M Winther wrote on Mon, Apr 20, 2009 05:07 AM UTC:
The Guanaco is a much faster piece than the Llama. Moreover, the Llama has,
in practice, fewer capture squares than the Guanaco. However, it's easier
for the Llama to create threats, while the capture square is two squares
away. If an enemy piece occupies a central square, the Llama can chase it
away from a distance of two squares. It doesn't matter if there is a
friendly pawn in between. Thus, the Llama is the perfect piece for
controlling the centre, and that's why I am somewhat sceptical about it.
(The Alpaca is different.) Anyway, since computer programs are threat- and
capture-oriented, they can find good use for the Llama.
The Guanaco, however, is a piece that demands planning. It can easily
penetrate into the enemy position. But one must think like Capablanca and
decide where one should position it. Probably it is better handled by the
human brain. So the solution to the Guanaco mystery would be that the
computer is too stupid to handle it. The Guanaco's capabilities are, in
the middlegame, beyond the horizon. A way of verifying this is to set up
practical endgames, (e.g. remove the queen, a rook, a bishop, a knight and
a few pawns) and set Guanacos against Llamas. The Guanacos would win
against the Llamas in a practical endgame. In this case the Guanaca
positioning would be within the horizon of the computer.
/Mats