Forums

The two bishops = advantage?

Sort:
InverseVariation

"They [Steinitz and his successors] also considered the possession of the two bishops as a real factor in guaranteeing an overall advantage, though this particular question, more than any other, is today a controversial one. For example, I can think of few cases where the two bishops proved a decisive factor. As a rule endings won with the help of the two bishops had other favourable factors for the winning side (better king position, greater space, the presence of enemy weaknesses). On the other hand, I can recall quite a lot of cases where two knights showed the greater energy and really trounced the bishops. Hence I feel it would be better for us not to consider the two bishops as a factor that works independently of other factors." -- A. Kotov, from Think like a Grandmaster

Thoughts?

Yaroslavl

There are several factors that make the 2Bs an advantage, as long as your opponent has only one B or no Bs.  And, the pawn structure is not closed and your opponent has 1 or 2 Ns.

The factors are:

1.Bs can gain or lose a tempo (even when reflecting off the edge ofthe board.  Ns CANNOT.  This is especially important when your opponent is in zugswang. Big advantage for the Bs

2.Bs can get across the board in 1 move.  Ns take from 4-5 moves to get across the board.  Big time advantage for the Bs

3.A Bishop alone can trap a N on the edge of the board.  A Knight CANNOT trap a B on he edge of the board.  Big advantage to B

4.Bs can hem in enemy pawns and Ns.  Ns CANNOT hem in enemy pawns or Bs.  Big advantage to Bs

5.2Bs are a mating force.  2Ns ARE NOT a mating force.  Big advantabge to Bs

There are more but I think you get the idea.

onizukant
Yaroslavl a écrit :
5.2Bs are a mating force.  2Ns ARE NOT a mating force.  Big advantabge to Bs

There are more but I think you get the idea.

They are. It's just very complicated... and, by the way, there is lots of situations when kniths work better than bishop... It's all situational.

macer75
Yaroslavl wrote:

3.A Bishop alone can trap a N on the edge of the board.  A Knight CANNOT trap a B on he edge of the board.  Big advantage to B

4.Bs can hem in enemy pawns and Ns.  Ns CANNOT hem in enemy pawns or Bs.  Big advantage to Bs

Could you explain #3 and the part of #4 about bishops hemming in kinghts?

Yaroslavl
onizukant wrote:
Yaroslavl a écrit :
5.2Bs are a mating force.  2Ns ARE NOT a mating force.  Big advantabge to Bs

There are more but I think you get the idea.

They are. It's just very complicated... and, by the way, there is lots of situations when kniths work better than bishop... It's all situational.

You forgot to quote me completely:

There are several factors that make the 2Bs an advantage, as long as your opponent has only one B or no Bs.  And, the pawn structure is not closed and your opponent has 1 or 2 Ns.

Yaroslavl
[COMMENT DELETED]
macer75
Yaroslavl wrote:

Please be relevant, helpful & nice!

?

aoBye
Yaroslavl wrote:

1.Bs can gain or lose a tempo (even when reflecting off the edge ofthe board.  Ns CANNOT.  This is especially important when your opponent is in zugswang. Big advantage for the Bs

What does "reflecting off the edge of the board" mean?

solskytz

Like a snooker shot, I suppose, where you hurl it at the edge, and it comes back on the other diagonal to hit his king. Advanced technique. Always comes as a surprise. 

Yaroslavl
macer75 wrote:
Yaroslavl wrote:

3.A Bishop alone can trap a N on the edge of the board.  A Knight CANNOT trap a B on he edge of the board.  Big advantage to B

4.Bs can hem in enemy pawns and Ns.  Ns CANNOT hem in enemy pawns or Bs.  Big advantage to Bs

Could you explain #3 and the part of #4 about bishops hemming in kinghts?

I would gladly do that, but I have not learned how to post interactive diagrams.

Yaroslavl
AgnosticOracle wrote:
Yaroslavl wrote:

1.Bs can gain or lose a tempo (even when reflecting off the edge ofthe board.  Ns CANNOT.  This is especially important when your opponent is in zugswang. Big advantage for the Bs

What does "reflecting off the edge of the board" mean?

For an example read, "Secrets of Minor-Piece Endings", by GM John Nunn.

pg. 265, K+2B v K+N.  It is an endgame that although extensively researched and studied, for 300 years it was thought to be a draw.  It is actually a forced mate for the K+2Bs.

There are positions where the B fianchetto even though it takes at least 2 moves to accomplish, when the B moves from the edge of the board at(c1,f1,c8,f8) to the long diagonal it actually gains a tempo.

Toadofsky

My thoughts? It depends on the position.

CardSure

I watched a bit of the Norway Chess yesterday, and when Garry Kasparov joined the commentary team, he immediately noted that Simen Agdestein, playing black, had given up the bishop pair. Kasparov implied that this constituted a significant disadvantage, and that he would rather play Aronian's position with white.

Agdestein drew the game, so maybe it's a matter of personal preference after all.

Yaroslavl
CardSure wrote:

I watched a bit of the Norway Chess yesterday, and when Garry Kasparov joined the commentary team, he immediately noted that Simen Agdestein, playing black, had given up the bishop pair. Kasparov implied that this constituted a significant disadvantage, and that he would rather play Aronian's position with white.

 

Agdestein drew the game, so maybe it's a matter of personal preference after all.

Please post the game.

CardSure
http://www.chessgames.com/perl/chessgame?gid=1757437
kleelof

Tapani

Also known as coralling the knight.

Yaroslavl

You forgot to mention that essentially this was a closed pawn structure and blocked center.  Also Black still had his LSB.  Without open diagonals there is no real advantage to having the B-pair.  I mentioned this in post #2.

Here is the game:

          http://www.chessgames.com/perl/chessgame?gid=1757437

aoBye

One way the bishop pair is clearly better from a weaker player's point of view is to look at how a bishop is weaker than a knight. The bishop's primary weakness vis-a-vis a knight is that the bishop can only play on half the board. A player can keep her pieces safe from the bishop by having them on the opposite color.

If you have both bishop your opponent doesn't have this option. This tactic may less useful in master level play (not being a master I wouldn't know), but I know it is a factor when I play.

Rumo75
InverseVariation hat geschrieben:

"They [Steinitz and his successors] also considered the possession of the two bishops as a real factor in guaranteeing an overall advantage, though this particular question, more than any other, is today a controversial one. For example, I can think of few cases where the two bishops proved a decisive factor. [...]

Well, in Kotov's time or in Kotov's mind it might have been a controversial subject. Today it's not. Either every world class grandmaster as well as Houdini are highly delusional, or two bishop against any other constellation of minor pieces with pawns on both side and open center mark a significant material advantage.

I don't mean to argue ad hominem here, but I'd like to add that Kotov's ideas are out-dated in more than one way. Think of his idea of "candidate moves", that was so nicely caricatured in Hendrik's "Move first, think later!"