18202 Players currently online!
Man vs. Machine - good luck!
Turn-based games at any time!
Vote for the best move to win!
Do you have what it takes?
Sharpen your tactical vision!
Get advice and game insights!
Learn from top players & pros!
View millions of master games!
Your virtual chess coach!
Perfect your opening moves!
Test your skills vs. computer!
Find the right private coach!
Can you solve it each day?
Bring it all together!
Beginners, start here!
Make friends & play team games!
News from the world of chess!
Search all Chess.com members!
Find local clubs & events!
Who's the best of your friends?
Read what members are saying!
A lot of people think a "Bad Bishop" is one that is impeded by it's own pawns (because they're on the same colour) but it isn't!!!
According to what I read somewhere a "Bad Bishop" is a bishop for which the pawns are on the same colour, but the reason why it's bad is not because it will be impeded!
The reason it's bad is because with the bishop and the pawns on the same colour they only control half the board so what going to defend the other half. (it's bad when its a lone bishop i.e hat makes it bad is the fact that is partner is not there to protect the other colour)
a good bishop controls one colour while the pawns control the other. that's why it's good.
this means that what makes a bishop bad is the "weakness of squares it doesn't control" and this creates two more terms:
Good "Bad Bishop"
If a bad bishop is not impeded by it's pawns then it's a good bad bishop
Bad "Good Bishop"
If a good bishop has difficulties in one small area
A Good "Bad Bishop" has unrivaled power on half the board it becomes very powerful
but a Bad "Good Bishop" the power is distrbuted over the whole board so it's power is "dluted" (a Good "Bad Bishop" is concentrated)
and since it has dificulties in a small area it lowers the strength.
A Good Bad Bishop is better than a Bad Good Bishop
(if that makes sense:D)
A bad bishop is the one that the player moving it does not know how to make good use of.
Yes, that's an important reason to keep in mind. I've had players strong enough to know better argue for putting their pawns on the same color as their bishop in an endgame, but mobility and giving up half the board as you said are clear reasons this is (generally) wrong.
Yeah, that's why I said it's generally wrong ( not all the time).
But this one guy was telling me his "theory" about bishop endgames, and how it's always a good thing to do I gave up trying to talk him out of it... he did eventually agree later.
It was close to 1500 at the time, a few tourneys later he was 1500s.
"WCC Match 2014: Anand vs Carlsen - Game 10 Recap! GM Alex Yermolinsky & GM Simon Williams"
Advertisements mean I cannot take an opponents piece!!
by glamdring27 a few minutes ago
FEN, clipboard ipad
by tranchant 2 minutes ago
Crushed by Magnus!
by Poldi_der_Drache 3 minutes ago
Beer + chess = disaster?
by owltuna 3 minutes ago
Told you that Carlsen would do absolutely nothing to popularize chess.
by Mersaphe 6 minutes ago
Post your best miniatures here
by Poldi_der_Drache 7 minutes ago
Bill Cosby and Chess
by macer75 8 minutes ago
Kings Gambit: Theory
by TheGreatOogieBoogie 8 minutes ago
Dallas' daily puzzles! *Submissions needed!*
by Chesscoaching 10 minutes ago
I can beat Medium (~1200) but don't know anything beyond basic moves.
by notmtwain 11 minutes ago
Why Join | Chess Topics |
Help & Support |
© 2014 Chess.com
• Chess - English
We are working hard to make Chess.com available in over 70 languages. Check back over the year as we develop the technology to add more, and we will try our best to notify you when your language is ready for translating!