Or 1. It's an impossible position though with white to move.
A Bishop is stronger then a Knight !
Sort:
Nov 28, 2012
0
#63
Impossible position? Maybe black wasn't very wise, but he was in check before and decided to play Kc8 to escape.
Dunno how I missed Qc7# though lol.
I amaze myself sometimes. But at least it's a mate in 1.
Black's king could have been on b8, and white could have played Qd6+ Kc8, with white to move.
Nov 28, 2012
0
#66
Elubas wrote:
Black's king could have been on b8, and white could have played Qd6+ Kc8, with white to move.
If that's the case, White's an idiot, as there is not a square on the board that the Queen could have come from to execute Qd6+ where he didn't also have a move that was immediately mate.
For example, if the King was on b8, the Queen could not have come from the h2-b8 diagonal as Black would already have been in check with White to move. If the Queen came from anywhere on the d-file, Qd8 would have been mate. If the Queen came from anywhere on the a3-f8 diagonal, Qf8 would have been mate. Lastly, if he came from the 6th rank, then a Queen move to the back rank was mate (if it was on c6, go diagonal, not vertical, Qe8 is mate, along with Qb7 as well!)
As for strength, the Queen is clearly the strongest, and there is absolutely no reason to ever promote to Bishop or Rook with the lone exception that promotion the Queen is stalemate! The only piece that can move in such a way that the Queen can't is the Knight, and the vast majority of my underpromotions are indeed promotions to a Knight.
It is quite obvious the Queen is the strongest, and the Knight and Bishop thing is based on the postion of the pieces on the chess board.
That's true Thriller Fan, but I am arguing that the position is possible, not that Qd6+ is the best move if the king were on b8.
haven't your mums tucked you lot into your bunkbeds yet ?
No, it's too early for that.
I have a single bed. Not a bunkbed. And it's almost 7:00pm. That's dead early.
plutonia wrote:
It's amazing that two pieces so different, actually the antithesis of each other, can find themselves balanced on the chessboard. It's really an example of how great of a game chess is.
That is true...although knights actually aren't that far from bishops (their range looks kind of like arc-fragments of a bishop's movement). Thus you can get fairly similar positions:
ThrillerFan wrote:
I read one of the best middlegame books ever written, "Bishop v Knight: The Verdict" by Steve Mayer (Copywright 1997). It's a MUST READ if you really want to understand the ins and outs of the minor pieces.
I doubt very much that anything is really a "must read."
At any rate, I've already given my incisive and insightful analysis of the difference between B + N before. But since everybody just kind of seemed to ignore it, and it certainly hasn't stopped the incidence of stupid and repetitious threads like this one, I'm just gonna kind of sulk over in the corner.
(Incidentally, I hope that means you're a fan of the [US] TV show, and not that MJ song.)
I think their respective bench and squat numbers are exactly the same...Carlsen knows how to make them both stronger than I do, or they are by default... so maybe the question needs to be rephrased... ?
The funny thing is...
The guy who started the thread, after realizing he was perhaps, slightly incorrect, deleted all his posts yet left the thread open.
... LOL
cat phobia ?
or he realised those masky dudes ain't supposed to talk ?
I guarrantee you, the person reading this post, that the OP has atleast 2 ratings under 1200.
According to that diagram, it was white's turn to move, looks like a mate in 2.