Posts: 3148
- Joined: Tue Nov 05, 2013 5:24 pm
Re: Why is this position evaluated so?
what does 1.f5 give White advantage in: