Single Comment

Aberg variation of Capablanca's Chess. Different setup and castling rules. (10x8, Cells: 80) [All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]

H.G.Muller wrote on Mon, Apr 21, 2008 07:10 AM UTC:

Why would I have to add Larry Kaufman to your list of 'insufferably stupid
people'? In the page you quote he has C-A only 50cP, very close to my
25cP, while having R-B at the usual value of 200cP.

Let me remind you that I was not originally discussing your theoretical
model at all, but the piece values given by Hans Aberg in this
Chessvariants item, and how they violate empirical observation. It was
YOUR claim that the empirical observations were at odds with the
predictions of your model, and by inference thus falsified the latter.

If you now want to retract that claim, and replace it by one that says
that the piece values I observed (P=85, N=300, B=350(+40 for pair), R=475,
A=875, C=900, Q=950) are exactly what your model predicts, it _might_ be
useful to look at your model. But not before. I wonder why you expect
anyone to read 58 pages of low-density information that you yourself claim
to give wrong results. Of course I have not done such 'homework'. Why
would I have the slightest interest in wrong piece values, if I already
have a quite accurate set of good piece values? It is your brain child,
and if you claim it to be at odds with the facts, I believe you on your
word!

You have been a bit ambivalent in your claims, to say the least, first
fiving a list of piece values where A~B+N, and later claiming there was no
discrepancy with A>>B+N in the opening setup. This is why I asked you to
take a clear stance on some very specific positions involving A vs C and A
vs B+N imbalances. And of course you could not do it...

But to conclude this discussion:
people that want to play Capablanca-type Chess games, or have their
computer programs play such games, guided by piece values, had better use
the values I give, if they want to win any games. If the values given by
your model are the same, OK, then they could use those too. If not, by
using the latter as guidance, they will have to get used to playing losing
Chess. Such are the facts of life, no matter how 'flawed',
'inconsistent' and 'illogical' you consider them to be. Life sucks, so
better get used to it!