Knight
Sort:
I think it depends on the specific game position. Knights are good in closed games for hopping around where the bishops are somewhat stuck on their diagonals. Bishops are good in open games especially end games where they are not hampered by pieces. Actually, I read that bishops are worth 3.5 points and knights worth 3 points.
really? I thought they both worth 3 points.
I actually prefer Bishops. Especially when I still have them both. I just place them strategically to be able to put the King in check whenever he makes a wrong move.
And then play with the other pieces.
And then play with the other pieces.
Whoever I play with takes my knight for their bishops...
Mar 7, 2018
0
#7
If they do this for no good reason then you should get good positions.
Mar 7, 2018
0
#8
To me, knights are better by themselves than bishops. But I'd rather have two bishops than two knights.
Knights are always better than bishops!
Knights are better in closed positions, Bishops are better in open positions (pretty much 100% of the time)
NOT true. In a Scotch Gambit endgame, the knight (c5) dominates the passive bishop (c8)- you can win this one a pawn down.
i'll give you trophies if you guys can tell me more about this topic.
So, this 1390 BULLET player (lol that's why) assume people like Knights more than bishops. I am willing to do a minor "sacrifice" (N for B), but most like bishops. Tip, bro. Stop the bullet!
The relative value of the pieces is not constant. To use an often repeated phrase: it depends on the position. Yusupov relates with approval Georgy Lisitsin's five factors that influence the value of a piece:
The central position of the piece
A safe and well protected position
The activity of the piece
The coordination of the piece with other pieces
The mobility of the piece.
These factors shift during a game. You must take that into account in evaluating the pieces.
Why do most chess players like knights better than bishops?
Are the knights actually better?