why the knight

Sort:
Avatar of Torkil
ErrantDeeds wrote:

I think you know you're a player when you promote to a Knight. Not something I've ever done, sadly...


Neither have I, but at least this is a position which could have arisen in one of my games if my opponent had taken a different turn:

Avatar of antne003

KISSINGER,  i agree with you,  palladin is  his name and  the symbol for this game.

a knight on the rim is grim , but let him loose in the center of  the board,  i tremble because they can be  incredible foes that can lead you into many traps

                               tony ( antne003)

                from the jersey  shore

Avatar of pimpskillz
Minzz0 wrote:

I used to find knites very troublesome as well when I was a begginer but as time brewed on and my play got better I played more and more endgames (you tend to pull your punches the more you learn) I noticed how the knites could be very bad pieces in the endgame... and how they were useless in a variety of other situations so now I prefer bishops.


In the beginning i might prefer the bishop but in the end game id take the knight and any other piece to solidify a victory.

Avatar of pimpskillz

i guess it does depend on circumstance i like how rainbowrising did the good and bad thing

Avatar of sstteevveenn
RainbowRising wrote:
sstteevveenn wrote:

here is a bishop fork

 

 

 


yeah i meant to delete that point before i posted it lol. Nice one :)


It's an easy one to miss when you are thinking about forks because it's easy to just think about the bishop going forwards when attacking and only attacking in those directions.  Sometimes when thinking about it, it might take me a second to realise the bishop can fork by going between 2 pieces.

Avatar of pimpskillz
sstteevveenn wrote:
RainbowRising wrote:
sstteevveenn wrote:

here is a bishop fork

 

 

 


yeah i meant to delete that point before i posted it lol. Nice one :)


It's an easy one to miss when you are thinking about forks because it's easy to just think about the bishop going forwards when attacking and only attacking in those directions.  Sometimes when thinking about it, it might take me a second to realise the bishop can fork by going between 2 pieces.


 yeah but the the knight can attack up to 8 pieces at one time. and usually once he get started the damage he causes before he sacrifices himself is devistating.

Avatar of ncpharaoh

next to the king, queen, rooks, bishops and the pawns the knight is ok.

Avatar of robincookuk

Knights starting position on the board is weak. Two knights side by side is effective. Get the knight central and subdue any impasse to more strategic diagonals. Good luck.

Avatar of pimpskillz
ncpharaoh wrote:

next to the king, queen, rooks, bishops and the pawns the knight is ok.


 lol

Avatar of gcfbron

Allways save you Knights but leave your bishops for the endgame

Avatar of antne003

 a knight on the rim is grim, so for effective use of more  spaces to cover, get him out in the  center

Avatar of uritbon

without Knights Swedish chess would really be quite boring don't you think?

Avatar of --Eshel--

thats because Knights movement complement the other pieces in chess, especially Queens movement........in fact whit the knight you can atack another piece whit out being atack

Avatar of bomtrown

I like it when my queen does not get trapped by the knights.

Avatar of pimpskillz
rab63 wrote:

The Knights are like Japanese Samurai thats how I veiw them when I play I do not See them is knights in my head. I say keep them in the game


 i agree i'll keep them