21 Apr 11
3 edits
Let's suppose we were to rate the king based purely on it's ability to move, the same we judge the other pieces. How much would the King be worth? Would you say it would be worth more or less than the knight?
Based on nothing else but the King's ability to move, I'd say it's worth maybe 2.5 points.
21 Apr 11
Originally posted by vivifyA little more than 4 pawns, per the author of "Elements of Positional Evaluation."
Let's suppose we were to rate the king based purely on it's ability to move, the same we judge the other pieces. How much would the King be worth? Would you say it would be worth more or less than the knight?
Based on nothing else but the King's ability to move, I'd say it's worth maybe 2.5 points.
21 Apr 11
1 edit
If there was a piece which moved like the king did, I've always thought it would make a great defensive tool. Based my experience with endgames, the King's a rather sluggish peice if you need to rely on it for offense. However, I do agree that it's possibly the peice to get around tight pawn defense, since it has the best freedom of movement, aside of from the queen.
And Mad Rook, I'll have to read that book. Sound's interesting.
- Joined
- 18 Jan 07
- Moves
- 12477
22 Apr 11
Originally posted by vivifyAnd yet, experts generally agree that in the endgame, when it does not have to hide in a corner, it has an attacking power only little less than a rook, and more than the average minor piece. It may not be fast, but it covers everything around it.
If there was a piece which moved like the king did, I've always thought it would make a great defensive tool. Based my experience with endgames, the King's a rather sluggish peice if you need to rely on it for offense. However, I do agree that it's possibly the peice to get around tight pawn defense, since it has the best freedom of movement, aside of from the queen.
For comparison (a trivial one, but you might get some idea): you can't mate a lone king with any single piece (i.e., not using your king to help), not even a queen. You can mate with a queen and any other single piece, even a pawn if it's well-placed. Without queens, you can mate with a rook and a rook, or a rook and a king, but not with a rook and a minor piece (try it; they don't cover enough squares), and a rook and a pawn only works by promoting the pawn. So in that case, a king is worth as much as a rook, and more than a bishop or knight.
Richard
22 Apr 11
Originally posted by vivifychessicle is right - I was showing a final position that can't be forced. The knight cannot help to get the king into the corner *and* be ready to defend the rook. Compare KNN vs K for a similar case.
^ why not?
(To post a position use the "fen" tags as shown in the reply to my post. It uses Forsyth notation)
23 Apr 11
Originally posted by vivifyInteresting question, I'd say a 4
Let's suppose we were to rate the king based purely on it's ability to move, the same we judge the other pieces. How much would the King be worth? Would you say it would be worth more or less than the knight?
Based on nothing else but the King's ability to move, I'd say it's worth maybe 2.5 points.
