Who's better: bishop or knight?

Originally posted by ChessJester
If I had a choice to either have 4 bishops or 4 knights (instead of 2 of each) I'd say 4 bishops FOR SURE!

I like bishops, and I'm very tired of peple who keep answering this question with: 'well, it depends on the position' because ok fine, you're right, but we already KNOW that we just want a definite answer anyways.

there are times when a bishop (or much less often a knight) is worth more than a rook... it's all relative

What do you need the pieces for?

Originally posted by bishops r cool
a great chess player who I respect told me to always sacrifice a bishop to kill the oppenets knight.
What's your guys opinion?

Originally posted by Ragnorak
White to play 😉
[fen]4b3/6KP/2b5/8/3k4/5b1b/8/8 w - - 0 9[/fen]

D

Originally posted by mrjonesvich321
I like bishops, and I'm very tired of peple who keep answering this question with: 'well, it depends on the position' because ok fine, you're right, but we already KNOW that we just want a definite answer anyways.

Originally posted by mrjonesvich321
I'm very tired

e4#!!!!!!!

Bishops are typically said to be marginally stronger than knights overall, but relatively equal in value.

They are, however, very different in character, and its this difference which allows for bishops/knights to provide a means of creating a dynamic imbalance which could shift towards the knights or the bishops.

Bishops - Preferred in open positions where there isn't a lot of clutter, owing to their long range abilities. Two bishops working in tandem are very powerful, and each covers the other's weakness and they work well together. This allows King + 2 Bishops VS King to be a forceably winning endgame whereas King + 2 Knights VS King is usually drawn (although the king can be help-mated I believe.) Bishops do have a color weakness, however.

Knights - Very maneuverable in closed positions where the pawn structure makes movement tight. The best forking piece owing to its odd movement. However, knights are short range pieces, which makes them possibly slow. Their movement also makes some nearby squares cumbersome to access, and 2 knights do not work well together without help.

It is noteworthy that a good knight is better than a bad bishop, and a bad knight worse than a good bishop. In addition, a position can favor either piece, which makes the decision of whether to take one with the other potentially very complicated.

Originally posted by bishops r cool

Knights are much better, position doesn't matter at all and anyone who says different isn't drunk enough.

Originally posted by Wulebgr
consume more caffiene, and perhaps you'll be able to come to terms with the fact that all depends upon concrete analysis.

White to move:

[fen]q7/2q5/2nrbq2/q1rkb1qq/2n5/3KP3/1q5q/q7 w - - 0 1[/fen]

Originally posted by bishops r cool
I've always believed that bishops are more valuable (see my name) but a great chess player who I respect told me to always sacrifice a bishop to kill the oppenets knight.
What's your guys opinion?

Bishop =2.5 + 1.6 (long-range bonus) - 1.7 (colour weakness) + 1.0 (skewering&pinning ability) + 0.7 (extra bonus for having a bishop pair)

Knight =2 + 1.9 (only piece to jump-bonus) - 0.5 (poor range) + 0.6 (forking ability) - 0.3 (poor defending ability against advanced passed pawns)

equals:

Bishop without its counterpart=3.4
Bishop with its counterpart=4.1
Knight=3.7