It really depends on the situation. It is easier to checkmate with a king and a rock than with a king and two bishops, however.
chess
1 bishop goes on black square and 1 on white, so you can check them to the corner and then bring in your king to finish of.
In the middlegame, two bishops are often better than even R+N, provided the position is relatively open and you can attack. (I'm not making this up, I read this from Yusupov I think).
Also, it is just about automatic to checkmate with two bishops. It is tricky to do it with a knight and a bishop, I learned to do it twice already but I always forget (because it never comes up). Actually I saw a game between 2700+ grandmasters where the losing side let their opponent play it out until mate in 3 or 4 was elementary. You would never see that with K+2B v K.
gwnn you may be referring to a Ponomariov-Nakamura game from the recent match with the KBN vs K thing!
Two bishops are much better than a rook in 90% of situations.
No, it was in the European Championships in April. I might be able to find it, but it's not important.
In the Ponomariov game I think he resigned immediately.
They COULD be on the same color, of course, as it could have been a pawn that was promoted into a bishop....
Sam, I believe if you take the time to study the mechanics of a K+2B ending, you will see that once a couple of key concepts are firmly established, the mate is very straightforward. I like to familiarize myself with minor piece endgames because if my opponent exchanges off the heavy pieces and leaves me with 2 Bishops, i want to know that I can mate effectively with them as i could a lone Rook. For that reason, I am going to set up a position that emphasizes using the 2 Bishops to mate with some comments provided. Learning these "lesser" mates will only strengthen your endgame play.
are two bishops better than a castle? I know two bishops would equal six points and a rook is only 5 points. But I find it easier to checkmate with a king and a rook then a king and two bishops?