Why is it bad to block check with pawn?

Sort:
TwoWaysNoWays

I don't know exactly, but for many cases, I see players block check by moving their knight to block it. But:

 
And there are many other cases such as:
In general, alot of times when players are in check by the bishop in situations similar to this, they tend to block it with their knight, but why not block with their pawn? Is there a reason? I guess it does mess up the players pawn structure a bit, but they can also equalize later, and it chases the bishop around.
 



TheLastSupper

Blocking with a piece, develops a piece.

And most people do not like to block c3/c6/f3/f6 with a pawn, because they usually want to put their knight there.

JamesColeman

In the first example, blocking with the pawn is clearly superior to 3...Nc6

The second example is a bit weird but again, blocking with the pawn would be good - though white would have a large advantage after any sensible blocking move.

WindowsEnthusiast

Blocking with a pawn to gain tempo is often desirable, but when it blocks a desirable development square for another piece (here the knight), there could be a tradeoff. Plus, when the pawn structure is looser, blocking with a pawn could be fatal:

This is a contrived example, but in general, the facts that pawns cannot move backwards and are immobile, potentially getting in the way of other pieces, are the main reasons to not block with a pawn. You will want to block with a pawn if doing so gains a tempo without compromising your position.

blueemu

In both of the examples given in the first post, blocking with the Pawn is fine.