- Blind mode tutorial
lichess.org
Donate

The REAL value of chess pieces

#2

wow very interesting, so complicated

wow very interesting, so complicated
#3

Remarkable how a comparison between the sums of the piece values here doesn't determine who's better!

On the contrary, as you explained in the discussion of the tactics problem, Black's position is hanging on a thread, which is why every piece is essential for survival.

White, on the other hand, has a harmonious, superior position, which is why all the individual piece values are LOW.

A related observation might be that for example after a sequence like

1e4 e5
2 Bc4 Bc5
3 Qf3 Qg5
4 Qxf7+

both the Queen on f7 and the Bishop on c4 come out as being worth about 20 pawn units: since if the Bishop was gone, Black could capture the Queen, and if the Queen was gone, it would be off the board anyway. But it would be absurd to think that those 20 units of value are contained in BOTH the Bishop and the Queen.

Again, that observation seems to show that you cannot do sums here.

Remarkable how a comparison between the sums of the piece values here doesn't determine who's better! On the contrary, as you explained in the discussion of the tactics problem, Black's position is hanging on a thread, which is why every piece is essential for survival. White, on the other hand, has a harmonious, superior position, which is why all the individual piece values are LOW. A related observation might be that for example after a sequence like 1e4 e5 2 Bc4 Bc5 3 Qf3 Qg5 4 Qxf7+ both the Queen on f7 and the Bishop on c4 come out as being worth about 20 pawn units: since if the Bishop was gone, Black could capture the Queen, and if the Queen was gone, it would be off the board anyway. But it would be absurd to think that those 20 units of value are contained in BOTH the Bishop and the Queen. Again, that observation seems to show that you cannot do sums here.
#4

@Meerkatze said in #3:

Remarkable how a comparison between the sums of the piece values here doesn't determine who's better!

My intuition tells me that there is information in pieces suddenly losing their value (they are going to be captured no matter what), having their value go into the negative (indicating some smothering), pieces having a similar value (indicating maybe a common role or maybe a line in which they will be relevant, but not in a particular order) and the relative value of pieces under tension (indicating that maybe an exchange is good).

But I just made this happen today and I am not that good at chess :D so maybe I will let the masters draw conclusions.

@Meerkatze said in #3: > Remarkable how a comparison between the sums of the piece values here doesn't determine who's better! My intuition tells me that there is information in pieces suddenly losing their value (they are going to be captured no matter what), having their value go into the negative (indicating some smothering), pieces having a similar value (indicating maybe a common role or maybe a line in which they will be relevant, but not in a particular order) and the relative value of pieces under tension (indicating that maybe an exchange is good). But I just made this happen today and I am not that good at chess :D so maybe I will let the masters draw conclusions.
#5

Doooood

Cool idea

Couple notes:

\White, on the other hand, has a harmonious, superior position, which is why all the individual piece values are LOW

Intuitively one should like to think synergy INCREASES overall value and the value of every contributor
-Survival of all
-Likelyhood of victory
and probably something else. Chics.

But no? You have it scored all the other way around.

Are you many hours in any given day with stockfish?
I'm not sure engine thinking, a.i. thinking translates to human thinking or else why would everyone still be so modest at chess.(?)

Get Hans, and a pawn shop owner appraise active pieces!

How many points is checkmate worth. That must sum in, right?

Thanks for your time.

If I have completely missed the point here, sorry about that.

Doooood Cool idea Couple notes: \White, on the other hand, has a harmonious, superior position, which is why all the individual piece values are LOW Intuitively one should like to think synergy INCREASES overall value and the value of every contributor -Survival of all -Likelyhood of victory and probably something else. Chics. But no? You have it scored all the other way around. Are you many hours in any given day with stockfish? I'm not sure engine thinking, a.i. thinking translates to human thinking or else why would everyone still be so modest at chess.(?) Get Hans, and a pawn shop owner appraise active pieces! How many points is checkmate worth. That must sum in, right? Thanks for your time. If I have completely missed the point here, sorry about that.
#6

Hey, I think you posted the article without finishing the conclusion?

Very interesting article by the way

Hey, I think you posted the article without finishing the conclusion? Very interesting article by the way
#7

Yea the ending is missing and in the puzzle, Bg4+ is written twice, but you meant Be4+.
Interesting otherwise.

Yea the ending is missing and in the puzzle, Bg4+ is written twice, but you meant Be4+. Interesting otherwise.
#8

I may be stupid, but I can't make it work. When I type /piecevalue it just shows up in the research bar.

I may be stupid, but I can't make it work. When I type /piecevalue it just shows up in the research bar.
#9

@HelloItsDmitri said in #6:

Hey, I think you posted the article without finishing the conclusion?

It's a rolling conclusion :D Thanks! I've updated it.

@HelloItsDmitri said in #6: > Hey, I think you posted the article without finishing the conclusion? It's a rolling conclusion :D Thanks! I've updated it.
#10

@zimp1 said in #7:

Yea the ending is missing and in the puzzle, Bg4+ is written twice, but you meant Be4+.

Yeah, Lichess won't let me change my username to ChessDyslexic... :) Thanks.

@zimp1 said in #7: > Yea the ending is missing and in the puzzle, Bg4+ is written twice, but you meant Be4+. Yeah, Lichess won't let me change my username to ChessDyslexic... :) Thanks.