Equal. You can mate with 2 bishops endgame while two knights is drawn. A single bishop can't touch half the squares, but a knight takes a long, long time to reach certain squares. Midgame is all about the position, in some one is better than another... no one can say in general, only about a specific game/position.
Which is better, Bishop or Knight?
In the middlegame, which is better, a bishop or a knight?
In the middlegame, there would still be a lot of pieces on the board. This leads to that the bishops will not be able to move as freely as Knights, therefore Knights are better.
However, in the endgame, The quantities of these pieces can determine whether a knights or bishops are better. A knight is better than A bishop, but then 2 Bishops on different square colours are better than 2 Knights. This is because a bishop can only control a colour of squares, but another bishop on the oppsite-coloured square would be able to control the whole board if they work as a team.
However, in the endgame, The quantities of these pieces can determine whether a knights or bishops are better. A knight is better than A bishop, but then 2 Bishops on different square colours are better than 2 Knights. This is because a bishop can only control a colour of squares, but another bishop on the oppsite-coloured square would be able to control the whole board if they work as a team.
Not true, it depends. In a knight vs bishop endgame with pawns on both sides of the board and no pawns in the centre, you want a bishop.
In the middlegame, which is better, a bishop or a knight?
Depends on the position.
Generally if its an open position, then bishops are better, if its closed knight are better.
I agree with Diakonia. In open positions, bishops can control many squares. In open positions, bishops are usually better. In closed positions, the movement of the bishop is harshly restricted. In closed positions, knights are usually better.
Yeah, but M1i2c3h4a5e6l7890 is kind of right too, i guess
Knights and bishops have their own advantages and disadvantages. A single bishop only has access to the squares of one color, unlike the knight. However, the bishop's movement is much "smoother" compared to the knight's movement. The bishop pair is usually better than the knight pair. You can checkmate a lone king by force with two bishops, but not with two knights. In some positions, the knight pair is better. It depends entirely on the position.
Yeah, but M1i2c3h4a5e6l7890 is kind of right too, i guess
The trouble with questions these is that we can only give "generalizations". But the ultimate factor in deciding which piece is better is the actual position.
Yeah, but M1i2c3h4a5e6l7890 is kind of right too, i guess
The trouble with questions these is that we can only give "generalizations". But the ultimate factor in deciding which piece is better is the actual position.
Well said!
Alright, I got you guys. So what you're saying is that unless there are fewer pieces on the board, a knight is always better.
Alright, I got you guys. So what you're saying is that unless there are fewer pieces on the board, a knight is always better.
Again....it depends on the position.
Alright, I got you guys. So what you're saying is that unless there are fewer pieces on the board, a knight is always better.
Not always. In an open position, the bishop is usually better because of its long-range movement. In closed positions, the knight is usually better. Remember, in a closed position, the bishop's movement is limited. Whether a position is open or closed has nothing to do with the number of pieces on the board.


In the middlegame, which is better, a bishop or a knight?