Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="SHEHAN_GIWANTHA" data-source="post: 21423006" data-attributes="member: 496236">Knight is better than bishop. Better, because....it's much harder to calculate with knight-moves and this fact is VERY useful in 'everyday' chess games. (And this is the most important argument defending Knights: you can suprise your opponent)CPU is the strongest with Knights too.Bishop and Knight are equal during endgames (in theory). - You won't know whether it will be closed or open endgame.The Good Bishop - Bad Bishop problemForking > Pinning... Forking is bigger problem <img src="/styles/default/xenforo/smilies/default/happy.gif"  class="smilie" loading="lazy" alt=":)" title="Happy    :)" data-shortname=":)" />Bishops can not really stop pawns from reaching the 8th line. They must defend the 8th line or the 7th, while Knight's aren't 'compelled'.2 Bishops can make checkmate, while 2 Knights not. But when will you have these situations at endgame? About never. Endgames are about pawns. (And forced checkmate IS possible with 1 Knight and 1 Bishop, but very hard to learn the systematics)You can not really hide from Knights. And if they made a check, it's hard to run. But if a dark-square bishop makes a check, you can run with going to light-square.The only fact defending bishops is 2 bishops > bishop + knight</blockquote>

Top Bottom