That awkward moment when you realize you're not the first chess player to consider the relative value of the pieces.
What did he say?
That awkward moment when you realize you're not the first chess player to consider the relative value of the pieces.
What did he say?
This is kind of a silly subject because the truth is--it depends on the position.
I took a knight and a bishop from my chess set and put them in a small bag and when they came out--the knight had won as it is usually better in closed positions...
That is because you put the Knight in first so when the Bishop entered the bag he was already going to be under attack. Heheheheh.
Put a Knight and a Bishop on the side of the board or corner. Which one will get out that situation quicker and to the other side of the board. The Bishop every time. The Bishop is the only piece that can initiate pressure on the h-file for a mate.
Bishop has more value according to Hans Berliner's system
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chess_piece_relative_value
Check it out!
The knight is more likely to adminster the wonderful smothered mate.
The knight can get to all squares of a chess board and poor bishop is limited to either light or dark squares only.
I have not looked at Berliner's system but am guessing he says the bishop has more value at the start of the game--but this is nothing new--most players already know that.
I have not looked at Berliner's system but am guessing he says the bishop has more value at the start of the game--but this is nothing new--most players already know that.
personally, I'm thinking bishops are more valuable at the end of the game as the board less of pawns, bishop can move more squares than knight... and knights are more valuable at earlier of the game coz horse can jump any obstables while bishop can't.. but that's just for me
There's nothing in it - both knights and bishops are not democtratically elected, and both cannot be women.... in the U.K anyway.
In gothic chess there is a piece that combines knight and bishop movement, i think.