I would like to know what is the diffrences between the "good" bishop and the "bad" bishop, or knight or whatever....  and how do you know witch is witch.

I ask this because when I look at gm games with comments, they often refer to good and bad pieces. What do the comentators mean by "good" and "bad". 

no Idea what your talking about

a good bishop is one that has an open file that it can travel on, preferably without being in killed in the process. a bad bishop is one that is trapped and cannot be moved, like two pawns obstructing the bishops pathway. the same definition that be applied to the other pieces as well.

GM Vallejo Pons wins XVII Pamplona International

Move 25

 

It totally makes sense now.

reassess your chess by silman , ll look it up thank you.

Viau_A wrote:

I would like to know what is the diffrences between the "good" bishop and the "bad" bishop...

 

---

 My friend and coach GM Rashit Ziatdinov says there is no such thing as bad bishops, just bad owners.

Remember, "The general in charge of your army is not the king. It is You! The king is just a wooden piece without any brains." -GM Ziatdinov 

Simply put, a bad bishop (or any piece) does not have any purpose, like a bishop that is blocked by his own forces (see bishop in diagram); a good bishop does have a purpose, and has good mobility.  But this should not be permanent--can be changed.  One good example of bad pieces is a smothered mate (king imprisoned by own forces).  In the diagram, the queen, knight and pawn (technically not a piece) are all bad pieces... 

RetGuvvie98 (see following post), I've modified the diagram appropriate for your comment.