echecs06 [#71]:
"Eberulf, the King is NOT a normal piece so the discussion is a mute point. Got it?"
Judging from the amount of opinion expressed in this thread it is not a mute point, or moot either, at least to those commenting on it.
To understand the subjunctive mood, ("If such and such were the case...") is a mark of higher intelligence. Most of the animal kingdom cannot manage it.
echecs06 [#71]:
"Eberulf, the King is NOT a normal piece so the discussion is a mute point. Got it?"
Judging from the amount of opinion expressed in this thread it is not a mute point, or moot either, at least to those commenting on it.
To understand the subjunctive mood, ("If such and such were the case...") is a mark of higher intelligence. Most of the animal kingdom cannot manage it.
Yes
Then how do you win the game?
Maybe the point is moo.
I don't understand what you mean by a "normal" piece. the King is a normal piece, a King, by definition, a unique piece, made unique by it's ability to move to any square around it, provided it is not lost immediately, and its value to the game - in that if you lose it, you lose the game.
so, what is the logic involved in defining it as "not a normal piece" ? and what is it not?
it is not a rook, obviously, nor is it a bishop nor a knight, nor a queen nor a pawn. A king is a normal king. period.
a normal piece would be a piece that can put itself in "check" imagine an endgame with 2 white kings v 1 black king and 1 of the white kings is normal in that it is permitted to put itself in check- would it be quicker with the 2 white kings thus described to mate than with a white king and rook? if so the normal king is worth more than a rook at that stage of the game possibly?
Based on the old "point" value system that puts a pawn at 1, a knight or bishop at about 3, a rook at 5, and a queen at 9, I would put a king at 4. Of course, as with all such evaluations, particular positions can enhace or detract from the value of a piece.
its funny to see that when is explained several times that it is not about a normal king but about another piece moving like a king and almost everybody keeps going on about the real king, therefore almost all post are useless and is there no reason of giving it points or any other comparison since the question is not understood.
iknow you said if it were a normal piece, but off the board (checkmate) machines can rate anywhere from between 40-250 points.
iknow you said if it were a normal piece, but off the board (checkmate) machines can rate anywhere from between 40-250 points.
Interesting, I was going to say 42.
Yay popular goo goo ga ga!
For example of a normal piece, play with the queen moving only by one square, and keep all others rules standard (in fact this was the original move of the queen).
Assuming a "king" in endgame, i would say 4.5, by no way less than 4.
Try once to promote a pawn supported by a bishop, a knight or even a rook and blocked by opponent's king, while yours is somewhere else on the chessboard. Then try to block a pawn with bishop / knight / rook when supported by the king. You will understand !
AFAIK Wikipedia says that the dynamic power of the king is 3.5 points. The only problem of course is that the an exposed king is a tempo factory for the opponent, like an exposed queen to a certain extent.
i vote two points.
while i appreciate the value of a king in the end game, i think the rest of the game is probably as important in judging the value.
i don't think a king piece would be as valuable, even in the endgame, because a king piece cannot check a king unless it is protected. if it were merely king and king piece vs. king, forcing mate is likely. but if the endgame had a few pawns involved on opposite sides of the board the king piece would be fairly weak compared to other minor pieces. try to use a king piece to cover passed pawns on both the a and h files compared to any other minor piece.
i would also think that if it were up against a bishop and a king i would think this would be a draw, although i can also see help mates since the king piece has to stand next to the king all the time. it would have more chance vs. a knight.
so, i would not want to trade any of my minor pieces for a king piece.
3.5 is the right value for king.......
courtesy - yaseer seirwan
I say 3 points, kings, knights, and bishops are pretty much worth the same, although it depends on the position always.
looks like you can only find out playing several times a game set up with an extra king invulnerable to check replacing first a king side bishop, then replacing the queen side bishop, followed by replacing a king side knight then queens side, then king side rook then queen side rook and see till what extend you'd like to keep replacing it. If you never want a piece replaced its less then 3 points if you want it replacing the knights but not the bishops it's 3 points, if you want to replace all but rooks its 4 points, just queen side rook or king side rook it's 5 and if you never want to give up the extra king it is worth more than 5. Actually quite interesting and i think I am going to try for fun, will take a while before getting used to it though.
So Rich, you're equating the worth of a king to just 2 pawns? I'd take the king anyday.
Hmmm and a rook is worth 5 pawns, yet i would most likely (i say most likely because it depends on the position) take the 5 pawns.
I think the King's value at the start of the game would probably be quite low like 1.5 or 2. But as the game progresses and less pieces are on the board (particularly the endgame), the King's value would rise. How exactly can you even use the King in the opening? And where is the best spot for the King? Do you want an e4, d4, Nf3, Nf6 setup and have the King at e3 or d3? It seems nice supporting the two pawns but the King can also get in the way, and it doesn't help with a pawn-push. I think in the opening the King would be completely useless but towards the middle-game it can sneak up to certain squares and help support pawn breaks and such. In the endgame I feel like the King can be quite powerful depending on the pawn structur. Like a bishop and knight would dominate the King if the pieces are spread out. But the King would dominate both knight and bishop in a clogged up pawn structure.