Well, more than one of the pieces, I generally like the bishops pair. I've read Anand is very fond of the knights pair lately.
ARE YOU A BISHOP PERSON OR A KNIGHT PERSON?!?!?!
Sort:
Oh,yeah, the bishop pair controls so many squares and is instrumental in a side attack. Not to mention, two bishops controls like 20 more squares than two knights!
Bishops. Except when they commit heresy. Then I prefer knights.
Not a fanboy of either. Depend on the situation on the board.
The knight is more fun as the attacks are harder to see coming and the forks can be devastating even in an endgame.
two bishops when the game is open...........two knights definitely when the game is clogged up and closed
Ahh, the eternal question of B v N, second only to the A v B one (Ass person vs Boobs person, from a male perspective, though females also probably have a preference).
I'm more of a "put your hands together" person myself. The way I see it, nothing beats a combination of a killer derriere and a nice rack on top of it, just like it's great to have at least one Bishop and one Knight in one's arsenal.
Porn chess.... Has anyone thought of that before?! Cha-ching! $$$
Octopus 🐙 knights?!?! That is just amazing! Never thought of it that way!
I agree that knights are better at ambushing, but do not forget that bishops can create batteries which are just as dangerous.
When the game is open, bishops are potentially just covering squares while knights are actually doing things, but overall, yeah!
Heinkel111, I so definitely agree with you! High five ✋ for same opinions! I like knights!
Seleinko, I agree that both are necessary for a good game. However, everyone has their own preference, so what is yours? And if you really don’t have one,why are they same to you? Is it just because they are both worth 3 pawns?
I would personally like the knights because of there is a destroying fork of them every once in a while. But my coach says the bishop is worth 3.3 and the knight is just 3
I like bishops better by a smidge
Knights tend to be better in many of my games because of their closed or semi-closed nature. But I find Bishops easier to use. The # of confusing ways knights can be used in checkmates is just dizzying.
im a black knight my favourite openings are the tango and the alekhine hiiiiiah
In my experience, I have found that one of each is generally better than two of either, though my own knight play is a bit stronger than my bishop play.
The knight tends to be stronger with the queens still on the board, simply because the knight can attack the queen without support. The bishop pair gets stronger as the board opens up, but a board which is too open will weaken them in comparison to opposing rooks. Both minor pieces can run out of squares surprisingly fast, but having them adds versatility to your attack which you don't get with other material combinations.
The bishop pair can create powerful crossing and raking attacks, but their inability to converge on a single key square is a glaring weakness, one which I've often used to beat opponents in the middlegame and endgame. A pair of knights, on the other hand, can converge and coordinate well, but can't give tempo, which is often lethal in the endgame (again, a weakness I've exploited often).
Having a knight and a bishop can usually cover for the weaknesses which each piece has by itself. There is no simple strategy to counter the combination, and pawn structures can be more easily adapted to leverage the bishop color you have, rendering the opponent's second bishop almost useless. I have played literally thousands of games if this type (including quite a few against much stronger opponents), and I have yet to lose one where I held a bishop & knight against a pair of either piece.
Bishops-they are always in the game, whether on the back row or not. They can control many more spaces than a knight, although they are limited to one colour, and are key to a winning thrust attack on the king. Necessary to back up pieces like the queen and the rook, they can wreck havoc amongst pawns of the same colour, and doubled pawns are playtime to a bishop. Pinning is really awesome, and bishops are what you need to establish pressure on your opponent. However, pawns can really disrupt a bishop’s line of attack/defence, and in the end game, bishops can simply be rendered useless. But actually, depending on the position, knights can find themselves in a position where they are useless-that’s when you trade pieces.
I suppose it is really a question of style-theoretically, a bishop can beat a knight, and controls more squares. But with their unique power, knights are hard to track, and attack in all directions...kind of. So, what do YOU think? If you say Knight!, then that’s great! Leave a list of why you think knights are better, and why bishops are inferior. But if you think Bishop!, I won’t disagree. Just leave a list like for the knight, and maybe you will convince me to change preferred minor piece!
Like Alekhine the famous chess player who used his knights so incredibly destructively, and Capablanca who knew how to manipulate his bishops to their full potential on the board, and like how Lasker prefers Black and Fischer prefers White, this is probably a highly debatable subject, and I CAN’T WAIT to read what you all will post; don’t forget to put some awesome examples!
And remember, this is not a flame thread. Respect one another’s opinions. Well, what are you waiting for-go ahead and post, post, post!