People say that bishops are more valuable than Knights

PawN_Heart

But if you are 2000 below I think knights rule the game, its the trickiest piece on board. 

  • How many games did u already resigned because of that danm royal fork
MarkGrubb

Neither is objectively better than the other. They favour different positions. Sometimes its necessary to shape the position for the pieces, sometimes trade off pieces to suit the position.

katerinah337

Well I am under 2000, but in closed position knights were usually better for me and in middle game they are tricky. But in endgame I mostly won when I had bishop and my opponent knight. 

jerrylmacdonald

Point values are relative to the state of the position.

For example a d-pawn is slightly more valued than an a-pawn. A white pawn on the 7th rank is more than one on the second.  A bishop is worth more in open positions and a knight worth more in closed.  The points are for quick analysis of a position but should never trump true positional analysis or tactical advantage.

AtaChess68
I didn’t know the expression ‘royal fork’ but now I have heard it I won’t forget. Yes, I resigned games due to a damn royal fork. Not once. Not twice.
thephoenix639
Nights are way better
Steeler033

royal fork you say........hmmmmm

Komnenos1097

General rule from what I've heard from people: bishops are better in an open position where they have open diagonals to attack and defend on, knights are better in a closed position. This also generally means that knights are stronger in the early game, and bishops are stronger in the late game.

Anonymous_Dragon

One of the reasons behind the Bishop having a slightly higher value than the knight (3.2 / 3) is because of their higher utility than the knight in much more games than vice versa . I read this somewhere that out of millions of games played by top engines , there were slightly more cases where the Bishop proved to be more effective than their were cases where the knight proved to be more effective. 

So in my opinion , combining this data , and the traditional knowledge that knights are effective in closed positions and bishops in open we can conclude that the Bishop is more valuable than the knight since the probability of a random chess game ending up in an open position is more likely than not. 

Also another key feature is that a Bishop at the centre controls more squares than a knight. And it's much more mobile as well .

MarkGrubb

knights gain in strength as they advance towards your opponents position. On the 4th rank they are roughly equal to a bishop, on the 5th rank they can be better, on the 6th rank they can be equal to a rook meaning an opponent may be willing to exchange the knight for a rook to get rid of it. A knight outpost on the 5th or 6th rank controlling infiltration squares on an open file in your opponents position is a great advantage.

Destroyereck
O
Tonya_Harding

_ Knight is the strongest piece is most middlegames

_ "GMs beat IMs by trading their Bishops for their Knights" (quote I forgot who from)

_ The more pawns are blocked, the stronger are the Knights in endgames, compared to Bishops who often will prevail in endgames where most pawns are free to move.

_ The pair of Bishop, constitutes a strong couple, but Queen+Knight is the Bonny & Clyde of Chess.

_ There is a reason why, Bishops have got 3 pawns value, and Knights aswell.

_ Don't listen to what the woodpushers say, read books.