Originally posted by KunsooI assume you meant three minor pieces (bishops and knights). If one (or more) of the pieces is a rook, then the three pieces will almost always be superior to the queen, unless there's something specific about the position. Queen v 3 minor pieces is more equal and will depend on various factors in the position (pawn structure, how well the minor pieces combine, the activity of the queen, the relative safety of the kings etc). Generally speaking I should think there may be slightly more positions where the three pieces are superior, but as I've just said, it really does depend on the nature of the position.
Which would you prefer an open midgame? Closed?
Well, I guess it couldn't really be closed.
Well, which would you prefer? Feel free to qualify.
Originally posted by English TalI'm assuming you are talking about Game 2671911.
It's a fascinating game. I'm playing someone with a higher rating, and I'd had his castled rook trapped on his backline by my unexpected pawn move on move 14!
(I knew I shouldn't have done it, but it was so tempting that I did it and pm'd him that although it wasn't the strongest move I simply couldn't resist it against such a strong player!)
I thought ...[text shortened]... ow, but as it happens its settled down to K+R+5P vs K+N+N+B+2P after a rearguard action.
That really was an interesting game; that rook trap was great.
I look forward to seeing the result.
- Joined
- 03 Feb 07
- Moves
- 209392
Originally posted by Northern LadYes, I meant three minor pieces.
I assume you meant three minor pieces (bishops and knights). If one (or more) of the pieces is a rook, then the three pieces will almost always be superior to the queen, unless there's something specific about the position. Queen v 3 minor pieces is more equal and will depend on various factors in the position (pawn structure, how well the minor pieces ...[text shortened]... eces are superior, but as I've just said, it really does depend on the nature of the position.
Out of boredom, I set up the position below in Fritz 7 and made Fritz play itself. It resulted in a draw.
Starting Position:
[Event "Blitz 10' "]
[Site "?"]
[Date "????.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Fritz 7"]
[Black "wittywonka"]
[Result "1/2-1/2"]
[SetUp "1"]
[FEN "1kq5/ppp5/8/8/8/8/PPP5/1K1BBN2 w - - 0 0"]
[PlyCount "?"]
[TimeControl "600"]
1. Bd2 Qe6 2. Ne3 Qd6 3. Bc1 a6 4. c4 c6 5. a3 Kc7 6. b4 b6 7. Be2 Kb7 8. Bf1 c5 9. b5 Qg6+ 10. Kb2 axb5 11. cxb5 Kc8 12. Bd2 Kd8 13. Bc4 Qe4 14. a4 Qd4+ 15. Kc1 Kc8 16. Kc2 Qe4+ 17. Kd1 Qh1+ 18. Be1 Qh8 19. Bd3 Qa1+ 20. Kd2 Qb2+ 21. Nc2 Qa2 22. Kc3 Qxa4 23.
Bc4 Qa8 24. Bd2 Qe4 25. Ne3 Kb8 26. Bc1 Qd4+ 27. Kc2 Kc7 28. Bd2 Kb7 29. Kd1 Qa1+ 30. Ke2 Qd4 31. Bb3 Kb8 32. Kd1 Qd3 33. Bc4 d4 34. Ke1 Qh4+ 35. Kd1 Qd4 36. Kc2 Kb7 37. Bb3 Qe4+ 38. Kc1 Qd4 39. Nc4 Ka7 40. Nb2 Qg1+ 41. Kc2 Qg6+ 42. Kc1 1/2-1/2
I watched the annotation of the game relatively closely, and Fritz never went above 0.80 on the positional analysis. Around half way through or so, it went down to 0.20 and below, so I offered a draw at move 42 and Fritz accepted.
If I get bored again tomorrow (😛), I'll run it with three knights.
Originally posted by wittywonkaThe draw in the above position is assured because of the pawn position (3v3 on same side of board). However, if you added a white pawn on say h2, the position would almost certainly be winning for white. But if instead you put a black pawn on h7 (so black has the extra pawn), white should be able to hold the position quite easily. This demonstrates that BBNvQ in an open position is better for the three pieces.
Out of boredom, I set up the position below in Fritz 7 and made Fritz play itself. It resulted in a draw.
Starting Position:
[fen]1kq5/ppp5/8/8/8/8/PPP5/1K1BBN2[/fen]
[Event "Blitz 10' "]
[Site "?"]
[Date "????.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Fritz 7"]
[Black "wittywonka"]
[Result "1/2-1/2"]
[SetUp "1"]
[FEN "1kq5/ppp5/8/8/8/8/PPP5/1K1BBN2 w - .
If I get bored again tomorrow (😛), I'll run it with three knights.
As for the fairly rare situation of three minor pieces for a queen, the statistics put the equilibrium as three minors equal queen plus half a pawn, although the sample size is below my stated minimum. Conventional master opinion actually favors the minors by a full pawn or even a bit more, though I think this is because they are usually talking about opening variations rather than endings (the minor pieces are worth relatively more with rooks on the board, in my opinion, due to the "redundancy of major pieces"😉. Note that when talking about three minors vs. a queen, the side with the minors usually also enjoys the advantage of the bishop pair.
This is probably the main reason that three minor pieces are generally superior to a queen; without the bishop pair they should be evenly matched in my opinion, but such cases are too rare to test this hypothesis. In the even rarer case of two rooks vs. three minor pieces, the limited statistics give the minor pieces a slight edge provided they include the bishop pair, which they usually do.
Here also master opinion is a bit more favorable to the minor pieces. As for queen and pawns vs. rook and two minor pieces, the statistics put the fair value at 1¾ pawns, whereas conventional master thinking puts it a bit above two pawns. In general, master opinion tends to value the queen a bit lower than the statistics imply. This may be because masters are usually writing about positions where the kings are not exposed, but in actual games the imbalance often occurs with the kings wide open to checks, which of course favors the queen.
http://mywebpages.comcast.net/danheisman/Articles/evaluation_of_material_imbalance.htm
I like having a B.pair and a knight, they are fun to work with. The queen needs room to move and weaknesses to penetrate, with a knight you can access squares the queen might not be able to. I think 3 minor pieces are a bit more flexible if you are talking about the b.pair, however, it depends entirely on the situation. Overall, I would probably take the minor pieces on slightly more occassions.
This position actually resulted in a win for black when Fritz played itself. It took 90+ moves, but black pulled it out.
Initially, Fritz analyzed the position as =/+ at -0.50.
After move 10 or so, however, it went down to -/+ at 1.00.
I think black won mainly because his h-pawn diverted the three minor pieces away from their pawns.
Eventually, the situation came down to K+Q vs. K+B+B+N (black sacrificed his pawn to force white into an awkward position), but black's queen and king had a far superior position, which led to a K+Q vs. K+B+B position. Soon after, black won a bishop, and checkmated easily.
Originally posted by wittywonkaI simply don't believe that Fritz will have played this endgame right. White should make sure his two bishops and king are kept safe and well-placed and not worry excessively about the h-pawn, which he can sacrifice his knight for when the time comes. The two bishops should be able to hold the queen as long as white has set his pieces up well. Fritz is too materialistic to understand any of this.
[fen]1kq5/ppp4p/8/8/8/8/PPP5/1KBBN3[/fen]
This position actually resulted in a win for black when Fritz played itself. It took 90+ moves, but black pulled it out.
Initially, Fritz analyzed the position as =/+ at -0.50.
After move 10 or so, however, it went down to -/+ at 1.00.
I think black won mainly because his h-pawn diverted the three min which led to a K+Q vs. K+B+B position. Soon after, black won a bishop, and checkmated easily.