Houdini wrote:peter wrote:Maybe we should change to email not to overcharge this thread here?
Please continue to post here, it's fascinating.
From an engine developer's point of view, I'd love to see some similar positions (but with a different pawn configuration) where the Bishop side is - nearly - wining but our engines only give a very small advantage (say 0.2).
Robert
Hi Robert.
Posting too much these days, but when you are bored, obviously, there is nothing else to do but post on a forum.
Removing the g2 and g7 pawns and the f2 and f7 pawns from the main diagram (and placing the white h pawn on h2 in the first case, so that it is not attacked by the bishop) would be two such positions. Both should be won for black. In distinction to the main diagram, the bishop side will be favoured by:
- bigger number of groups (isolated pawns)
- bigger distance in between the pawns of the defending side on both wings
- inability for the weaker side to construct a fortress
Placing the white pawn on a3 instead of b3 from the main diagram should also be a position, won for black, as the distance between the pawns of the defending side on both wings increases and the are no chances for a fortress.
Placing the black pawn on b7 instead of a7 from the main diagram already increases white's drawing chances, as symmetrical pawn structures generally favour the weaker side.
Larger blocked pawn structures on the king side (white pawns on f3,g4,h5; black pawns on f4,g5,h6) would favour the weaker side, as the objects of attack would decrease to just the base pawn of the chain (f3). At the same time, such a structure is an ideal fortress.
Blocked pawns, even when they are not part of a bigger structure (for example white pawns on f3 and h4; black pawns on f4 and h5), will always favour the knight, as blocked pawns are attached to a square of particular colour, and, while the bishop can only access squares of only one colour, the knight is able to access squares of both colours. Btw, the above-mentioned position is an ideal example for a fortress on the king side: all squares are either controlled by friendly pawns, or occupied by enemy blocked pawns, h4 controls g5, on h5 there is a blocked pawn, g4 is controlled by f3, on f4 there is a blocked pawn and e4 is controlled by f3, so no passage there.
Playing 1...a5 on the first move for black (if tactically justified; probably not, I did not count tempos, just a principled decision) would make out of b3 a semi-static object (meaning that upon advancing it could be captured), and such pawns are more vulnerable; besides, a static pawn on a square the colour of the bishop will always be welcome for the bishop side.
Having advantage on the side with the lower number of pawns is always more welcome than having advantage (presumably space advantage) on the other side, as the resistance faced is smaller; just along the same lines a passer would be more welcome than a potential passer, because the potential passer still has to become a passer.
But, of course, one can only be certain when the game is played out. As you know much better than me, the interplay of different factors can completely change the importance of any single one of them.
Sorry again for posting, probably meaningless, but again, when you are bored, there is nothing else to do but post on a forum
.
Lyudmil
