I am not an expert on stockfish source code, but my understanding is the following.
It is true, that the 1 piece equals 3 pawns approach is pretty accurate, surprisingly so. However as you are probably aware, when evaluating a position, we consider many other aspects as well, such as piece activity, space, king safety, etc. The difference however ...
The answer by MikroDel gives the commonly-used "Reinfeld values" of pawn=1, bishop=knight=3, rook=5, and queen=9 (kings are essentially worth an infinite number of points, because the game ends if it is lost). While this is a good guide, chess is rarely that simple. Many books will give the value of bishops as 3.5 instead of 3, simply because they are often ...
Here is a quick an dirty analysis based on the "Million Base" PGN database. I did this in a bit of a rush, so there may well be errors in my programming or logic. Please don't use it for anything too serious. Update - Note: Actually, I've just noticed I made a mistake with the data set, and limited it to the first 1 million records. I'll post an update ...
blundering a full piece
being a full piece down
are typical expressions in English chess literature.
With the little word "full", the author wants to make clear that the player has not only lost the piece, but that they also received no consolation material in return, i.e. one or two pawns. An alternative expression is "blundering a ...
I am not an arbiter, but here's what the rules say:
Rule 4.3 (emphasis added)
if the player having the move touches on the chessboard, with the intention of moving or capturing
I think it should be clear to any reasonable person that picking up a piece that was knocked down by a spectator does not imply intent to move.
Perhaps the arbiter went with an ...
Rooks are more suitable for open games where there are open lines. Knight are better for more closed games. Knights have the benefit of jumping over other pieces and rooks have the ability to move quickly whereas knights move very slowly.
Also, remember that you can't checkmate with just a Knight and King, so Rooks are probably more powerful in the endgame ...
Each player has a white square on their near right corner. The queen goes on the square of her own color; as a result, the kings and queens face each other.
rnbqkbnr/pppppppp/8/8/8/8/PPPPPPPP/RNBQKBNR w KQkq - 0 1
When FIDE tournament rules apply: If you displace one or more pieces – knocking off the board, intentionally or unintentionally, is a displacement – you have to re-establish the correct position on your own time (Art. 7.4.1). While it is not specifically mentioned, I would say that you have to do this at once; if you wait, that could be regarded as an ...
The relevant section from the rules would be Article 7.4.1:
If a player displaces one or more pieces, he shall re-establish the
correct position in his own time.
The rules do not specify a certain procedure, but what I have seen happening in practice is: Player A knocks a piece over on his opponent's time. Player B is now allowed to press the clock to ...
Pawn - 1 point
Bishop, Knight - 3 Pawns
Rook - 5 Pawns
Queen - 9 Pawns
The evaluation depends on the position.
In some situation you will find it equal or good to give you Rook and Pawn (6 Pawns) for Bishop and Knight (6 Pawns). But it is also possible that two light pieces are more valuable than Rook + Pawn.
The value of pieces given to you will be a ...
According to the Laws of Chess:
7.4.1 If a player displaces one or more pieces, he shall re-establish the correct position in his own time.
Of course, in this situation, it is not the player who displaced one or more pieces. I believe that another rule would therefore be in effect:
7.6 If, during a game it is found that any piece has been displaced ...
There is always a situation where one piece can be better than another.
Rooks are superior to knights because they control more squares, and have more mobility. Also since they control whole ranks and files, they are able to bound the enemy pieces while knights and bishops are much more limited in that regard.
I found an interesting page featuring the results of some data mining on a sample of 4,226,520 games, and from which answers to your questions can be extracted, at least for that large sample of games, which is probably reasonably reflective of what happens in general.
According to the numbers there, the average game has a ply count of 57.63 (i.e. total ...
I don't think "full piece" means anything beyond "piece" but "full" was added for emphasis. This is to highlight the magnitude of the blunder, since many blunders are smaller than a piece; for example, one can blunder a pawn or the Exchange (rook for knight or bishop), or trade a piece for a pawn or two.
The commonly used terms to distinguish queen/rook vs ...
First the board must be correct.
Put the white square in the right hand corner nearest to you.
Then put the queens on their color in the center of the board on the row closest to you. White queen on white. Black queen on Black.
Finally put the kings next to the queens in the center of the board.
That link you gave is not that useful.
For the rest of ...
There's a great analysis/article about this by GM Larry Kaufman available here.
Pawn = 1
Knight = Bishop = 3.25
Bishop Pair = 0.5
Rook = 5
Queen = 9.75
There's also a lot more detail in the article about what situations favor which groups of pieces. For example, when B+N is better than R+P, or when Q+P is better than R+R, etc.
When did this happen? Because there is no reasonable interpretation of the current rules by which a TD should have upheld the touch-move claim.
I went back and looked at the 3rd Edition rulebook, and it doesn't say that a piece has to be "on the chessboard" to count for touch-move. So in 1987, a TD who was being a "strict constructionist" about the rules ...
Unicode has chess piece icons in it.
This means you could look for a font which includes the chess symbol unicode block and has a license which fits your purpose. Most fonts are in TrueType format which is already vector-based and can be converted to SVG with Apache SVG Font Converter. This would mean ...
You need to understand that the point system is only a rough guideline meant to assist you in evaluating positions or in deciding on potential exchanges. Many factors, particularly the pawn structure, influences how valuable pieces are. Rooks tend to be better in open positions with fewer pieces/pawns on the board, bishops can get hindered in closed ...
It's possible to use logistic regression (a statistical method) to estimate the predictive values. This way, you wouldn't need anyone to try the game at all.
http://www.sumsar.net/blog/2015/06/big-data-and-chess has the details. I personally tried the method, and it was a good start.
The method estimates the value of each piece by predicting how they ...
Please note that those values are "abstract", later to be modified by the specifics of the position. For example, even though a knight appears 0.8 pawns less valuable than a bishop, it could be that bigger bonuses are awarded to well-placed knights than for well-placed bishops, turning the balance around.
It's also worth noting that the "3 pawns equal a ...
Here are some things to consider when thinking about the strength of a knight vs. a rook (and much of this goes for other pieces in relation to the knight as well).
At the height of their power a knight can only ever attack 8 squares. On an open board, if placed in the a1 square, the worst placement for a rook, a rook can attack 14. ...
I agree with Xaisoft, and just want to add that in an open game, a rook can be very effective to reduce the opponent's pawns and keep the opponent's king "in place". While it is true that knights can be mobile in a close game, they are also very predictable. That being said, personally I'd be happy to see an opponent lose both of his/her knights.
This answer is extended from my comment to Ross Milikan's answer to your question Numerical FEN writing.
There is a website devoted to counting the number of legal positions up to equivalence with given number of pieces. Currently they have results for positions with 2 to 8 pieces.
Trading for the sake of trading is bound to be in your opponent's favour more often than not.
Generally speaking, recapturing often activates the piece that can capture back. Consider two rooks on an open file, both protected by another, pretty passive rook on the a-file. The side that trades loses control of the open file and is stuck with the a-file rook, ...
Ralph Betza tried to do this and he wrote a series of six articles about this, starting with this one: http://www.chessvariants.com/piececlopedia.dir/ideal-and-practical-values.html
Ideas to determine the piece values include the following factors
average mobility (clearly the dominant factor, but hard to bring it down to numbers)
type of ...