So I'm pretty comfortable with my knowledge about knights and bishops material values. Knights are better for closed positions, bishops for open positions. A pair of bishops is worth more in particular (some say approx +0.5 points).

However, I was just watching an annotated Blitz Armageddon game by GM Alexandra Kosteniuk where she claims the following: "Antoaneta has the two bishops advantage. My knights have a lot of good squares ... and as we know in a blitz game its better to have knights... because its easier to play with them." Watch @ 4:30

Most of the games I play are blitz, though I have never really heard this before. Is it a known fact that knights are somewhat more advantageous in Blitz because of their ease of use?

-- Saccadic

I would say knights are better in blitz. Your opponent is less able to keep track of the knight's movement possibilties. A bishop's territory of control is more easily recognized so calculateing the moves of an opponent with bishops would be faster and advantageous in fast time controls. 

The Savy Swede has expressed my exact thoughts.

Too many knight forks in blitz ...

Bishops are 3.20 a Knight is 3 exactly so Bishops are better.

I'm talking about Blitz, sir.

In most positions a bishop will be slightly better than a knight. But Knights can be good in closed games.

Not really, I have played blitz before now.

Knights have the advantage in blitz play, as long as you can use them to their potental quickly.