When I first learned to play, the rule of thumb values for Chess pieces were pawn=1, bishop=3, knight=3, rook=5 and queen=9. I've seen other value systems including one which may have been more accurate but used fractions and was too complicated, eg. queen=25¾ !
I wondered if anyone has any variations on my value system, or a different valuation method?
I know that knights can be more valuable than bishops in an end game situation in which it's possible to entirely avoid a bishop...
Originally posted by UncleBucketWhat you have stated is pretty much just rough guidelines. There are no real piece "values". If there were, chess would alot more simple as one would only need to consider piece value when going into the exchange. The value of pieces is largely dependant on whether the game is open or closed. Knights do better in closed positions and bishops do better in open positions.
When I first learned to play, the rule of thumb values for Chess pieces were pawn=1, bishop=3, knight=3, rook=5 and queen=9. I've seen other value systems including one which may have been more accurate but used fractions and was too complicated, eg. queen=25¾ !
I wondered if anyone has any variations on my value system, or a different valuation me ...[text shortened]... able than bishops in an end game situation in which it's possible to entirely avoid a bishop...
As to your comment on the endgame... well unless the pawns are locked, I think most will agree that the bishop is not the inferior minor piece as it has long range powers and can "coral" (trap/dominate) the knight. However, the knight can move on both light and dark squares whereas the bishop is stuck on its colour. And no, there is no way for the knight to completely avoid the influence of the bishop. The knight moves alternating square colours, meaning if its on a white square, it will only be able to move to a black square and vice versa.
I hope I've answereded your question adaquetly=D
Originally posted by gambit3A rook is not always worth 5 or 6 or whatever. Its really relative. Let's say you have a strong attack going. You fork king and rook with your bishop. Would you just take the rook simply because its "worth more"? Sometimes, but not always. First you look for more. You look for a mating attack perhaps, or a chance to gain even more material. Then if you cannot find a forced combination, you consider if you will have a bigger advantage by not trading down pieces (often, the rook is the last piece to be activated, and if your bishop is well placed for an potential attack, you should not trade your active bishop for his passive rook.) Only if you cannot find either of these 2 (or maybe more) conditions do you exchange and try to go into an endgame asap.
I was told Rooks scored at six. Even vs two minor pieces. ChessMaster showed me that a Rook cannot keep up with two minor pieces. ChessMaster also showed me that two pawns can be more valuable than a minor piece.
Also, 2 pawns can be worth more than a piece in the endgame. If you have 2 pawns vs a lone knight or bishop, then you're winning! Simply because you will draw AT LEAST (your opponent can't checkmate you) and can try to promote your pawns. Also, its very common to sacrifice pieces to promote pawns.
In short, piece value is relative.
This is my opinion but I think its not too far from what is right.
A few things you should probably know about peice values, in general:
A) Two rooks are WAY BETTER then a queen and pawn
B) Two minor peices are way better then a rook and pawn, unless those two minor peices are two knights, in which you might have a slight endgame disadvantage but will have a middle-game advantage
C) The bishop pair is better then two knights, even in closed positions IMHO, because if you defend well, the endgame advantage is too great, the bishops can attack the base of closed pawn chains and eat them all, for example, BUT, in closed positions, it's better to have a knight and bishop, then say, two bishops.
D) In open positions, a bishop and knight is better then two knights, and of course two bishops is even greater.
E) 3 pawns are way better then a knight
F) 3 pawns are usually just as good/even, or slightly better, then a bishop
G) A minor peice and two pawns are better then a rook
H) This will never happen in your games, but a queen is better then all 8 pawns, try this strange endgame, give your opponent 8 pawns and a king, while give yourself a queen and king, the queen side should always win, this shocks most new players.
Originally posted by Steelman31E, F, G are subjective to the situation. H is pretty obvious.
A few things you should probably know about peice values, in general:
A) Two rooks are WAY BETTER then a queen and pawn
B) Two minor peices are way better then a rook and pawn, unless those two minor peices are two knights, in which you might have a slight endgame disadvantage but will have a middle-game advantage
C) The bishop pair is better the ...[text shortened]... give yourself a queen and king, the queen side should always win, this shocks most new players.
Originally posted by DfthdThank you for that. I've only been playing for 42 years, so I was glad to receive your lesson. 😛
What you have stated is pretty much just rough guidelines. There are no real piece "values". If there were, chess would alot more simple as one would only need to consider piece value when going into the exchange. The value of pieces is lar ...[text shortened]... vice versa.
I hope I've answereded your question adaquetly=D
The approximate relative values of the pieces for "Stanley Random Chess" (SRC) are quite interesting:
King = Somewhere between 49 and infinity (minus 1). However, if the "Rule Of Sixes" is in effect then he can be invaluable.
Queen = 6.125. With the help of a Loaded Rook this may approximate more closely to 17.4. There is some debate over whether the Inverted Columbus Combination sequence can in fact raise this higher still.
Rook = 2 (or 4). Used in combination with the rather unorthodox Rolling Barrel attack the Rook may exceed 4, although this can happen only once in the course of any particular game. (Many SRC Grandmasters would of course argue that attacking too early can seriously undermine the piece's chances of attaining this higher value, especially before VH Conditions have been verified.)
Bishop = 8. If either opponent is favoured, however slightly, to win the game by Forced IMR (Inferior Material Resignation), and if both players agree, then the dark-square Bishops may take on the new value of roughly 13 for the rest of the game, or until move 40 has been reached. [Note: There is one exception to this rule which is extremely complicated and shall be ignored for the purposes of this summary.]
Knight = ? It is a known fact among Stanley Random Chess (SRC) players that the Knight's value (since the revision of the rules between 1789 - 1816, led by Sir William Blyndesworth) is quite indeterminable at most stages of the game.
Pawn = 7. This is often surprising to those new to Stanley Random Chess (SRC) and is almost always why a beginner overlooks the continual threat of the Caterpillar Manoeuvre. It is also interesting to note that immediately after a Pawn Shuffle (though usually for one move only), the humble foot-soldier may find his value placed, remarkably, nearer 12.
In the chess players handbook, by howard staunton it has more accurate values than the basic values you are taught as beginner. He rates the pieces as follows
Pawn=1.00
Knight=3.05
Bishop=3.50
Rook=5.48
Queen=9.94
I know the value changes throughout different game situations, but these average values Staunton gives hadn't been stated, and I have found them quite useful
Originally posted by asperseStauton was a loser, who ran away from Morphy, who never mentioned anything about decimal places and just kicked ass in general.
In the chess players handbook, by howard staunton it has more accurate values than the basic values you are taught as beginner. He rates the pieces as follows
Pawn=1.00
Knight=3.05
Bishop=3.50
Rook=5.48
Queen=9.94
I know the value changes throughout different game situations, but these average values Staunton gives hadn't been stated, and I have found them quite useful
the value of the pieces fluctuates throughout the game. Sometimes a pawn is worth a queen. And if you can checkmate your opponent, who cares how much material he has. That being said, there is some value to knowing the general value of the pieces, if only as a starting off point, but it's not a rigid, algabraic system. Don't forget there are other variables, such as time (tempo) and control of vital squares (position) to take into consideration.
Personally i value knights as about 2.5 pawns. Generally speaking (very generally) two bishops can be viewed as an advantage in itself, one which i will play for, given the opportunity. However, anyone encountering this little table of values must take this rule much more seriously...It is not the pieces off the board that win a game, it is the pieces on the board!!! You only have to look at a few of Tals games to see the truth of this.
http://gameknot.com/uimg/mateintwo.jpg
(A case in point! White to move, taken from gameknot player profile "power is nothing without control"😉