Assigning numerical values to chess pieces.

Discuss anything you like about chess related matters in this forum.
Geoff Chandler
Posts: 2292
Joined: Mon Jul 06, 2009 1:36 pm
Location: Under Cover
Contact:

Re: Assigning numerical values to chess pieces.

Post by Geoff Chandler » Thu Oct 22, 2020 3:03 pm

The Rook = 5pts Bishop =3 pts is purely a guide for beginners, it has to done to give them
a relative piece value when showing them basic tactics. A PIn, Skerer, A Fork etc.

Later Gambits and Sacrifices will be discussed and soon, hopefully, they will drop the points table and play chess.

Image

User avatar
JustinHorton
Posts: 7913
Joined: Mon Aug 04, 2008 10:06 am
Location: Somewhere you're not

Re: Assigning numerical values to chess pieces.

Post by JustinHorton » Thu Oct 22, 2020 3:26 pm

MJMcCready wrote:
Thu Oct 22, 2020 2:27 pm
Or alternatively reconsider the point that some of us have a sense of humour and a more light-hearted approach
But not the light touch that ought to go with that
"Do you play chess?"
"Yes, but I prefer a game with a better chance of cheating."

lostontime.blogspot.com

User avatar
MJMcCready
Posts: 1710
Joined: Mon Jun 24, 2013 2:30 pm

Re: Assigning numerical values to chess pieces.

Post by MJMcCready » Thu Oct 22, 2020 3:55 pm

Yes that's true and intentionally so. I am proud of my very harsh working class upbringing although not in its totality. It's drifted that way because a broader spectrum of opinions and backgrounds on this forum has been left sorely wanting. The pretentiousness it panders to all too often I can do without thank you very much. I am an academic which on a personal note, compounds the problems as I see them.

User avatar
John Clarke
Posts: 467
Joined: Sat Apr 30, 2011 1:07 pm

Re: Assigning numerical values to chess pieces.

Post by John Clarke » Fri Oct 23, 2020 12:42 am

I think it was Gerald Abrahams who once commented that being the exchange "down" in the early middle game could often actually be an advantage.

And now (having got the on-topic stuff out of the way) I see that less middle-classery and some humour are requested. OK then:
Attachments
Scan_Pic0013 (2).jpg
Scan_Pic0013 (2).jpg (191.31 KiB) Viewed 531 times
"The chess-board is the world ..... the player on the other side is hidden from us ..... he never overlooks a mistake, or makes the smallest allowance for ignorance."
(He doesn't let you resign and start again, either.)

Mike Gunn
Posts: 775
Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2007 4:45 pm

Re: Assigning numerical values to chess pieces.

Post by Mike Gunn » Fri Oct 23, 2020 10:43 am

"Years of research involving the strongest chess software and hardware in the world by GM Larry Kaufman and others suggests that the most correct (rounded) piece values 1 (pawn), 3.45 (knight), 3.55 (bishop), 5.25 (rook) and 10 for the queen." (Applying Logic in Chess by Erik Kislik, Gambit, 2018.) No, I don't believe it, either.

User avatar
JustinHorton
Posts: 7913
Joined: Mon Aug 04, 2008 10:06 am
Location: Somewhere you're not

Re: Assigning numerical values to chess pieces.

Post by JustinHorton » Fri Oct 23, 2020 10:52 am

You'd want to know how they arrived at that conclusion though.

For what it's worth, Euwe (and/or a co-author, I think, I can't remember the name of the book) recommended 4.5 for the rook and 8 for the queen, and I've used those figures as my benchmark for several decades.
"Do you play chess?"
"Yes, but I prefer a game with a better chance of cheating."

lostontime.blogspot.com

Ian Thompson
Posts: 2585
Joined: Wed Jul 02, 2008 4:31 pm
Location: Awbridge, Hampshire

Re: Assigning numerical values to chess pieces.

Post by Ian Thompson » Fri Oct 23, 2020 12:07 pm

There's a large selection of possible relative values of pieces to choose from here - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chess_pie ... tive_value.

With some of them going to two decimal places, I think I'd have to use a pencil and paper to keep track of them during a game, which would, of course, be against the rules.

User avatar
MJMcCready
Posts: 1710
Joined: Mon Jun 24, 2013 2:30 pm

Re: Assigning numerical values to chess pieces.

Post by MJMcCready » Fri Oct 23, 2020 5:44 pm

JustinHorton wrote:
Fri Oct 23, 2020 10:52 am
You'd want to know how they arrived at that conclusion though.

For what it's worth, Euwe (and/or a co-author, I think, I can't remember the name of the book) recommended 4.5 for the rook and 8 for the queen, and I've used those figures as my benchmark for several decades.
But numbers are static and pieces in play are dynamic, that's the problem. Sometimes a knight can be stronger than a queen. As a general guide yes its helpful but you have to know what the limits of that are, and as Kramnik kept saying last week, rooks are only stronger in the endgame.

Paul Cooksey
Posts: 733
Joined: Fri Oct 21, 2016 4:15 pm

Re: Assigning numerical values to chess pieces.

Post by Paul Cooksey » Fri Oct 23, 2020 6:07 pm

I'm a bit surprised by the discussion. I've never tried to assign dynamic values to the pieces. I might ask myself if a good knight and a pawn are enough for the exchange for example. But I've never thought "that good knight is worth 4.3". Do people do that?

Nick Ivell
Posts: 414
Joined: Wed Aug 31, 2011 6:33 pm

Re: Assigning numerical values to chess pieces.

Post by Nick Ivell » Fri Oct 23, 2020 6:51 pm

Attentive readers will recall the name of Martin Goldschmidt cropping up on the YMCA thread.

Why do I resurrect the name of this long-forgotten player, more recently associated with the music industry?

Because, in 1975, he did me a great service. He pointed out what he saw as my main weakness. Which was: lack of understanding of positional sacrifices.

He was right then and probably nothing much has changed. Take Fischer's brilliant ...Rh8 in game 13 of the first Spassky match (I don't count the second match anyway). I didn't understand it in 1972 and I'm still not sure I understand it now!

User avatar
IM Jack Rudd
Posts: 4101
Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2007 1:13 am
Location: Bideford

Re: Assigning numerical values to chess pieces.

Post by IM Jack Rudd » Fri Oct 23, 2020 7:03 pm

I recall Soltis's not thinking much of that ...Rh8 move; it gets featured in Chess Mistakes: How To Detect And Avoid Them, and he recommends ...Rg8 instead.

John Moore
Posts: 1988
Joined: Wed May 14, 2008 6:33 pm

Re: Assigning numerical values to chess pieces.

Post by John Moore » Fri Oct 23, 2020 7:15 pm

MJMcCready wrote:
Thu Oct 22, 2020 3:55 pm
Yes that's true and intentionally so. I am proud of my very harsh working class upbringing although not in its totality. It's drifted that way because a broader spectrum of opinions and backgrounds on this forum has been left sorely wanting. The pretentiousness it panders to all too often I can do without thank you very much. I am an academic which on a personal note, compounds the problems as I see them.
Is it possible you can give us all a rest from this tripe. If others disagree. I am happy to withdraw but I personally find it tiresome.

Kevin Thurlow
Posts: 3941
Joined: Wed Apr 30, 2008 12:28 pm

Re: Assigning numerical values to chess pieces.

Post by Kevin Thurlow » Fri Oct 23, 2020 7:17 pm

Exchange sacrifices - Petrosian - Spassky (10) 1966 is quite a good example.

John Sellen
Posts: 36
Joined: Thu May 07, 2020 4:30 pm

Re: Assigning numerical values to chess pieces.

Post by John Sellen » Fri Oct 23, 2020 7:31 pm

MJMcCready wrote: ↑Thu Oct 22, 2020 3:55 pm
Yes that's true and intentionally so. I am proud of my very harsh working class upbringing although not in its totality. It's drifted that way because a broader spectrum of opinions and backgrounds on this forum has been left sorely wanting. The pretentiousness it panders to all too often I can do without thank you very much. I am an academic which on a personal note, compounds the problems as I see them.

John Moore wrote
Is it possible you can give us all a rest from this tripe. If others disagree. I am happy to withdraw but I personally find it tiresome.

Agree totally John
The lovely irony is that is that MJMcCready as a self claimed "academic " has no realisation that his posts are far more pretentious then those on the forum that seem to irritate him

Paul Cooksey
Posts: 733
Joined: Fri Oct 21, 2016 4:15 pm

Re: Assigning numerical values to chess pieces.

Post by Paul Cooksey » Fri Oct 23, 2020 7:43 pm

Kevin Thurlow wrote:
Fri Oct 23, 2020 7:17 pm
Exchange sacrifices - Petrosian - Spassky (10) 1966 is quite a good example.
Yes, but:

Post Reply