Upgrade to Chess.com Premium!

The Hitchhikers Guide to Chess

Here's a question for you. Just answer quickly with your gut feeling: Bishop v Knight - which is stronger?

Of course, the standard answer to this question always begins with "It depends on...", but is there really an ultimate answer? There is even a book devoted to just this topic (if anyone has read it, please let me know what you think of it). But has anyone ever surveyed chess players with this question to find out what they think?

Mikhail Chigorin had a distinct preference for knights. Bobby Fischer was a fan of the bishop. What is your preference? What do you feel comfortable with?

I think I've discovered that I'm definitely a fan of the bishop. I recently reached the diagrammed position in a practice game with my Palm Chess Hiarcs (I'm Black, to move).

I had just exchanged rooks 25...Rb8xRb3 26. c2xRb3 assuming that I was better in the endgame because I have a bishop against a knight. I proceeded to lose the endgame quite badly!

I would be interested to hear other players thoughts on the position. Would you rather be White or Black and how should the game continue?

If computer software could be designed to analyse all possible chess positions and assign values to the minor pieces, after millions of years of analysis what would it discover? If it produced an answer that bishops are worth 3.51 pawns and knights are worth 3.49 pawns we would have an answer, but would we be any the wiser?

Perhaps you have to understand the question to understand the answer. Like the Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy where the answer to the meaning of Life, the Universe and Everything was discovered to be 42. You have to know what the real question is to understand the answer.

Comments

  • 12 months ago

    shengyi

    It's diificult to decide. I guess the bishop is better because statistically there are more "open" positions than closed positions so bishops are generally thought better. And perhaps of its "infinite long range power" which has a profound effect on the human mind because it's hard to perceive/understand infinite.

  • 6 years ago

    jay

    Maybe just Bd8 is better then, following by some king moves and a pawn push to d5 eventually.
  • 6 years ago

    erik

    generally in positions with pawns on both sides of the board a bishop is better
  • 6 years ago

    Eugen

    A very interesting article. As for me I can't give a definite answer which piece is better for me. I can't efficiently use the advantages neither of a bishop nor of a knight. That's why I have nothing else than trade them away.

    I admit that I usually tend to simplification  on a chessboard. But that is my style and everyone has their own manner of play. I suppose that 

    your preference for bishops says that you are an attacking , aggresive player. But nevertheless

    I would prefer a knight to a bishop. Bishops are especially strong when they are together,

    when they combine each other.  Sometimes one bishop (say dark-square bishop) may become absolutely helpless, especially in the endgame when your opponent's pawns  occupy light squares for instance. In this sense a knight is more "independent", so to speak. But this is my personal opinion and I may be wrong.

  • 6 years ago

    SonofPearl

    I don't think so!  I played a similar line and got steamrollered by the 2v1 pawn majority on the queenside.  For example:

     

    I loved my bishop so much I overlooked the potential power of the pawn majority. Cry

  • 6 years ago

    jay

    I would continue:

     

     

Back to Top

Post your reply:

Log In
Join
^ Ads keep Chess.com free. Upgrade to remove ads! ^
^ Ads keep Chess.com free. Upgrade to remove ads! ^