which do you prefer???

o.k. ....bishop and knight are both worth the same number of points in a game...but which you you rather have? bishops are long range whereas knights can jump and be useful pinning and generally attacking? would which piece you have depend on what situation you were in or is it a general concesus that one piece is better than the other? freddie 😀

depends on the position. if i have a black bishop and my opponent puts all his pieces on white squares then give me a knight!

If it is a rapid game I might give them same value but in correspondence chess bishops come tops.Knights are powerful if they can have a powerful resting place and the lots of tactics they can throw around you.But in correspondence chess you have time to see each and every knight threat ,future threat ,bad squares etc.
But of course I accept that if the position is closed knights might have the edge, sometimes a well placed knight is worth a whole rook.But a closed position has to break out sometime and when it does bishops shine through the open lines.2 bishops are even more potent.
One thing with bishops if you feel your bishop is inferior to knights you usually have the option of exchanging it off but if you have a knight and want to exchange it to an oponents good bishop thats tough. A knight is also good in the end game at stopping passed pawns .But if the end game action occurs along 2sides of the board then a bishop might trump over it.
Well as Lasker said as the players skill increases the value of the bishop over the knight goes up for him.I suppose this has to the fact of being able to deal better with enemy knights as your skill increases.It is generally accepted by masters that in most positions the bishop is superior but knights too shine in some specific instances.

i can see how that all makes sense. thanks very much druid ravi

Originally posted by druidravi
If it is a rapid game I might give them same value but in correspondence chess bishops come tops.

Originally posted by !~TONY~!
I think this statement is outrageous. The value of the pieces means nothing in relation to the time of the game. It's all relative to the position.

I'll go on record and say that I've been nuturing a relationship with my knights. They can hit every square and there are certain positions in the endgame (closed OR open) where a knight is essential instead of a bishop. Sometime a pawn majority in the endgame isn't enough for the win if you're stuck with a bishop as opposed to a knight. Of course... I know there are always exceptions.

There's nothing like a knight to threaten a killer fork OR mate on the next move! 😀

i think steely dan hit the nail on the head!

One thing with bishops if you feel your bishop is inferior to knights you usually have the option of exchanging it off but if you have a knight and want to exchange it to an oponents good bishop thats tough.

I never considered this, though it's true. Bishops give you a psychological edge because sometimes the opponent overvalues them.

Well as Lasker said as the players skill increases the value of the bishop over the knight goes up for him.

That's interesting. I'd never heard that before.

I think this statement is outrageous. The value of the pieces means nothing in relation to the time of the game. It's all relative to the position

I agree with the original statement. Any fine differences between the two pieces requires plenty of time to make into something more tangible. In a five minute game that difference, like any difference, is negligable. Being down a Rook in a five minute game when you both have two minutes left on the clock sometimes isn't that much of an advantage.

My father estimates Knights at 2.9 and Bishops at 3.1. I tend to consider them equal overall, though the position affects this (Bishops have long range versus Knights maneuverability in closed games and ability to hit both colors). The situation in which the trade is offered generally will have minor additional factors that outweigh any subtle differences in value, unless the position clearly favors one over the other.

Bobby Fischer became famous for winning white games using the Ruy Lopez exchange variation. Maybe we should ask Bobby if he thinks bishops are way better then knights. . . 😀

Originally posted by steelydan

I'll go on record and say that I've been nuturing a relationship with my knights. They can hit every square and there are certain positions in the endgame (closed OR open) where a knight is essential instead of a bishop. Sometime a pawn majority in the endgame isn't enough for the win if you're stuck with a bishop as opposed to a knight. Of course ...[text shortened]... ptions.

There's nothing like a knight to threaten a killer fork OR mate on the next move! 😀