bishop biggest weakness

Never, ever put your bishops behind your own pawns!!!

Why not? You have a discovered attack :) Or, do you mean something like this:

or like this:

In general. but don't think so rigidly. There are many exceptions when it's ok. As with just about everything else in chess, the decision whether to commit your Bishop behind it's own pawns must be taken based on the current board position...

@ yusuf_prasojo:

It was just to demonstrate his point. The actual position he showed doesn't matter. And no he doesn't mean like your 2nd example.

The position definitely does matter. Putting a bishop behind a mobile pawn group doesn't make the bishop bad. However have it stuck behind a fixed pawn chain such as yusuf's 1st example does. Neither of the bishops in the originally posted diagram are bad since a simple pawn moves and they have full access to long diagonals. 

Side note: Yusuf, the first example is not resignable for white, as it is an easy draw. White simply plays his king to g1, and can't be forced to give up opposition as he can just shuffle his bishop. 

A point from IM John Watson about so called "bad" Bishops which I've been appreciating more lately (I can't remember his exact words, but this is the jist of it): Treasure your bad Bishops as they often play crucial roles in defending good pawns. In this game although my Bishop was technically healthier than his, it was still to be recommended (I think) that he preserved his Bishop:

You had your bad bishop outside the pawn chain, and with your opponents pawns also on light squares it made it very good. I don't see how this game has anything to do with bad bishops.

Oh, I missed that one! Yes, such simple techniques are often out of my head because of my lack of experience playing chess (Calculating is mandatory for me because such is not readily available in my memory). Sometimes I blunderly exchange pieces thinking I will win the game with K+B vs K :)

I was referring to my opponent's Bishop, which was very "bad". I know my Bishop was good. And I think the game has a lot to do with good and bad Bishops.

Not at all. His bishop was inside, the pawn chain, but wasn't bad for very long. after ...exd5 his bishop has great scope. 

The game was decided by your opponent missing Bg4 where you win material, not due to the inactivity of his bishop. 

When did he have the chance to develop the Bishop out of it then? I could have always played something like Qg5 and stopped it from coming to f5 or g4.

The game was decided by that, but I was fully in control I think straight from the start of the middle-game when I was already much better (largely due to his bad Bishop, also due to the fact that it was very hard for him to make the desired b4 push)...

Keep telling yourself that, but after 17...Qd8 I'd say your strictly worse. Very worse. I'd also much rather have his position after 10...Nbd7. ...b5 looked like a waste of time, but after you wasted 2 tempi giving up your bishop for his, he is better. Your game was decided by tactics, not strategy. 

I mean, the game has good/bad bishops but the game play doesn't get to the point where it matters so it's not the best example.  Around move 15-16 the game isn't about the bishops at all, black's bishop has scope.  In fact more than white's bishop unless white can find the time to move his knight out of the way!  It's more about his d5 pawn, the e-file, and if he can play b4.  White's pieces look a little bunched up and black should get the initiative fairly easily, he can grab the e file and get b4 in before white can put any pressure on d5.

I'm only looking at move 16 on, black wastes 4-5 moves in a row doing nothing and finally loses a pawn for it (Qd8 with Re8 really wanted to be played), I actually like black a little better after move 15 -- his only weakness is d5 and the only piece white can put on it is the queen which will be kicked away after Re8.  Black has the center and Q-side to play on + his king is safe, meanwhile white's compensation, the d5 weakness, can't be maneuvered against, that's what this middle game (at move 16) was about.  If you want to compare bishops, I'd actually want to say black's is better (of course later though, if it got to an endgame I'd want white's heh)

I'd say more a mixture. Even if he'd have played fxe6 I would have still had the much better position.

His bishop wasn't bad. I don't know why you keep on telling yourself that. The b4 push doesn't seem necessary as he should focus more on getting his minor piece to optimal squares which there already are plenty of without any more pawn breaks. 

I'm not saying that I'm better than a GM but Nbd7-f6-e4 looks like better development than just placing it on c6. I'm not going to just blindly develop my piece to a square that a GM says is 'best' even after out of book variations have been reached.

I don't see how you think you have a good game after move 17...Qd8, and I'd gladly play out the position and I think who is better will be extremely clear after 5-10 moves. 

I just explained it to you and you don't seem to have much of an answer. And I come to the forums to have discussions, not to add other games to my list and have to play out positions just to demonstrate my points. If however you come up with a decent argument that puts any doubt on my assertions then I might play out the position with you.

* Disclaimer: I'm not saying I'm definitely right about everything I've said. But until someone can provide a convincing argument otherwise I'll stick to my guns.*

I have a perfect answer, yet you wont play me in a game b/c you know your are dead losing. Id gladly do unrated, 14/day per move, it wouldn't take long for you to realize your mistake in evaluation. 

lol I'll let you think that. If you don't have any more arguments there's no point in me continuing to track this.

Well I beat Glaurung 2.2 in that position. I'm sure Id have a tougher time against you though. 

Ah, I see now 17.Qd8 18.g4 fails to Re8 followed by Nd6-e4. I don't know why you couldn't have told me that before when I asked, but anyway I honestly was very sure I was right and not scared to play you. I can admit when I'm wrong though. My apologies. I was somewhat lucky.