do you prefer knight or bishop??♘♗

Sort:
Avatar of kasehkkbk
i love bishop..you?
Avatar of ChessProMasterGZ

Bishop

 

Avatar of wollyhood

I am having a fascinating game at the moment (not playing it very well or anything) that is them RRK8pawns  Vs  NNKR7pawns.

(Notice that is exactly equal material.)

When I do analysis of my possible moves, it gets super nasty to avoid N forks when there are so many blinking pawns in the way xd

Avatar of eric0022

Oh no, why this topic again???

Avatar of eric0022
strom425 wrote:

actually two bishops can checkmate but two knights need another piece to checkmate .

for this reason bishop is preferred

 

Think again.

 

Two bishops cannot force checkmate against a lone king (and in fact, cannot checkmate the lone king).

Two bishops AND a friendly king can force checkmate against a lone king.

Two knights cannot force checkmate against a lone king (and in fact, cannot checkmate the lone king).

Two knights AND a friendly can checkmate a lone king, but the checkmate cannot be forced.

Avatar of cheeringpest64

I prefer knight more 

Avatar of wollyhood

Everytime I look at the above game, I have a huge advantage with the Ns, but I suppose I might with the Bs also? *shrug*

Avatar of wollyhood
eric0022 wrote:
strom425 wrote:

actually two bishops can checkmate but two knights need another piece to checkmate .

for this reason bishop is preferred

 

Think again.

 

Two bishops cannot force checkmate against a lone king (and in fact, cannot checkmate the lone king).

Two bishops AND a friendly king can force checkmate against a lone king.

Two knights cannot force checkmate against a lone king (and in fact, cannot checkmate the lone king).

Two knights AND a friendly can checkmate a lone king, but the checkmate cannot be forced.

Most chess games seem to have two Kings on the board  : /

that's quite some variation you mention

Avatar of palkochess
strom425 napísal:

actually two bishops can checkmate but two knights need another piece to checkmate .

for this reason bishop is preferred

this is true but for me is knight better

Avatar of tgdggg
Knights are better because they can jump over other pieces.
Avatar of hvega

knight

Avatar of NathanMa17

Knight

Avatar of Freevision89

Bishop is better, but Knight is trickier, I have won many games where I was lost because a nice knight move.

Avatar of Ewan_the_legend_05

bishop, covers more squares and is nicer to attack and defend with

it has more maneuverability too

 

Avatar of eric0022
Ewan_the_legend_05 wrote:

bishop, covers more squares and is nicer to attack and defend with

it has more maneuverability too

 

 

A bishop can possibly cover more squares in a single turn than a knight does.

 

However, a bishop does not cover more squares than a knight does, since a knight covers all the 64 squares on the board whereas a bishop can only cover 32 squares on the board.

 

Also the following. Can the bishop make maneuvers if nothing is captured or removed from the board?

 

Avatar of eric0022
wollyhood wrote:
eric0022 wrote:
strom425 wrote:

actually two bishops can checkmate but two knights need another piece to checkmate .

for this reason bishop is preferred

 

Think again.

 

Two bishops cannot force checkmate against a lone king (and in fact, cannot checkmate the lone king).

Two bishops AND a friendly king can force checkmate against a lone king.

Two knights cannot force checkmate against a lone king (and in fact, cannot checkmate the lone king).

Two knights AND a friendly can checkmate a lone king, but the checkmate cannot be forced.

Most chess games seem to have two Kings on the board  : /

that's quite some variation you mention

 

As in, you will need your king to box in the opponent's king so that checkmate can be forced by the two bishops. If your king stays in the opposite corner to your opponent's, then the two bishops cannot force checkmate on their own.

Avatar of eric0022
strom425 wrote:

actually two bishops can checkmate but two knights need another piece to checkmate .

for this reason bishop is preferred

 

I forgot to mention this case, since you mentioned that two bishops can launch a checkmate.

 

 

If White can checkmate Black in this position, history will change itself.

Avatar of eric0022
strom425 wrote:

knight can overcome bad openings for this reason  knight  is preferred

 

Sadly knights can get trapped in some opening stages.

Avatar of MARattigan
strom425 wrote:

actually two bishops can checkmate but two knights need another piece to checkmate .

for this reason bishop is preferred

On the other hand two knights have about ten times the chance of drawing against a queen that two bishops on different coloured squares have (theoretically). 

Avatar of wollyhood
eric0022 wrote:
wollyhood wrote:
eric0022 wrote:
strom425 wrote:

actually two bishops can checkmate but two knights need another piece to checkmate .

for this reason bishop is preferred

 

Think again.

 

Two bishops cannot force checkmate against a lone king (and in fact, cannot checkmate the lone king).

Two bishops AND a friendly king can force checkmate against a lone king.

Two knights cannot force checkmate against a lone king (and in fact, cannot checkmate the lone king).

Two knights AND a friendly can checkmate a lone king, but the checkmate cannot be forced.

Most chess games seem to have two Kings on the board  : /

that's quite some variation you mention

 

As in, you will need your king to box in the opponent's king so that checkmate can be forced by the two bishops. If your king stays in the opposite corner to your opponent's, then the two bishops cannot force checkmate on their own.

Yeh I know sorry. It was really funny when I first wrote it, but then when I turned my comprehension knob up further, it seemed a bit kingless really.