Positional Score

I played this game as Black in Battle Creek last week & was asked by my opponent how I thought the computer (Fritz) would evaluate the current position. Black stood better is what I figured. He disagreed and was curious what Fritz would think. So, here it is....























White is numerically ahead in material (31-29), his pieces are active, influential, and well-placed. This image is after Fritz evaluated at a rate of 1.7 million possible resulting positions. After 20 minutes of thinking, Fritz says Black is winning by almost 2 pawns -+ (1.69).

The computer can't tell us why it thinks that way - we're left to guess. We know it considers material, space, forcing continuations, activity, and numerous other factors in its analysis. Obviously, Black isn't better here because of material. lol

Here's why I think the computer evaluates the position favorably for Black: Despite White's material advantage and activity, I figure Black to be standing better because of White's crippled & weak structure and the semi-open files all around White's somewhat-exposed king. There is a ton of tension in the position and Black's pieces aren't so badly placed to justify a plus score for White.

I suspect any master would glance at this position and say it's a technical win for Black. Trade all the pieces off and Black's pawn structure beats White's (Fritz says Black is up -+1.54 with pawns only). Given reason and statistical odds with all things being equal (meaning both sides of equal strength), the best that White could do here is draw ....theoretically. On the other hand, for Black to convert this advantage into a win is easier said than done. The position is very dynamic. Still.... it's like a ground & pound fight. White's outside passer makes it good chances for both sides. I'll set it up for the computer to play this out a hundred times or so & see which side wins. My guess is that Black wins more than White.

It's encouraging to have correctly evaluated the position as better for Black just as the computer did, but it's difficult to explain exactly how the White side could be so active, ahead in material and yet - still losing the game. This goes along with Kasparov's "material, time, quality" theorem and it's just another part of the fascinating beauty and mystique of chess.