Originally posted by rooktakesqueen are rooks really as powerful as we give them credit for? most players, especially low rated players, will always sacrifce their knight or bishop for the rook; i think in an end game the knight outshines the rook...
Rooks are often thought of as better than knights. Without a second thought i'd sac my knight for a rook i would like to think. 🙂
In my opinion, the more powerful piece is the piece that you can accomplish more powerful things with.
It is much more likely that you'd win your opponents queen by forking his king and queen; with your knight than by using a rook.
If you can guarantee certain combos. for your knight than it can be more valuable. What good is a rook that is blocked in with no opened files compared to a knight that is jumping freely all over the place, threatening your opponent's structure. With forks and checks and stuff.
The value of a piece increases or decreases depending on the structure it lives in and what it's able to do at the time. In my opinion.
Saying you like the knight best tells people who have been at this a while that you lack some posistional, stratigic and endgame understanding.
That's not a bad thing since you'll get there. Ive played h4 and Rh3 in my life too!
You can like the knight but the reason you like the bishop less is because you most likely don't give the bishop the proper habitat to survive.
If you had a game with a very open center and nothing to anchor or conceal your knight you should like the bishop better in that game. If the posistion is locked and your bishop is reduced to a tall pawn, then you are right the knight is better.
Same for the rook. If you get the rooks connected and give them some open files they will thrive.
Originally posted by anthias Why do people keep "favoring" pieces? You should not play a knight move because you like the piece, you should play it because the position demands it and it improves your position!
that sounds like IM Jeremy Silman talking 🙂
a well placed Knight on the sixth rank can be equal to, or even better than a rook, but a rook in general is stronger.
Originally posted by rooktakesqueen are rooks really as powerful as we give them credit for? most players, especially low rated players, will always sacrifce their knight or bishop for the rook; i think in an end game the knight outshines the rook...
Here's an example (just finished) of the difference between a Rook and Knight in the end game. I'm sure neither side played perfectly, but it demonstrates the point.
Originally posted by mtthw Here's an example (just finished) of the difference between a Rook and Knight in the end game. I'm sure neither side played perfectly, but it demonstrates the point.
Gosh
Different pieces have different values in different situations. In the endgame, the rook is obviously better because there is a lot of open room. Bishops are the same. Knights have no speed whatsoever and can only be good if SOMEHOW you get an amazing fork, which doesn't really happen with good players.
Originally posted by MoneyMaker7 Gosh
Different pieces have different values in different situations. In the endgame, the rook is obviously better because there is a lot of open room. Bishops are the same. Knights have no speed whatsoever and can only be good if SOMEHOW you get an amazing fork, which doesn't really happen with good players.
Knights > Bishops in endgames with passed pawns on only one side of the board (it can jump over the pawns and attack both color squares, Bishops can only touch half the squares and their long range power is worthless when everything's so close together)
the rooks?
28 Oct '06 16:44
Back to Top