Knight or Bishop
Sort:
I'm just saying knights are awesome but so are bishops.
personally though I love knights for its forks and for its ability to jump over other pieces
At the end of the game I will rather have a knight, they are lethal.
If there’s pawns on both sides in an endgame the bishop has the advantage but on one side I like the knight better because the opponent can’t just park their pawns on one color which makes things harder
Practice the 3 basic checkmates KBB vs. K, KBN vs. K, KNN vs. KP.
Then you will appreciate that a bishop is worth more than a knight.
Nah knight all the way
tygxc wrote:
Practice the 3 basic checkmates KBB vs. K, KBN vs. K, KNN vs. KP.
Then you will appreciate that a bishop is worth more than a knight.
Based on the exact same reasoning, looking at the 2 knights endgame you might conclude that having a pawn in the endgame is worse than not having a pawn.
Based on similar reasoning, you might conclude that a rook is worth more than 2 knights.
In reality, a bishop is slightly better than a knight on average. Saying that "a bishop is worth more than a knight" is simply false. A good bishop is worth more than a bad knight. A good knight is worth more than a bad bishop.
In my opinion knights are more useful becouse they can fork easily
@6
"having a pawn in the endgame is worse than not having a pawn"
++ Usually a pawn is an asset, sometimes a pawn is a liability.
"A good knight is worth more than a bad bishop."
++ A good knight is worth more than a bad rook.
A good knight is worth more than a bad queen.
Servers
Rust
[EU/EE] VOID RUST 2x | LOOT+ | JUST WIPED!
[EU/EE] VOID RUST 2x | LOOT+ | JUST WIPED
Feb 7, 2023
0
#10
A Bishop is infinitely more powerful in an end game than a Kkkkkkkkknighit.
tygxc wrote:
@6
"having a pawn in the endgame is worse than not having a pawn"
++ Usually a pawn is an asset, sometimes a pawn is a liability.
"A good knight is worth more than a bad bishop."
++ A good knight is worth more than a bad rook.
A good knight is worth more than a bad queen.
I agree with all that.
That does not change my point that you should avoid simplistic and superficial statements like "a bishop is worth more than a knight".
There was a game that I've seen on these forums. White had a poor little bishop on e2, walled behind an a2-b3-c4-d3-e4 pawn formation. Black had a monster knight sitting on d4. Black traded with Nxe2, reasoning that "a bishop is worth more than a knight".
For me the knight is best . It’s easier to see the attacking possibilities of a bishop, but not so for the knight because of its ability to to hop over pieces, and control a much wider variety of squares than a bishop . It this that makes a knight such a dangerous piece. Also it’s an ideal piece for laying an ambush .
It depends on pawn structure. If it is locked, trade your bishop for their knight and gain an advantage because knights are more mobile in closed position than bishops. If not, bishops are better.
The knight it’s a much tricky piece to keep under observation, not so a bishop , especially in the middle game .
Personally, knights are a little bit more valuable than knights but that starts to change towards the endgame as the board is emptied But as a beginner there's nothing i dread more than an unexpected knight fork in the endgame 😭
Obviously it depends on the board position, but even so I still prefer the knight .
The knight must do it’s work , in the opening and middle of the game .
Since insights gives you your piece accuracy a better way to look at personal value might be accuracy%*piece value