Bishop or knight?
Sort:
Fig51
18 days ago
0
#21
But I guess knights are better for tactical stuff?
18 days ago
0
#22
It depends on the position and how active the piece is because what may appear like an equal exchange could in-fact be much more beneficial to one player such as trading your bad bishop for your opponent's good bishop or a knight guarding your castled pawn wall compared to your opponent's bad bishop. In the endgame when both kings are active a bishop is probably going to be more powerful especially if it's the same colour as a queening square for any passed pawns. I've started to focus a lot more on exchanges and how it benefits my position instead of doing them for no other reason than it gives my opponent doubled pawns. The minor advantage I might get from that will likely soon be lost if it's against a stronger player.
Knights are better early and bishops are better later is a good framework but it comes down to the position which changes with every move.
18 days ago
0
#23
The simple answer(according to GothamChess) is that in closed positions, the knight is better since it can jump over peices; Whereas in open positions, the bishop is better since it can control more squares on the chess board.
Fr3nchToastCrunch wrote:
Beginning: Knight
End: Bishop
I agree. Once I checkmated with a bishop and a knight, and the knight played the most important role. I'd say middlegame is also knight, so knight overall is best.
2 days ago
0
#26
JayThe10th skrev:
Well, most books and also tutors consider the bishop to be worth around 3.5, a little more than the knight, but do not be fooled! It is very situational! Here are a few examples of when the knights can be better :
1. When they are outposted between the 4-6th ranks or vice versa for the black side. In these ranks, the knights control more enemy squares and can be considered equal or even much better than the bishop determined on where it is posted. A knight outposted on the sixth rank is sometimes even considered sacking a rook for to get the knight and the out posting pawn, as the knight is just too strong there! Remember that on the 7th or 8th ranks, the knights are usually worse as they control less and less enemy squares, and same for your own back rank, like the 1st and 2nd ranks, as they do not provide much central coverage there and are most likely bad.
2. A much simpler one, knights are better in closed positions as they can jump over pieces and create threats and tactics!
Here are a few examples of when the bishops may be better:
1. Open positions tend to make the bishop a staple of power if you can position them properly. Its like a blade stabbing into the position, always ready to strike or do something whenever the enemy position falters.
2. When having the bishop pair, you control both colors of squares, removing the weakness of only seeing one color across the board. With this, the bishops are absolutely amazing and are especially good in open endgame positions as well.
I hope this offers some insight on the B vs N battle but remember there are many more reasons why one may be better than the other, like activity, tactics or piece play.
Dude! How long did that message take! By the way thanks for all information yo always give us! 
2 days ago
0
#27
In the start of the game the knight is the best, but in the end game... the bishop is the best.
2 days ago
0
#29
Fig51 wrote:
SeanTheSheep yes but I heard that in some cases bishops can be slightly higher than 3
That is sometimes true in some positions, but in official chess games, a bishop is considered as 3 points.
2 days ago
0
#32
Bishops in an endgame are more important, but I think knights are more important in the middlegames
Bishops are usually stronger than knights.
Not always though.
You wanna know what the secret of chess is?
Place your pieces in the center of the board.
That's the fastest way to play well, and chances you go wrong are very low.
Place you pieces in the center of the board and everything will be all right.
If you follow that rule, you will make far less mistakes.