Which is better, Bishop or Knight?

Hi guys!

I've been hearing so many people argue about the Bishop being better than the Knight and the Knight being better than the Bishop. I think the Bishop is better than the Knight, what do you guys think?

Depends on the position.

Third response: it also depends on your team. I hear queen and knight make a good couple, and the same goes for rook and bishop.

even this level of generality is misleading. knights can be as helpless in super closed positions as badly as bishops. knights are more circumstantial when they are good and bad vs bishops. 

I think that they are pretty much equal only the Bishop can cover more spaces and Knight by Bishop is usually frowned upon. 

I don't think bishops are allowed to become a couple with someone else...

Come to think of it, the queen and knight getting together also seems quite scandalous.

Haha, I had the same thoughts but then I decided to be the bold commentator... Ladies and gentlemen at home, you heard it from me, WSama, signing out.

Yea, more like the hol... - I should refrain. But I think that's a good idea for certain levels of play, I also used to feel the same way. Generally speaking anyway.

Of course there are many positions in which the knight would dominate the bishop, this is just one example that shows why (most?) players prefer a bishop in the end game.

"but vast majority of the time even a bad knight will outdo even your opponents "good" bishop because It has much more mobility." 

except this completely contradicts what a bad knight is. a knight better than a good bishop in a position is  a super knight, not a bad knight.

I think Knight is better than Bishop because Knight can check and eat Rook, Bishop, Queen, Pawn.

Averaged over many games they're worth the same.

But in every position each piece's value changes. This includes pawns, rooks, queens, everyone. One knight wont be worth the same as the other knight, for example.

There is a small bonus for the bishop pair though, so the first bishop you lose is usually worth a little more... but as a lower rated player you should probably just ignore that. It takes a fair amount of jiu-jitsu to grind the bishop pair all the way to a win.

Google "kauffmans material imbalances" to read more. This dude did statistical analysis of a database full of games where all players were rated over 2300.

I personally try not to favorite any one piece. I sometimes trade my bishop for a knight and vice versa, trade queens off the board early, and even trade two pieces for a rook and a pawn at times. I find this helps to develop a more intimate understanding of each piece, and therefore develop the ability to create the most suitable environment for your plans (which aren't without the pieces on the board). In the end this nurtures a more flexible style of play, one that is able to flow in/with many situations. So ultimately, it's as the points indicate, a bishop and a knight are of equal standing, but each one is a unique individual piece, and to use it well you must understand it well (which includes understanding the environment in which it thrives). Throughout our journey, we will often find that our opinions of things are ever growing and thus ever changing, so long as we continue to grow as people. Let us all enjoy arguing over which is better, whether we change those views or not, for many more years to come.

WSama, I think Kb4 is better than Bd5 as it allows capture of the knight next turn.

I believe Bishops are slightly better than knights, but are fairly close in value. I know that when time is ticking down I have to tread more carefully with knights on the board. The weird L shapes that they move in require more focus as to not make a mistake.

I remember reading somewhere GM's opinions on what the pieces should be worth and the bishops were usually equal or slightly better than the knight over all.

I missed that one, thanks. Haha...if it were tactics and points were on the line, I'd have a lot of hate mail to deal with.

The bishop pair isn't a small advantage. Though they cant do trick knight forks, they are an extreme pain to play against, and you usually want to get rid of one.

i think most masters play under this operating assumption

"until something in the position hints otherwise, or its a theoretical line, its easier/better to keep the bishop over the knight, more often than not, it can flourish in more positions than the knight can"

i remember a crucial game in my career, that made me abandon a specific line in the nimzowitsch defense. the critical line, lead to a virtually symmetrical position except i had bishop+ knight vs the bishop pair. i thought that the rare times i got to play such line, i should at least be able to hold it to a draw agaisnt equal opposition. 

i in fact did play it agaisnt someone about equal to me in strength, and lost badly. The bishop pair, always found a way to make black's life annoying having to play defensive, whats worse, his king had an easier time marching to the center than mine because the bishop pair was too dangerous. i eventually lost.

whats interesting though is that in the same opening in a different sideline, black also ends up in a bishop pair vs bishop knight pair, except its absolutely equal because white has a weak e pawn black can attack twice, but since white has a bishop pair, can only defend once!