Upgrade to Chess.com Premium!

how many centipawns is white ahead @ first move?


  • 11 months ago · Quote · #21

    zborg

    BulgarianMachine wrote:
    zborg wrote:

    A tempo is worth about 1/3 of a pawn.  It ain't rocket science.  Sorry.

    As for the OP's earlier thread -- 1 and 1/2 pawns is generally considered a "winning advantage."  End of story.

    is the first one a general statement or just for the first move?

    and 1 pawn is not enough?

    Can you pls show me your GM certificate?

    Give this mindless thread a rest.  So tiresome, the OP.

    No, one pawn is many times not enough to win.  Get off your arse and simply look it up in a good chess book.  Duh ??

  • 11 months ago · Quote · #22

    varelse1

    There should be a movie, named "The Human Centipawn"

  • 11 months ago · Quote · #23

    BulgarianMachine

    zborg wrote:
    BulgarianMachine wrote:
    zborg wrote:

    A tempo is worth about 1/3 of a pawn.  It ain't rocket science.  Sorry.

    As for the OP's earlier thread -- 1 and 1/2 pawns is generally considered a "winning advantage."  End of story.

    is the first one a general statement or just for the first move?

    and 1 pawn is not enough?

    Can you pls show me your GM certificate?

    Give this mindless thread a rest.  So tiresome, the OP.

    No, one pawn is many times not enough to win.  Get off your arse and simply look it up in a good chess book.  Duh ??

    let me makes this more clear: I'm well aware that 1 pawn sometimes is not enough. it should be obvious though that the evaluation of these positions is 0.00. my question however was how many centipawns is enough to secure a win no matter what the opponent plays. no need to be rude, dipshit.

  • 11 months ago · Quote · #24

    Xilmi

    It is 24. But only if white opens with d4. Otherwise it's like 13.

  • 11 months ago · Quote · #25

    TheGrobe

    In all likelihood, zero.

  • 11 months ago · Quote · #26

    zborg

    1.5 pawns is generally considered a "winning advantage," ceteris paribus.

    How dense do you have to be to not understand this simple rule of thumb ??

    What planet does the OP hail from ??  Such a windbag.  Please spare us.

  • 11 months ago · Quote · #27

    BulgarianMachine

    zborg wrote:

    1.5 pawns is generally considered a "winning advantage," ceteris paribus.

    How dense do you have to be to not understand this simply rule of thumb ??

    What planet does the OP hail from ??  Such a windbag.  Please spare us.

    wrong thread, einstein. btw, i seem to remember at least a couple of occasions where a GM resigned a game where the evaluation was 1.2 something in his opponents favor, and everybody agreed it's a clear win.

    doesn't that contradict your minimum requirement of 1.5 pawns, genius?

  • 11 months ago · Quote · #28

    zborg

    You have started 10 moronic thread is just the past two weeks.  Here's your latest -- 

    http://www.chess.com/forum/view/general/the-denver-broncos-should-replace-peyton-manning-with-magnus-carlsen

    Your prose speak for themselves.  Have a Nice Day.

  • 11 months ago · Quote · #29

    TheGrobe

    zborg wrote:

    1.5 pawns is generally considered a "winning advantage," ceteris paribus.

    How dense do you have to be to not understand this simply rule of thumb ??

    What planet does the OP hail from ??  Such a windbag.  Please spare us.

    BulgarianMachine wrote:

    wrong thread, einstein. btw, i seem to remember at least a couple of occasions where a GM resigned a game where the evaluation was 1.2 something in his opponents favor, and everybody agreed it's a clear win.

    doesn't that contradict your minimum requirement of 1.5 pawns, genius?

    Not only does he not understand the rule of thumb, he appears not to understand what a rule of thumb even is.

  • 11 months ago · Quote · #30

    zborg

    New sock puppets too.

  • 11 months ago · Quote · #31

    Xilmi

    zborg wrote:

    New sock puppets too.

    I miss the old ones!

  • 11 months ago · Quote · #32

    MathiasKux

    You are playing in two universes and putting things into conflict.

    In human play, one pawn, or even less may be enough to win, even in GM level, I am not talking about score, I am talking about material.

    In Engine play, or evaluation, when the position is won, give your engine some time and he will (most probably) find mate eventually.

    When you use computers to analyse a given position, the score it shows does not reflect the exact score in the given position. That is due to:

    1. Engines are made by humans, who don't play chess perfectly.

    2. Engines are super strong tacticians, but lack strategic view.

    We all use engines to study becouse it gives us a fast, easy and impartial evaluation of a position we encounter, not becouse it reflects the truth of what is going on the board.

    So, the (last) question in this thread: "minimum score to force a win with perfect defense" has no answer. First, becouse no one plays perceft chess (not even engines), so we can't evaluate the position correctly. Second, becouse +1 may be winning in a position (king and pawn vs king), while +38 may lead to a drawn (huge material advantage but the engine didn't reach the depth necessary to spot it).

  • 11 months ago · Quote · #33

    TheGrobe

    Xilmi wrote:
    zborg wrote:

    New sock puppets too.

    I miss the old ones!

     

    We could do without them altogether.


Back to Top

Post your reply: