H. G. Muller wrote on Mon, Jan 30, 2017 10:57 PM UTC:
Larry Kaufman has shown by statistical analysis of a huge number of GM games that the game outcomes are optimally predicted by the following values: (P-N-B-R-Q):
100 - 325 - 325 - 500 - 975
with the caveat that a pair of Bishops is worth 700 (rather than 2 x 325 = 650). Of course the value of a Pawn is not defined very well; we know there are many kinds of Pawns, with very different values, from backaward / doubled / edge Pawns to centralized protected passers. The opening value of the Commoner in my tests would be about 310 on this scale.
And yes, those claiming it would be 4 are very much off.
It is true that piece values in themselves are already a highly simplified approximation to reality, and that the power of an army cannot be written as a plain sum over its individual pieces. The Bishop pair already shows that. The 3Q vs 7N (which was in the presence of Pawns, BTW) is another example of that.
Larry Kaufman has shown by statistical analysis of a huge number of GM games that the game outcomes are optimally predicted by the following values: (P-N-B-R-Q):
100 - 325 - 325 - 500 - 975
with the caveat that a pair of Bishops is worth 700 (rather than 2 x 325 = 650). Of course the value of a Pawn is not defined very well; we know there are many kinds of Pawns, with very different values, from backaward / doubled / edge Pawns to centralized protected passers. The opening value of the Commoner in my tests would be about 310 on this scale.
And yes, those claiming it would be 4 are very much off.
It is true that piece values in themselves are already a highly simplified approximation to reality, and that the power of an army cannot be written as a plain sum over its individual pieces. The Bishop pair already shows that. The 3Q vs 7N (which was in the presence of Pawns, BTW) is another example of that.