do you prefer knight or bishop??♘♗
Sort:
i love bishop..you?
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
Oh no, why this topic again???
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.
I prefer knight more
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*
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
Jul 7, 2019
0
#9
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
Knights are better because they can jump over other pieces.
Knight
Bishop is better, but Knight is trickier, I have won many games where I was lost because a nice knight move.
bishop, covers more squares and is nicer to attack and defend with
it has more maneuverability too
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?
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.
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.
strom425 wrote:
knight can overcome bad openings for this reason knight is preferred
Sadly knights can get trapped in some opening stages.
Jul 7, 2019
0
#19
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).
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.