George Duke wrote on Thu, Jul 24, 2008 05:08 PM UTC:
Ignoring PGN logs, we notice infrequent castling both g1 and h1. Over 600
games' 54% to 46% shows remarkable equality. Whoever first loses a R or F
indicates whether R>F or F>R per side maybe 80% of the time. Also Standings
tell whether it is odd or even game, as to which is F>R and R>F. In value,
Rook is to Falcon as Bishop is to Knight, apparently. Characterize N,B & R
as interacting. Likewise, N,B & F interact. Whereas opposites Falcon and
Rook contrast, rather than interact. Even same-side R&F, keeping their
contrasts, are hard imaginatively to try to get to ''interact.''
Orthogonal Rook's and multi-path Falcon's different ways are at each
other's throat ever on opposite sides. The programs cautiously avoid
mid-term Falcon forks in fear of logic of intervening blocks, that fail to
materialize in real-world calculation by opposite number. Also,
point-counting human player would tend to grab unprotected Pawn oftener,
using personal 1.1 or more for the Pawn. [ Und deines Geistes hoechster Feuerflug Hat schon am Gleichnis, hat am Bild genug. --Goethe ]
