Game 4489927 A further example only of where two bishops are one step ahead of the horses,in the right position at the right time in the right game------------😴
Let's make full analysis for B & KN.
Number of reached & covered squares,
KN: Min=4, max 8 : constant / position independent
B: Min 7, Max 14 : variable. Can be as low as 1 covered & reached square.
Ability to form barricade
A bishop can barricade a KN provided the Kn is at a1, h1, a8 and h8. A bishop has to be for example at a4 and d4. It takes a K and another KN to release the barricaded KN.
A KN has no such ability. In fact two KNs can't form barricade against a B.
Fork
A KN cannot fork against two Bs. A B can.
Pin
A KN cannot pin a bishop. A bishop can pin both KNs.
When there are a few pieces on the board, a pair of bishops regain their full strength in particular the number of reached & covered squares. The advantage of a KN to have constant number of reached squares 8 has no longer valid. The advantage of a KN that can cover both square has no longer significant when we are talking about pair versus pair.
My suggestion. If you are not sure that your position really need two KNs, then vote for two Bishops.
Originally posted by BahariA very lop-sided and dangerous view.
Let's make full analysis for B & KN.
Number of reached & covered squares,
KN: Min=4, max 8 : constant / position independent
B: Min 7, Max 14 : variable. Can be as low as 1 covered & reached square.
Ability to form barricade
A bishop can barricade a KN provided the Kn is at a1, h1, a8 and h8. A bishop has to be for example at a4 and d4. ...[text shortened]... estion. If you are not sure that your position really need two KNs, then vote for two Bishops.
Even your examples are incomplete.
The 'barricade' can be anywhere.
Here is a better example of a Bishop hemming in a Knight.
Once again the use of a diagram is worth a 1,000 words.
Originally posted by greenpawn34Thank you. You are right. Next time I will put the the board.
A very lop-sided and dangerous view.
Even your examples are incomplete.
The 'barricade' can be anywhere.
Here is a better example of a Bishop hemming in a Knight.
Once again the use of a diagram is worth a 1,000 words.
[fen]8/8/8/8/4B3/8/8/4n3[/fen]
I too can give lop-sided one way views
only this time favouring the Knight.
Look at this position Black to play
If it was a Bishop on e3 then there is
now way that Black can promote his pawn.
The Bishop is a pathetic onlooker, totally sterile.
The Knight however rules.
1...Nd1 2.Kh2 Nf2 and the pawn Queens.
Contined...
continued...
Same setting only this time White is playing down the board
I've changed the Black h-pawn to a White a-pawn.
Black to play
Once again if it was a Bishop on d6 then this is a draw.
The mighty all powerful Bishop simply shrugs it's shoulders.
However the steady Knight once again shows the way.
1...Nb5 2.a7 Nc7 mate.
Originally posted by heinzkatOOPS....
1. ... Ng4? 2. hxg4 White wins!!
😉
Good job I said in the original thread...
Same setting only this time White is playing down the board 😉
Anyway no need to take the Knight, a Knight is hopless v Rook Pawns.
Infact if you read the rest of this thread you might as well get rid
of your Knights, they are a liability.
- Joined
- 11 Jan 09
- Moves
- 68814
101chesstips.com had this to say:
The relative value of the knight and bishop can change during the games progression. In the beginning of the game the knight is more valuable than the bishop due to the knight's ability to jump over a crowd. Towards the middle game the bishop becomes more important due to his ability to cover the board. A rook is generally not much of a threat in the beginning of the game, but is often critical to the end game since is can attack open files quite easily. Keep in mind that the value of a piece will change with the progression of the game.
Originally posted by dirtysniperMy opinion, the strength of a knight is almost constant throughout the game. The strength of a bishop increases as more pieces are removed from the board.
101chesstips.com had this to say:
The relative value of the knight and bishop can change during the games progression. In the beginning of the game the knight is more valuable than the bishop due to the knight's ability to jump over a crowd. Towards the middle game the bishop becomes more important due to his ability to cover the board. A rook is ge ...[text shortened]... te easily. Keep in mind that the value of a piece will change with the progression of the game.
Originally posted by greenpawn34Indeed. Finding over the past year or two that the bishop pair often has given me a clear advantage is one of the key pieces of evidence that my play has moved up a notch.
I too was baulking at some of the comments in this thread.
Wish I had 10p for every game I've won or seen won v a player
who has given up a brilliant Knight to get the two Bishops.
[b]The myth of the two Bishops has a lot to answer for.
(more about that later).
Nice game SF - Love this position.
[fen]3rr2k/6p1/1p4p1/1P1nnp2/8/6RP/1P1B2P ...[text shortened]... ac on h7.
Now that is the real power of the two Bishops. 😉[/b]
Yup.
It's pontless telling a novice Bishops are better than Knights and
expecting them to implement this in their own games.
It's a skill.
I'll tell you something else.
The older you get, the more you value a pawn.
In my youth I used to sac them with gay abandon.
Now I'm a burned out hacker, I have to play old man's chess. 😳