Queens vs Knights

[Lyudmil Tsvetkov]

No point in testing that, it's fairly obvious since trading Q for 2N, or even 3Q for 5N, leaves the Knight side without mate potential, and the Queens are strong enough that Black cannot avoid such a trade.

Actually it is not so obvious that the Queens are strong enough for that. After 4 QueeNy self-play games it is 3.5-0.5 for the Knights. QueeNy does strive for Q-for-2N trades with the Queens, but with equal tactical ability it just cannot find a way to force any before the Knights can inflict damage. Funny enough the first thing the Knights see typically seems to be a quite complex 2Q-for-3N trade! It is biased to ignore any Q-for-2N opportunities, but thinks 2Q-for-3N is a good deal (2*9.5 for 3*5). You then immediately end up in 4N vs. Q, which (in the kind of compact positions you typically convert to) should be an easy win for the Knights.

Unfortunately it is absolutely clueless for how to win KNNNNKQ, and often aimlessly wanders the Knight pack to one side of the board, while the enemy King is at the other side. I suppose a strong attractive evaluation term between the Kings would solve this. If it happens to wander close, a mate threat comes within the horizon, typically delayed by a final Q-for-N trade, and a KNNNK mate.

So I get the impression that even without Pawns it is an easy win for the Knights.

Impressive, and somewhat counter-intuitive. Of course, intuition is unneeded in the presence of actual data.

he is lying about it, or his engine is nuts.

it is impossible not to draw that, but you can easily check that yourself.

[Lyudmil Tsvetkov]

as said, and tested in practice, in pure case scenario, 7Ns equal 3Qs.

I have played many games like that, and all games end in a draw.

[pgn][Event "Shootout (Stockfish864POPCNT, Blitz 1m)"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "????.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "New game"]
[Black "?"]
[Result "1/2-1/2"]
[SetUp "1"]
[FEN "2nnknn1/3nnn2/8/8/8/8/8/2QQKQ2 w - - 0 1"]
[PlyCount "165"]

1. Qf2 {7.37/15 6} Ngf6 {6.62/17 4} 2. Qg1 {6.16/15 2 (Qa4)} Ncd6 {5.93/18 5
(Nfe6)} 3. Kf1 {5.65/17 1} Nfe6 {5.03/17 2} 4. Qb3 {4.75/16 2 (Qa3)} Nde4 {4.
34/16 2} 5. Qh3 {4.27/15 1} Ned5 {4.25/19 2} 6. Qc2 {4.23/16 1 (Qb2)} Nef4 {4.
04/19 1} 7. Qa3 {4.00/18 1} Nec3 {3.95/20 2} 8. Qcf2 {4.07/18 0} Nde5 {3.90/21
1} 9. Qg7 {3.85/19 1} Nfe6 {3.82/22 2} 10. Qfxf6 {3.89/19 1 (Qgxf6)} Nxf6 {3.
83/21 1} 11. Qxf6 {3.77/19 1} Nd5 {3.70/19 1} 12. Qf5 {3.79/20 2} Nef4 {3.58/
22 2} 13. Kg1 {3.58/20 1 (Qa7)} Nde6 {3.28/20 2} 14. Qc2 {3.43/19 1 (Qe4)} Nfg5
{3.08/21 1} 15. Qa7 {3.08/22 1} Ndc7 {3.08/24 1} 16. Qf5 {3.08/24 1 (Qaa4+)}
Ned3 {3.08/26 2} 17. Qb8+ {3.08/23 0 (Qf6)} Kd7 {3.08/27 3} 18. Qb6 {2.93/25 4}
Ncd5 {2.86/26 4} 19. Qa7+ {2.79/20 0} Kd6 {2.79/25 2} 20. Qa3+ {2.79/24 2
(Qa6+)} N5b4 {2.38/26 3} 21. Kh1 {1.52/21 3} Nf3 {1.70/21 1} 22. Qa7 {1.35/19 0
} Nbd5 {1.10/19 1} 23. Qff7 {0.88/17 1 (Qfh7)} Ke5 {0.37/20 2} 24. Qh7 {0.28/
18 1} Nec5 {0.25/20 1} 25. Qa1+ {0.24/17 0} Kd6 {0.19/20 1} 26. Qh6+ {0.25/20
0 (Qf1)} Nce6 {0.18/20 1} 27. Qf1 {0.17/20 0} Nd2 {0.18/21 1} 28. Qg1 {0.17/20
1} Ne4 {0.17/21 1} 29. Qa7 {0.17/19 1} Ndf2+ {0.16/20 1} 30. Kg1 {0.16/23 2}
Ne2+ {0.16/22 1} 31. Kf1 {0.16/23 5} Ndf4 {0.13/17 0 (N2g3+)} 32. Qb8+ {0.13/
18 0 (Qb6+)} Kd5 {0.13/21 1} 33. Qb3+ {0.13/21 1} Kc5 {0.13/22 1} 34. Qa3+ {0.
13/19 0} Kd5 {0.13/21 0} 35. Qh8 {0.13/21 2 (Qh2)} N2g3+ {0.13/20 0} 36. Qxg3 {
0.13/23 1} Nxg3+ {0.13/23 1} 37. Kxf2 {0.13/25 2} Ne4+ {0.13/25 0} 38. Kf3 {0.
13/26 1} N4c5 {0.13/25 0} 39. Qa1 {0.13/24 0 (Qa8+)} Nfd3 {0.13/24 0} 40. Qa8+
{0.13/22 2 (Ke3)} Kc4 {0.13/22 0 (Ke5)} 41. Qa2+ {0.13/22 0} Kd4 {0.13/23 0}
42. Qd2 {0.13/23 0} Nef4 {0.12/20 0} 43. Qh2 {0.12/19 0} Nd5 {0.12/19 0} 44.
Qg1+ {0.12/19 0 (Qh8+)} Kc4 {0.12/17 0} 45. Qg4+ {0.12/17 0} Kc3 {0.12/13 0}
46. Kg3 {0.12/16 0 (Qg7+)} Ne5 {0.12/13 0 (Nf6)} 47. Qe2 {0.09/16 0} Ncd3 {0.
09/16 0} 48. Qe4 {0.10/18 0 (Qa2)} Nf6 {0.11/16 0} 49. Qb7 {0.12/19 0 (Qe3)}
Nfd7 {0.12/18 0} 50. Qa7 {0.12/20 0} N7c5 {0.12/19 0 (Kd2)} 51. Kh4 {0.12/20 0}
Kd4 {0.12/18 0 (Kd2)} 52. Kg5 {0.12/19 0} Ke3 {0.12/15 0 (Ke4)} 53. Kf6 {0.12/
17 0} Kf4 {0.12/17 0} 54. Qa8 {0.12/18 0} Ke3 {0.12/14 0} 55. Qh1 {0.12/17 0
(Qa3)} Nf3 {0.12/16 0} 56. Ke7 {0.12/19 0} Nde5 {0.12/18 0} 57. Qc1+ {0.11/18 0
} Kd4 {0.11/18 0} 58. Qa1+ {0.12/20 0} Ke3 {0.12/21 0} 59. Kd6 {0.12/21 0} Ncd3
{0.12/19 0} 60. Qa7+ {0.12/21 0} Ke4 {0.12/21 0} 61. Qe7 {0.12/22 0} Ke3 {0.12/
20 0} 62. Kd5 {0.12/22 0} Nf4+ {0.12/21 0} 63. Kc5 {0.12/23 0} Nfd3+ {0.12/22 0
} 64. Kd6 {0.12/23 0} Ke4 {0.12/22 0} 65. Qb7+ {0.12/20 0 (Qe8)} Ke3 {0.12/19
0 (Kd4)} 66. Qd5 {0.12/20 0} Kf4 {0.12/20 0} 67. Qa2 {0.12/20 0} Ke4 {0.12/20 0
} 68. Qa8+ {0.11/19 0} Kf4 {0.11/20 0} 69. Qa4+ {0.11/20 0 (Ke6)} Ke3 {0.11/19
0} 70. Kc7 {0.11/20 0} Nf4 {0.11/20 0} 71. Qa7+ {0.11/17 0 (Qa2)} Ke4 {0.11/18
0} 72. Qb7+ {0.11/18 0} Ke3 {0.11/18 0} 73. Qb6+ {0.11/18 0} Ke4 {0.11/15 0}
74. Qb1+ {0.11/17 0 (Qa6)} Kd4 {0.11/18 0} 75. Qa1+ {0.11/18 0} Ke3 {0.11/16 0
(Ke4)} 76. Qa4 {0.11/17 0 (Qc3+)} Nd5+ {0.11/16 0} 77. Kd6 {0.10/15 0} Nf4 {0.
11/15 0} 78. Qa8 {0.11/14 0} Ned3 {0.09/14 0} 79. Ke7 {0.08/13 0} Ng6+ {0.08/
11 0} 80. Kf7 {0.08/13 0 (Kd7)} Ngf4 {0.07/13 0} 81. Qa3 {0.00/12 0 (Kf6)} Ke4
{0.00/14 0} 82. Qa8+ {0.00/17 0} Ke3 {0.00/23 0} 83. Kg7 {0.00/20 0 (Qa3)}
1/2-1/2

[Event "Shootout (Stockfish864POPCNT, Blitz 1m)"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "????.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "New game"]
[Black "?"]
[Result "1/2-1/2"]
[SetUp "1"]
[FEN "2nnknn1/3nnn2/8/8/8/8/8/2QQKQ2 w - - 0 1"]
[PlyCount "165"]

1. Qf2 {7.37/15 6} Ngf6 {6.62/17 4} 2. Qg1 {6.16/15 2 (Qa4)} Ncd6 {5.93/18 5
(Nfe6)} 3. Kf1 {5.65/17 1} Nfe6 {5.03/17 2} 4. Qb3 {4.75/16 2 (Qa3)} Nde4 {4.
34/16 2} 5. Qh3 {4.27/15 1} Ned5 {4.25/19 2} 6. Qc2 {4.23/16 0 (Qb2)} Nef4 {4.
04/19 1} 7. Qa3 {4.00/18 1} Nec3 {3.95/20 2} 8. Qcf2 {4.07/18 0} Nde5 {3.90/21
1} 9. Qg7 {3.85/19 1} Nfe6 {3.82/22 2} 10. Qfxf6 {3.89/19 0 (Qgxf6)} Nxf6 {3.
83/21 1} 11. Qxf6 {3.77/19 1} Nd5 {3.70/19 1} 12. Qf5 {3.79/20 2} Nef4 {3.58/
22 2} 13. Kg1 {3.58/20 1 (Qa7)} Nde6 {3.28/20 2} 14. Qc2 {3.43/19 1 (Qe4)} Nfg5
{3.08/21 1} 15. Qa7 {3.08/22 1} Ndc7 {3.08/24 1} 16. Qf5 {3.08/24 1 (Qaa4+)}
Ned3 {3.08/26 2} 17. Qb8+ {3.08/23 0 (Qf6)} Kd7 {3.08/27 3} 18. Qb6 {2.93/25 4}
Ncd5 {2.86/26 4} 19. Qa7+ {2.87/22 1} Kd6 {2.85/26 1} 20. Kh2 {2.79/25 1} Ndc5
{2.79/26 1} 21. Qb8+ {2.79/24 0 (Qa3)} Ke7 {2.79/28 1} 22. Kh1 {2.79/28 1} Nd7
{2.79/28 1} 23. Qa7 {2.71/22 1 (Qb3)} N5f6 {2.58/21 1} 24. Qa3+ {2.73/18 1} Kf7
{2.41/20 2 (Ke8)} 25. Qb3 {2.20/19 1} Ke8 {2.37/20 2} 26. Qb7 {2.20/19 1 (Qa4)}
Nfe4 {1.87/19 2} 27. Qa5 {1.69/17 1 (Qfb5)} N6c5 {1.72/16 0} 28. Qaa8+ {1.60/
18 1 (Qc8+)} Kf7 {1.08/18 1} 29. Qc7 {0.78/18 1} Nge6 {0.93/17 0} 30. Qca7 {0.
52/17 1} Nef6 {0.36/16 0} 31. Kg1 {0.16/19 1 (Qh8)} Kg6 {0.12/18 1} 32. Kf1 {
0.12/19 0} Ne5 {0.15/20 1} 33. Ke1 {0.18/20 0} Ned3+ {0.18/20 1} 34. Kd1 {0.14/
19 1} N4d5 {0.12/19 0} 35. Q7b8 {0.12/19 0 (Q8b8)} Nce4 {0.16/18 0} 36. Kc2 {
0.11/20 1 (Qa1)} N6c5 {0.11/20 0} 37. Qa3 {0.11/22 0} N3b4+ {0.11/21 0} 38.
Qbxb4 {0.11/24 1} Nxb4+ {0.11/25 1} 39. Qxb4 {0.11/27 0} Kf5 {0.11/27 0 (Ne6)}
40. Qb8 {0.11/27 0} Ne6 {0.11/27 0} 41. Kb3 {0.11/25 0 (Kd3)} N6c5+ {0.11/23 0
(Nd5)} 42. Kc4 {0.11/27 0} Ne6 {0.11/27 0} 43. Qb1 {0.11/26 0 (Qh2)} Kg6 {0.11/
26 0} 44. Qg1+ {0.11/27 0} Kf5 {0.11/28 0} 45. Kb3 {0.11/26 0 (Qf1+)} N6c5+ {
0.11/26 0} 46. Kb4 {0.11/28 0} Nd5+ {0.11/25 0 (Nd3+)} 47. Kc4 {0.11/28 2} Ndf6
{0.11/28 0} 48. Kb5 {0.11/27 0 (Qh2)} Ne6 {0.11/25 0} 49. Qf1+ {0.11/28 0} Nf4
{0.11/27 0} 50. Kb4 {0.11/24 0 (Qh1)} N6d5+ {0.11/23 0} 51. Ka3 {0.11/27 0} Ke5
{0.11/26 0} 52. Qa1+ {0.11/27 0} Kf5 {0.11/27 0} 53. Qh8 {0.11/28 0} Ne6 {0.11/
26 0} 54. Qh7+ {0.11/25 0 (Qh5+)} Ke5 {0.11/25 0} 55. Qh5+ {0.11/25 0} Kd4 {0.
11/26 0} 56. Qd1+ {0.11/25 1} Ke5 {0.11/25 0} 57. Qa1+ {0.11/25 0} Kf5 {0.11/
25 0} 58. Qh8 {0.11/26 0} Ndf4 {0.11/22 0} 59. Qh7+ {0.11/25 0} Ke5 {0.11/25 0}
60. Kb4 {0.11/25 0} Nd5+ {0.11/18 0} 61. Kc4 {0.11/25 0} Nd6+ {0.11/24 0} 62.
Kd3 {0.11/25 0} Nf6 {0.11/23 0} 63. Qh2+ {0.11/25 0} Nf4+ {0.11/26 0} 64. Kc2 {
0.11/28 1} Nde4 {0.11/25 0} 65. Qg1 {0.11/27 0} Ne6 {0.11/26 0} 66. Qa1+ {0.11/
26 0} Kf5 {0.11/27 0} 67. Qb1 {0.11/27 0 (Kb3)} Nd4+ {0.11/17 0 (N6c5)} 68. Kb2
{0.11/23 0} Ke5 {0.11/22 0} 69. Qg1 {0.11/23 0} Ne6 {0.11/22 0} 70. Kb3 {0.11/
24 0} N6c5+ {0.11/24 0} 71. Kb4 {0.11/25 0} Nd3+ {0.11/24 0} 72. Kc4 {0.11/25 0
} Nb2+ {0.11/24 0} 73. Kb3 {0.11/23 0 (Kb5)} Nd3 {0.11/23 0} 74. Qa1+ {0.11/24
0} Kf5 {0.11/25 0} 75. Qf1+ {0.11/22 0 (Kc2)} Ke5 {0.11/22 0} 76. Kc2 {0.11/23
0} Ndc5 {0.11/22 0 (Nb4+)} 77. Qa1+ {0.11/22 1} Kf4 {0.11/16 0} 78. Kb2 {0.11/
20 0 (Qa8)} Kf5 {0.11/19 0 (Ke5)} 79. Ka3 {0.11/18 0} Nd5 {0.11/17 0} 80. Qd1 {
0.04/19 1} Nf4 {0.04/13 0} 81. Qh1 {0.00/16 0 (Kb4)} Nfd3 {0.00/16 0 (Ke5)} 82.
Qh5+ {0.00/19 0} Kf4 {0.00/20 0} 83. Qd1 {0.00/21 0 (Qh2+)} 1/2-1/2

[Event "Shootout (Stockfish864POPCNT, Blitz 1m)"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "????.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "New game"]
[Black "?"]
[Result "1/2-1/2"]
[SetUp "1"]
[FEN "2nnknn1/3nnn2/8/8/8/8/8/2QQKQ2 w - - 0 1"]
[PlyCount "170"]

1. Qf2 {7.37/15 6} Ngf6 {6.62/17 4} 2. Qg1 {6.16/15 2 (Qa4)} Ncd6 {5.93/18 4
(Nfe6)} 3. Kf1 {5.65/17 2} Nfe6 {5.03/17 2} 4. Qb3 {4.75/16 3 (Qa3)} Nde4 {4.
34/16 2} 5. Qh3 {4.27/15 1} Ned5 {4.25/19 2} 6. Qc2 {4.23/16 0 (Qb2)} Nef4 {4.
04/19 1} 7. Qa3 {4.00/18 1} Nec3 {3.95/20 2} 8. Qcf2 {4.07/18 0} Nde5 {3.90/21
1} 9. Qg7 {3.85/19 1} Nfe6 {3.82/22 2} 10. Qfxf6 {3.89/19 0 (Qgxf6)} Nxf6 {3.
83/21 1} 11. Qxf6 {3.77/19 1} Nd5 {3.70/19 1} 12. Qf5 {3.79/20 2} Nef4 {3.58/
22 2} 13. Kg1 {3.58/20 1 (Qa7)} Nde6 {3.28/20 2} 14. Qc2 {3.43/19 1 (Qe4)} Nfg5
{3.08/21 1} 15. Qa7 {3.08/22 1} Ndc7 {3.08/24 1} 16. Qf5 {3.08/24 1 (Qaa4+)}
Ned3 {3.08/26 2} 17. Qb8+ {3.08/23 0 (Qf6)} Kd7 {3.08/27 3} 18. Qb6 {2.93/25 4}
Ncd5 {2.86/26 4} 19. Qa7+ {2.79/19 0} Kd6 {2.79/24 1} 20. Kh1 {2.79/24 1 (Qa6+)
} Nf3 {2.53/25 4} 21. Qff7 {1.83/18 1 (Qe4)} Ke5 {1.81/19 1} 22. Qh7 {0.60/18 1
} Nec5 {0.37/20 1} 23. Qa1+ {0.29/20 1} Kd6 {0.32/22 1} 24. Qh6+ {0.27/20 1}
Nce6 {0.27/23 1} 25. Qf1 {0.27/23 2} Nd2 {0.25/21 1} 26. Qg1 {0.23/21 0} Ne4 {
0.20/22 2} 27. Qa1 {0.19/22 2} Ndf2+ {0.18/21 1} 28. Kg1 {0.16/22 1} Ne2+ {0.
16/22 1} 29. Kf1 {0.16/21 0} N2g3+ {0.16/21 1} 30. Kg2 {0.16/23 1} Ndf4+ {0.16/
23 1} 31. Kf3 {0.16/24 2} Nge2 {0.16/24 0} 32. Qa3+ {0.15/21 1 (Qag7)} Kd5 {0.
15/22 1} 33. Qa8+ {0.15/22 1} Kc4 {0.15/21 0} 34. Qc8+ {0.15/18 0 (Qc6+)} Kb4 {
0.12/19 0} 35. Qb7+ {0.14/20 1 (Qhxe6)} Kc3 {0.12/19 0 (Kc4)} 36. Qc6+ {0.12/
20 0} Kb4 {0.12/21 0} 37. Qb6+ {0.12/21 1} Kc3 {0.12/20 0} 38. Qe3+ {0.12/22 1}
Kb4 {0.12/23 0} 39. Qxe6 {0.12/23 0} Nxe6 {0.12/23 0} 40. Kxe2 {0.12/22 0} N6c5
{0.12/22 0} 41. Qd4+ {0.12/23 0} Kb5 {0.12/24 0} 42. Qa1 {0.11/24 1 (Ke3)} Nfd3
{0.11/24 0} 43. Qb1+ {0.11/20 1 (Ke3)} Kc4 {0.11/22 0} 44. Ke3 {0.11/24 0} Nc3
{0.11/24 0} 45. Qb8 {0.11/23 2} Nd5+ {0.11/19 0} 46. Kf3 {0.11/20 0} Ne1+ {0.
11/19 0} 47. Kg4 {0.11/21 0} Ned3 {0.11/21 0} 48. Kf5 {0.11/22 0} Ne3+ {0.11/
22 0} 49. Kg6 {0.11/23 0} Nd5 {0.11/22 0} 50. Qh2 {0.11/22 1} Kd4 {0.11/20 0}
51. Qg1+ {0.11/22 2} Kc4 {0.11/15 0 (Kc3)} 52. Qa1 {0.11/20 0} Ne4 {0.11/19 0}
53. Qa4+ {0.11/21 0} N3b4 {0.11/22 0} 54. Kf5 {0.11/21 0} Nc5 {0.11/21 0} 55.
Qa8 {0.11/20 0} Ne3+ {0.11/18 0 (Nbd3)} 56. Kf4 {0.09/19 0} Ned5+ {0.09/19 0}
57. Ke5 {0.09/22 0} Nbd3+ {0.09/21 0} 58. Kf5 {0.09/22 0} Ne3+ {0.09/21 0} 59.
Kg5 {0.09/23 0} Nb4 {0.09/23 0} 60. Qa1 {0.09/20 0 (Kh6)} Nbd5 {0.09/19 0} 61.
Kg6 {0.09/22 0 (Qa2+)} Nc3 {0.09/19 0 (Kd3)} 62. Qa7 {0.09/22 0} Ned5 {0.09/20
0 (Kd4)} 63. Kf5 {0.09/22 0} Ne3+ {0.09/22 0} 64. Kf4 {0.09/23 0} Ned5+ {0.09/
23 0} 65. Ke5 {0.10/23 0 (Kf3)} Nd3+ {0.10/22 0} 66. Kf5 {0.09/22 0} Nc5 {0.09/
21 0} 67. Qf7 {0.09/20 0} Ne2 {0.09/19 0} 68. Qg8 {0.09/20 0} Nd4+ {0.09/19 0}
69. Kg4 {0.09/21 0} Nb5 {0.09/19 0} 70. Kf3 {0.09/23 0} Nbc3 {0.09/23 0} 71.
Qg4+ {0.09/24 0} Kd3 {0.09/25 0} 72. Qg1 {0.09/25 0} Kc4 {0.09/23 0} 73. Qa1 {
0.09/25 0} Nd3 {0.09/24 0} 74. Qa6+ {0.09/24 0} Kd4 {0.09/23 0} 75. Qa7+ {0.09/
24 0} Kc4 {0.09/24 0} 76. Qa1 {0.09/19 0 (Kg4)} Nc5 {0.09/20 0} 77. Kg4 {0.09/
22 0 (Qg1)} Nd3 {0.09/14 0 (N5e4)} 78. Qa6+ {0.09/13 0 (Qg1)} Kd4 {0.08/16 0}
79. Kf5 {0.09/16 0 (Kf3)} Nc5 {0.08/14 0 (Ne3+)} 80. Qa1 {0.08/15 0 (Qa8)} Ne3+
{0.08/13 0} 81. Kf6 {0.08/13 0} Kd3 {0.09/12 0} 82. Qa7 {0.08/14 0 (Ke5)} Ned5+
{0.08/13 0 (N5e4+)} 83. Ke5 {0.01/14 0 (Kf7)} Kc4 {0.00/14 0} 84. Qa1 {0.00/17
0 (Qf7)} Nd3+ {0.00/19 0} 85. Kf5 {0.00/23 0} Ne3+ {0.00/23 0} 1/2-1/2

[/pgn]

very obviously, any claims the knights are stronger are simply incorrect.

any specific game results with this imbalance would be only due to engine lack of knowledge, or specific biassed positions.

as simple as that.

You are wrong. When there are no pawns such as the position above, modified Rodent as Black will not allow Q for 2N trades. At least not when the time control is 5' + 3". It wins against everybody, including against itself.

The only positions where 7N (modified Rodent) consistently loses against 3Q (Komodo) are those with disconnected pawns and large pawn spans. The greater mobility of the queens allows pressure to quickly swing from one side to the other side. This allows Komodo to eventually promote a pawn to a queen and gain the edge.

please, post some games.

did you try modified SF vs modified SF, as tactics are very important here and Rodent, just as Queeny, is a relatively unstrong engine.

no one can convince me knights win here, this is a simple draw.

it does not also matter what the parameter is, good search should see the draw pretty easily.

[Lyudmil Tsvetkov]

Q vs 2Ns trades are simply always available.

pair of queens can always attack at least one knight defended by a single knight, so one trade is already there.

when you do one such trade, the second is even easier.

so, rest assured, Rodent is doing something very wrong.

[Lyudmil Tsvetkov]

You are wrong. When there are no pawns such as the position above, modified Rodent as Black will not allow Q for 2N trades. At least not when the time control is 5' + 3". It wins against everybody, including against itself.

The only positions where 7N (modified Rodent) consistently loses against 3Q (Komodo) are those with disconnected pawns and large pawn spans. The greater mobility of the queens allows pressure to quickly swing from one side to the other side. This allows Komodo to eventually promote a pawn to a queen and gain the edge.

Problem is that for this particular type of positions (3Q vs 7N) engines are obviously not properly tuned. And it would require quite some time to get it tuned.
It is enough just to reduce the QueenValue in SF and it destroys normal SF or Queeny in every single game black or white from any single 3Q vs 7N starting position. I don't have modified Rodent or newest Komodo to try, but I believe it would beat them also with ease both playing white or black.
I believe these type of positions (3Q vs. 7N) are pretty balanced (some of them maybe slightly favour 7N side) but it is almost impossible to claim it for sure, before you manage to properly tune the strongest existing engine (SF) for them.

for once, I would agree.

thanks Milos.

[Lyudmil Tsvetkov]

27% is not small at all, as you need only another 23% for perfect equality concerning the outcome of the game.

No you don't. We're talking 27% draws, 73% losses here. Raising that to 50% draws still gets you 50% losses.

you understand pretty well I am talking equality of win/draw chances.

that is sufficient for me for Harm's claim to be disclaimed.

[Lyudmil Tsvetkov]

please note again, that in a pure setting, on an empty board, 7Ns = 3Qs, so choosing the right additional elements of the position is indeed very important.

One assumes that this is a clumsy way to say "withouth Pawns"? Obviously a board with Knights and Queens on it is not empty. And without Kings every game would be trivially drawn anyway, as there is no checkmate possible.

if you need a pure setting formula/scenario, it is quite simple, 7Ns = 3Qs.

that is 1 Q = 2.33 Ns.

So your understanding of Chess is so much below patzer level that you even don't know that games without Pawns are far more difficult to win than with Pawns?

This is quite well known, amongst amateur players. KRKB is generally a draw, and KRBKR too. That does in no way imply that R=B, or that B=0. In the presence of equal numbers of Pawns these imbalances are generally winning.

So that a Pawnless 3Q-vs-7N would be a draw by no means implies that 3Q = 7N. Only that the difference is less than the ~4 Pawns needed to win a Pawnless end-game. If indeed it would be a draw, which still remains to be seen. I will switch the broadcast to trying this without Pawns.

[Edit] First Pawnless QueeNy vs. QueeNy game (not broadcasted) was an easy win for the Knights: 26 moves. Final position: 4 Knights against bare King. Couldn't prevent 3 Knights being traded away for Queens...

[pgn][Event "Computer Chess Game"]
[Site "MAKRO-PC"]
[Date "2017.07.19"]
[Round "-"]
[White "QueeNy 0.16"]
[Black "QueeNy 0.16"]
[Result "0-1"]
[TimeControl "40/600"]
[FEN "3nkn2/3n1n2/3nnn2/8/8/8/8/2QQKQ2 w - - 0 1"]
[SetUp "1"]
1. Qa4 {-5.79/14} Nfe4 {+5.88/14 10} 2. Qe2 {-5.79/14 8} N6g5 {+6.12/14 11}
3. Qce3 {-6.15/13 12} Nfe6 {+6.34/15 12} 4. Kf1 {-6.26/13 12} Ne5
{+6.43/14 11} 5. Kg2 {-6.48/13 8} Ke7 {+6.60/14 12} 6. Qaa3 {-6.61/14 8}
Ndc5 {+6.72/14 12} 7. Qa7+ {-6.80/14 15} Kf6 {+6.84/14 9} 8. Qb8
{-6.91/14 15} Ndc6 {+6.83/14 10} 9. Qg8 {-7.04/14 21} Nf5 {+7.12/14 17} 10.
Qf1 {-10.81/15 16} Ncd4 {+10.75/14 9} 11. Qh8+ {-10.83/14 12} Kg6
{+10.88/15 16} 12. Qg8+ {-10.89/13 9} Neg7 {+11.20/15 11} 13. Qa3
{-11.07/14 11} Ndf3 {+15.51/14 15} 14. Qfxf3 {-15.53/13 10} Ngxf3
{+16.27/15 8} 15. Kf1 {-16.33/15 14} Ncd3 {+16.42/15 15} 16. Qxd3
{-16.58/16 12} Nfg3+ {+20.06/17 13} 17. Kg2 {-21.02/19 19} Ne1+
{+20.94/18 19} 18. Kg1 {-319.89/18 13} N1xd3 {+319.90/18 13} 19. Qd5
{-26.06/20 9} Kh5 {+319.92/20 11} 20. Qg8 {-319.92/22 9} N7f5
{+319.93/23 10} 21. Qh7+ {-319.94/25 16} Kg4 {+319.94/27 9} 22. Qg8+
{-319.95/27 14} Ng5 {+319.95/27 13} 23. Qxg5+ {-319.96/31 31} Kxg5
{+319.96/33 10} 24. Kh2 {-319.97/32 11} Kg4 {+319.97/31 15} 25. Kg1
{-319.98/36 12} Ne3 {+319.98/34 10} 26. Kh2 {-319.99/39 11} Nf3#
{+319.99/37 10}
{Xboard adjudication: Checkmate} 0-1
[/pgn]

I set up the broadcast now for this, starting at game 34 (40 moves/10 min). Unfortunately, because I changed the start position in the HTML page, this means games 1-33 cannot be recalled anymore.

this is not a good starting position, as knights are fully developed.

why have the queens on the 1st rank, and most of the knights already on the 3rd, where they could easily check the enemy king and fork?

if you test like that, no doubt Queeny will win for the knights.

this is a simple draw, no one can deny it.

are your broadcast problems going to stop sometime?

[Lyudmil Tsvetkov]

Scharnagle effect

it is written Schnarnagl, and not Scharnagle.

you even don't seem to know the very name of your theoretical foundation.

[Lyudmil Tsvetkov]

... Only that the difference is less than the ~4 Pawns needed to win a Pawnless end-game.

I don't think that rule is accurate when there are more than 5 pieces (including kings) on the board. For example, it seems KQKNNNN is generally won by the knights, and KRRBKRR is often won by the side with the bishop.

From what I remember, 4 Pawns is rounded up and it's something like "minor+". KQKNNNN has a minor and elephantiasis (about 120cp according to estimates in this thread) for a material advantage over 4 pawns.
I don't know the elephantiasis term for rooks and bishops, but if it's something in the order of 40cp that might be enough. On the other hand, white must avoid trading rooks. That means white evaluates his rooks as more valuable than black's, and must adopt a trade-avoiding strategy. If the bonus of the former outweighs the penalty of the latter, that may help to put the score over the edge also in this case.

Either way though, I would treat the 4 pawn advantage rule as a rule of thumb, not a hard limit.

there is not such thing as simple material evaluation.

in every game situation, even without any pawns, psqt for the particular pieces, mobility, threat, etc., also matter very much, of course.

3.5 material points might be more accurate, as Q vs NN is mostly won, similarly BB vs N.

the formula is, howver, not so simple, as you should end a coefficient for the number of pieces present.

the more pieces, the better the winning chances for the stronger side, as coordination in a larger pool of pieces is much improved.

so, the formula might be 3.5 material points - (number of pieces for the stronger side)*some coefficient.

that is, with large number of pieces, the stronger side might win with only 2.5 points material advantage.

[Arpad Rusz]

I propose the following starting position for testing the pawnless 7Q/3N endgame:

[D]1nn5/nkn5/nnn5/8/8/8/6QQ/6QK w - - 0 1

The position doesn't have immediate tactics from any side.

[hgm]

it is written Schnarnagl, and not Scharnagle.

Hilarious. Even on simple matters like spelling you do not manage to say something that is correct even a single time.

this is not a good starting position, as knights are fully developed.

why have the queens on the 1st rank, and most of the knights already on the 3rd, where they could easily check the enemy king and fork?

"fully developed" would be in the center. So I would say they are only "half-developed" The Queens are on open files and diagonals, however, which also counts as fully developed. (And they have the first move as well.) So it seems the Queens are already positionally favored, and you want to favor them even more.

Apparently your claim only applies to positions with hanging Knights that will immediate get lost due to shallow tactics. But in normal terminology these do not even count as 3Q-7N positions. Only quiet positions would.

But if you are willing to conceed that my (or Arpad's) position is a win for the Knight, I don't think there is much to discuss. The position you started from is not tactically quiet: 6 of the 7 Knight are only singly protected. So of course the Queens, also having the first move advantage, can immediately gobble up some, if there is no Pawn shield. So the position is really a 2Q-5N position, and any results from it have no bearing on the 3Q-7N problem.

are your broadcast problems going to stop sometime?

I did have severe internet problems yesterday (router going dead all the time, and needing reset), and I am starting to worry that this is related to the broadcast. So for now I stopped that, to test if the problems disappear.