Yes, this is very interesting. Especially the thing with 2 rooks vs. queen. The "common" scheme thinks that R = 5 points and Q = 9 points (but I have also seen 10 in other publications), but your results suggest that the Q is slightly more valuable than 2 rooks (which holds also for higher rating levels). Interesting would be the comparison queen vs. three minor pieces (there is a popular position in the Sicilian with e6 and Nc6, where Black gives up their Q vs. 3 minor pieces).
@marcusbuffett, congratulations for your Chessbook.com, I love it!
This actually partially confirms two things I always felt strange:
1. The bishop pair doesn't seem to make that much of a difference, the position itself is much more important.
2. The queen is valuable more than 2 rooks. I play chess with a friend who is about as strong as me, and he was willingly throwing both his rooks to capture my queen, several times. And he always won in the end and my rooks always felt less strong than his queen. I stopped making those exchanges after about 2 or 3 times...
1. The bishop pair doesn't seem to make that much of a difference, the position itself is much more important.
2. The queen is valuable more than 2 rooks. I play chess with a friend who is about as strong as me, and he was willingly throwing both his rooks to capture my queen, several times. And he always won in the end and my rooks always felt less strong than his queen. I stopped making those exchanges after about 2 or 3 times...
How about 3 minor pieces vs queen? Which side have advantage?
<Comment deleted by user>
@marcusbuffett - what about being up 2 clean pawns and 3 clean pawns? What were the winning chances? Is it better to be up 2 pawns or with an exchange?
Are you integrating all the other moves or just the stats after achieving such an advantage?
Are you integrating all the other moves or just the stats after achieving such an advantage?