 | Chess Peices |
Grant and you will reveal!
Funny name, real interests
Funny name, real interests
lorddreamer
♡ 35 ( +1 | -1 )
Bishops vs Knights Which do y'all thing is better, a knight's game (closed up pawns) or bishop's open game? I mean, which is the most dangerous in any player's perspective?? I prefer bishop's, because it is simpler and I never have to worry about it suddenly switching into a closed game but...
Anyone who understands what I'm trying to say, please respond.
More: Playing Chess Online
ketchuplover
♡ 16 ( +1 | -1 )
Bishops are impressive! But Knights can be downright frightening!! Here's a free tip on avoiding a knight fork. Keep your pieces on opposite colored squares.
More: Blitz Chess
ionadowman
♡ 169 ( +1 | -1 )
I infer... ...that you want to compare positions in which the respective minor pieces are at their best. In respect of B vs N in general, though on an open board the B is often better, I think this superiority can be and is overestimated. The N's short range is not always an issue, even on an open board. Where the B can inaugurate threats on both sides of the board, then things can get tough for the N. On the other hand, you don't often see the N outplaying a B on an open board, unless the former has the B nailed down in some way (e.g. this kind of thing: WHITE: Ke5, Nd5, Pa4, g4; BLACK: Kh7, Bd8, Pa5, g5. White to play. Open board, but an easy win for White (1.Ke6 Kg7 2.Kd7 Bf6 3.Nxf6 Kxf6 4.Kd6... White is left with the 'opposition' and a simple win.)
Consider this position: WHITE: Kd3, Ng2, Pe4, f3, g4, h5. BLACK: Ke6, Bd6, Pe5, f6, g7, h6. Sort of closed, sort of open. According to Capablanca ('Last Lectures') White has a small advantage here, but probably not a decisive one. On the other hand, were the Black g-pawn on g5 instead of g7, White would win (more accessible weakness especially at f6). In the original position, Black plays his K to f7, maintains the B on the a3-f8 diagonal and exchanges it for the N whenever the N appears on that diagonal. Note here that the N's mobility is not at issue.
In respect of the original question (if I've understood it correctly) I prefer on the whole closed positions with the N. Often the N has the greater mobility. Note though, that P structure can make a big difference! Over 30 years ago I got something like this position: WHITE: Kg1, Bb5, g5, Nf3, Pa2, b2, c2, f2, g2, h2. BLACK: Kg7, Nc6, Nf6, Pa7, b7, c7, f7, g7, h7. The B pair on an open board looked pretty good, but White's position looked heaps better after 1.Bxc6! bxc6 2. Bxf6! gxf6.
White had no problem securing the full point...
Hope this helps (and is sufficiently close to your topic!)
Cheers,
Ion
More: Chess
ionadowman
♡ 22 ( +1 | -1 )
Damn... ...I left off Black's Bishop on c8 in that last position. Makes more sense with it on! Suffice to say, <N + neat pawns> vs <B + ragged pawns> looks a better bet than
<B + neat pawns> vs <N + neat pawns>...
More: Opening Chess Moves
ccmcacollister
♡ 48 ( +1 | -1 )
Personally ... I have a preference for working with knights in a knight's position. Especially N+P endings. Tho they can be notoriously drawish when well played ... I've found they tend to bring out errors in play, especially from players who will make hasty moves. That is why it is one of my specialty endings. In practice they seem to almost always present good winning chances.
Not to say I don't like having the Bishop pair, as I do. But it seems more simplistic to me. Not as much fun.
}8-)
More: Chess Pawn
ionadowman
♡ 77 ( +1 | -1 )
Capablanca's 'Last Lectures'... ...is worth getting hold of if you can. It has a chapter on B vs N in the endgame. It's quite short and pretty general, but there's plenty of meat and potatoes to be had, all the same. It concludes with an ending from Lasker-Marshall world championship match 1907, with a very lucid explanation of what's going on. On a fairly open board, Lasker exploits what for most would seem an insignificant edge, B for N. Capablanca had this to say about the loser of the game:"Marshall was then one of the first ranking players of the world. Moreover, he was always a good endgame player. He had, however, always a preference for the Knights instead of the Bishops, a defect amply demonstrated in this ending." The second sentence would be a high compliment, coming from Capablanca...
Cheers,
Ion
More: Game Of Chess
lorddreamer
♡ 40 ( +1 | -1 )
I have found that knights are for those who want a bit of excitement, cuz they have so many moves all the time, and can end up in such strange spots, they are more exciting. Bishops normally show a clear idea, but can be devestating. In the end, bishops are so much safer, because they attack a clear spot and its not hard to see a slatemate position, knights on the other hand can be very confusing.
More: Twic Chess