Point Value

What would the king's value be worth if he were just a normal piece?

Thanks(the game)

If he was a normal piece...he would not be the King...and therefore worth very little...moving one space at a time in any direction...with no chance on promotion to queen...he'd be worth zero.

actually about 4 less than rook more than minor pieces in the endgame but dont bring him out too early or he might take a little walk into a checkmate

youre saying (even if he didnt need to worry about checkmate) he would be worth 0?! thats crazy talk! sure, pawns can promote, but moving one square in any direction still has its value. I agree with eagle that somewhere around 4 sounds legit.

I've read estimates of the attacking value of the king that range anywhere from 2.5 to 6.5.  It seems to me that it should be less than the rook, because it can only move one square at a time, but more than a bishop, because it can move onto both colors of square and in any direction.  So I suppose I agree with Lasker, who put it at 4 points.  But of course we are only talking about attacking value.

Considering how many games have been won with only king and rook against king, or king and queen against king, and that those games cannot be won unless the king is part of the mating pattern, I don't see how anyone could consider the king to have zero value.

A King's pretty powerful when he's got some room to move around.  8 squares he can move to or capture on!  That's the same as a Knight.  A pawn in the open can only move to 1 square and capture on 2 other squares.  That's a big ratio difference in region of control by Kings and pawns.

This brings to mind some interesting ways to consider your king.

It is likely not a good idea to use the king offensively beginning-mid game but it reminds me as to the value of the piece.

 Even though they have the same number of squares, the King is stronger than the knight because its control forms a solid block around it.

The defensive strength of the King is also evident in the middlegame. One way to explain the rule against moving the King's pawns forward is that the King has to participate in its own defense, by protecting the pawns.

considering that the king can move one square at a time but in any direction, I'd but it somewhere in between 3 and 5.

3.5

A knight and king both attack 8 squares at the centre of the board. At the corners and side of the board, the king has more attack squares. The Knight however has double the range. I think 3.5/4 would be an appropriate value.

A good way to test the King in battle would be to play a 'Man at Arms' or 'Foot man' (moves like a king) instead of a knight or bishop in the setup.

@17

Such a Man at Arms or Foot man, i.e. non-royal king and a king can checkmate a lone king, which neither a knight, nor a bishop can, but it is harder than rook + king. So 4 is the right value: more than either a knight or a bishop (3), but less than a rook (5).

Yes, in the 16 central squares a king controls 8 squares just like a knight, but in the 48 edge squares a king controls more squares than a knight.

A king controls squares of both colors. A bishop controls only squares of one color. A knight can move to squares of both colors, but controls only squares of the opposite color it stands on.)

I've seen a lot of games where the board is starting to be fairly clear of pieces and there are some open files, and putting your King on the proper 2nd-rank square can prevent your opponent from being able to cross their Rooks or Queen over to your side of the board. That's an important defensive role for the King, which frees up your other pieces to work on something else.