The secret about Knight

sstteevveenn wrote:

Could it not equally well be a root 5 slider?  Unlike say a root 2 leaper, which would have to leap. 

No it couldn't because out of the "root 5" the knight is passing over foreign squares (possibly occcupied) for root 5/4.  If it were a slider like all the other pieces it would have to come into contact with other pieces.

I agree with mxdplay4, the knight is a leaper.

 Knights cover a wide circumferential range of attack on the board, which makes it quite an intimidating piece.  On the other hand, bishops hold very strong lines of attack/defense on the board. Both have obvious weaknesses when used alone. That's why they are most powerful in combinations. These pieces compliment one another.

 Some people fear bishops more than knights because they can skewer, pin & fork other pieces, at both short & long ranges. Bishops can also clear a path for knights to move in and inflict heavy material damage against the opponents forces, and vice-versa. Knights don't have the range of a bishop; and just like any horse, it can be clipped in close quarter combat when faced off against a crafty opponent.

~The Doctor

All things being equal, whether a Knight > Bishop or vice versa is determined by the situation on the board, for all the reasons described above by folks much more skilled than I. However, the bishop's power is so much more easily visualized than the knight's (at least to beginners) that it's easy to be seduced into believing (as I did as a youngster new to the game) that Bishops are always superior, or (as I did after several sound spankings due to that theory) that knights were to be feared and that bishops were little more than redundant and inferior queens. I see an interesting balance/tension between the two very different pieces. While there are general rules as to which piece is better in a particular situation or phase of the game, the more potent piece will vary between games, and even positions within a game.

Spinatai wrote:

Also, only with the help of a knight can you perform a double check!

 no. just look at this.

rich wrote:

Bishops are longer ranged, and are more maneuverable. Even in by book it says to remember a Bishop pair is stronger than a knight pair !

 really??

This is one of my favorite illustrations of the power of the knight in the endgame:

At first glance the knight only appears to control 6 squares... but if you look a bit closer you'll realize he's actually preventing the enemy king from stepping on the c-file or b3 or b5. Black has no way to make progress. Fans of the bishop take note: if you replace this knight with a bishop, White's position becomes hopeless.

chesslife wrote:

rich wrote:

Bishops are longer ranged, and are more maneuverable. Even in by book it says to remember a Bishop pair is stronger than a knight pair !

 really??

While Bishops are longer-ranged, they are not necessarily more maneuverable. As chesslife pointed out, knights are sometimes more maneuverable.

While your book is right in saying that a bishop pair is stronger than a knight pair, that does not make a single bishop stronger than a knight all the time. That's what we're trying to say here.

and knights in a good outpost are extremely hard to block out , while bishops are relativaly easy:

bd5 is not standard move right there d4 or c3 would be

were talking about bishop lover rich. he would try to save his bishop. of course he likes his bishops so much, he woud probably never play the ruy lopez.

Mebeme wrote:

were talking about bishop lover rich. he would try to save his bishop. of course he likes his bishops so much, he woud probably never play the ruy lopez.

What, do you think he plays the Bishop's Opening?

Kinda :\

Ah, The Knight.

I was fortunate enough to apprentice with a horse trainer. I lived with horses for two years and handled and worked with over 60 horses.

There was a horse named Zor and he was sent in for training. The owner wanted to sell Zor, but couldn't because Zor had some issues...with people. My teacher and I loved Zor...a completely handsome gelding of some strange Welsh or Scottish breed. He reminded us of Sean Connery. Salt and pepper coloring and tough as nails. Long flowing mane. A beautiful animal. We felt he was truely a prince, but had been mishandled at some point and had developed certain quirks that made him dangerous.

We worked patiently with Zor and part of my responsiblities were to take him for casual walks. Going thru gates, crossing roads, standing near loud machinery. He became mentally stronger and more confident in our gentle handling.

A day came when clippper training was on the list. The clippers are just variations of barbers clippers, but they are electric (or battery operated) and they buzz and vibrate. Horses need to tolerate clippers. Vets often have to clip hair to attend to wounds or injuries. Or horses will have hair clipped for shows.

This is how it works. You show the animal the clippers. They get to sniff and lick and generally check the clippers out. The clippers are definitely not turned on. Then you rub the clippers all over the animal, slowly and patiently trying to make the horses okay with the whole deal and at the sametime moving the clippers towards more sensitive areas around the hooves and ears and nose.

Then you move away and turn the clippers on. Then off.

Then you stop for the day.

Over time,the turning of the clippers on begins to happen closer and closer to the horse. It depends on the horse and alot has to do with feel.

And so it went for a week, until one morning, standing 3 feet in front of Zor, I turned on the clippers. He lifted his right foot and struck at me in a flash. It was absolutely the fastest thing I have ever witnessed. If he had wanted to have killed me, there would be no post here. He simply put his hoove directly over my nose and then placed it back on the ground in a fraction of a second.

It was almost like a trick and no one in the arena I was working in saw the movement.

The story goes on and has a happy ending for both Zor and myself, but I will never forget the speed and power of his movement.

Chess wise...I am a big fan of the knight.

in an open game, bishop is more powerful than knights becuase they can control more squares.. but only knights can perform a check that can'n be blocked.. means the king has to move or capture the knight!!!!!

eyom wrote:

in an open game, bishop is more powerful than knights becuase they can control more squares.. but only knights can perform a check that can'n be blocked.. means the king has to move or capture the knight!!!!!

Actually, any piece can perform a check that cannot be blocked, provided that it is part of a double check.

Also, knights are stronger than bishops in closed positions, which leaves them at about even, which is what just about every top player in the last 100 years or so agrees ago.

but knights can be only one piece check that cant be blocked

Mebeme wrote:

but knights can be only one piece check that cant be blocked

Agreed, which only adds to its power.

Another point is that knight is cheap (3 points), therefore if you place it behind the pawns, the oponent cannot trade it for a lesser piece I won several games just by putting one of my knights behind the enemy's pawns line, this causes a real mess in the defense.

The knight can be a very skilled piece. Its true power is that it can attack any square on the board. While a lone bishop can only attack along its colored diagonal. Also if given the right environment (support points) it can cripple the enemy team without really moving. But which piece is better the bishop or the knight still depends on the pawn structure and the position. Here’s a funny draw where white has his all powerful bishop and is a piece up. However, the position and pawn structure make his bishop more of a ghost on the board then a threat.

 I am totally enjoying this discussion...very stimulating. Excellent points are being made about both pieces.

~The Doctor