Although of course it depends on the position, my firm belief is that there are more positions where a bishop is stronger than where a knight is stronger. Then again, that might be due to my love of the bishop pair :)
is the bishop really a little stronger then the knight？
Sort:
there are several ways to think about this question. Here are some answers:
1) 2 bishops can mate. 2 knights can't. Sometimes that matters.
2) knights can hit both colors, though it takes a move to swap. 1 knight is better than 1 bishop in many games.
3) knights affect a 'circle' on the board, really. They can bypass pawn walls. In endgames with a lot of pawns left, the knight excels. Conversely, the bishop affects a diagonal and excels at an open board with a couple of pawns left. The open board is more common in my experience!
4) knights can defend each other. Bishops cannot. Bishops work well with any other piece but stink if its all you have. Knights are harder to coordinate with other pieces (doable, and powerful, but harder) and are much better if it is all you have left in many situations.
5) bishops can get to a runaway pawn faster. Knights may not be able to cross the board. This is really an addendum to the "open board" idea but worth a mention.
there are similar things to say but you can already guess the conclusion: it depends on the position!
jonnin wrote:
there are several ways to think about this question. Here are some answers:
1) 2 bishops can mate. 2 knights can't. Sometimes that matters.
2) knights can hit both colors, though it takes a move to swap. 1 knight is better than 1 bishop in many games.
3) knights affect a 'circle' on the board, really. They can bypass pawn walls. In endgames with a lot of pawns left, the knight excels. Conversely, the bishop affects a diagonal and excels at an open board with a couple of pawns left. The open board is more common in my experience!
4) knights can defend each other. Bishops cannot. Bishops work well with any other piece but stink if its all you have. Knights are harder to coordinate with other pieces (doable, and powerful, but harder) and are much better if it is all you have left in many situations.
5) bishops can get to a runaway pawn faster. Knights may not be able to cross the board. This is really an addendum to the "open board" idea but worth a mention.
there are similar things to say but you can already guess the conclusion: it depends on the position!
can you please explain point 4 a bit deeper. I dont think i really get what you mean.
[COMMENT DELETED]
Can black actually win that? I think it's just a draw, so the knight is equal to the two bishops there.
TetsuoShima wrote:
4) knights can defend each other. Bishops cannot. Bishops work well with any other piece but stink if its all you have. Knights are harder to coordinate with other pieces (doable, and powerful, but harder) and are much better if it is all you have left in many situations.
can you please explain point 4 a bit deeper. I dont think i really get what you mean.
certainly.
A few pictures may help.
The obvious: knights defend each other and work well together by supporting each.
Here 2 knights cover a LOT of squares.
A bishop struggles to stop this pawn. It may, but the knight can attempt to intervene between them as it marches toward home. Comes down to king placement but the knight is better. If you swap them (bishop and knight) the knight can cover the next square for the pawn (on any color!!!) without being attackable by the bishop, and its easier to handle IMHO. These exact positions are off the top of my head so they may have flaws but the concept is what I am saying, not specific positions.
And finally, think about how you use the pieces together. Think about something like this, and play both sides for a bit. Unless I goofed up and provided a flawed diagram (possible lol) it should be easier to manage the rook and bishop than the rook and knight. Both can be done, yes, but the knight player will eventually have to make 2 moves in a row to acquire his desired position, and he may not have 2 moves to spare! Much more likely than having to move the bishop twice to cover something if the bishop is played centrally and never abandoned on an edge/corner or something.
Again these may be flawed as they are really just random piece placement. That is not the point. Even if I accidentally put a tactical attack in one of them, ignore it and just try to manuver the pieces and coordinate them. With the knight, you constantly have to think a couple of moves ahead to keep him on good squares and enable it to work with something else. Or for a much better example, try the bishop+knight mate drill. Then do bishop pair mate. The knight one is easier to mess up, harder to coordinate, see?
Black's king cannot penetrate. I don't see a sacrifice that works either, i.e. Blacks king on d4 and the knight on e4 with the bishop on g1, Nxg3 fxg3+ and Black screwed himself out of a weird draw. Black's pawns are on the squares needed to for his knight to win the bishops.
I think if Bishop is little stronger than knight, then there is always continuation NxB on the board without hesitate. In early stage, i would say its equal. The difference of every pieces is change when it in the middlegame and endgame. This all depend on the mobility,outpost and other factors. Its too early to say Bishop is stronger than Knight.
Actually, post 27 is a win for black, he just transfers his knight to a3
Or h3, for that matter.
Hah making an example is frustrating (I feel for the guys that make the puzzles). If I get a chance I will rip something out of a real game that makes sense but I am supposed to be working atm and can only half look at it.
I agree 2 kinghts can defend each other while 2 bishop different color cant. However the meaning of defend each other also mean knight will have less square because other knight block path for the other one. While 2 different color bishop compliment each other well and will not block at the same time.
[COMMENT DELETED]
According to Dvoretsky 2 knights next to their king draws against a queen, but two bishops ussually fail. Knight and Bishop also fail except for this case:
I still don't understand the point of this thread.
A dead draw, as any tablebase will tell you. The bishop does not have trouble with this pawn and after 1. Ke3 the knight is dominated.
PregnantMonk wrote:
(...) a pieces strength is simply all about the number of squares it can control. Thus, bishops are typically stronger in open games (less pawns and more open lanes and diagonals) and knights are typically stonger in closed games. (more locked pawns that can provide useful perches - perhaps even after a bishop sacrifice!)
No. A piece's strength is about the importance of the squares it can control (directly or indirectly - if you can reach a square within two moves it can count as 'control'). The number is one factor, but certainly not the only one.
There is a Larsen game where his opponents manages to plant a knight on the 5th row on a central square, and Larsen manages to get around the knight everytime he needs to. In that case, the knight is not worth much (but of course, that game is an exception).
How about your Rook vs my Bishop?
bean was it really a game or did you just tease your opponent with your superior chess skills
The most important thing in chess is the activity of your pieces and how well they courdinate together . You can find positions when two minor pieces will work better than a queen . as every general tip in chess , it's just a general tip , you need to evealuate your position to determine the most accurate value of your chess pieces . it doesnt mean you need to ignore those tips but you should evaluate your position by your chess pieces activity .