Long standing argument with the general consensus stating that they both excel in different scenarios and are difficult to compare, however many people do value the bishops (particularly the bishop pair) as being very slightly more valuable.
wich is better, bishop or knight
Sort:
Jan 23, 2009
0
#3
I think that the most amassed information on this subject so far (on this site) has been collected/discussed in a thread I posted some time ago (with lots of contributions!) called "Knight vs Bishop summary(/essay)". Look it up, read ,then we can continue the discussion there where it is convenient to compare all viewpoints. 
I must agree. I think that bishops do more in the long run and are ample for setting up forks due to there long atack range. alas, knights do target more squares so I think that they can be invalueble for setting up a good ofence
thetman wrote:
I must agree. I think that bishops do more in the long run and are ample for setting up forks due to there long atack range. alas, knights do target more squares so I think that they can be invalueble for setting up a good ofence
A bishop on an open diagonal actually targets more squares than a knight.
Jan 23, 2009
0
#6
Thetman and Rich - sorry but you've got somewhat askew: first off, knights are preferred for defence actually, in the overall trend. Also, their value is completely dependent on which other pieces/pawns are on the board. This relates to whether or not it is a closed/open position or not. Furthermore, you have to factor in the bishop pair factor.
These are some of the TRUE determinants, though had you looked at everyone's input into the thread I mentioned above, you'd know that...
both
Jan 23, 2009
0
#8
2 Bishops > 2 Knights
1 Bishop < 1 Knight
...Positional considerations aside, of course.
I find that when one bishop is gone it realy limits the amount you can do with your bishops because with only one bishop you can only own 50% of the squares so I would say that a 1 knight is better than one bishop
Kupov wrote:
thetman wrote:
I must agree. I think that bishops do more in the long run and are ample for setting up forks due to there long atack range. alas, knights do target more squares so I think that they can be invalueble for setting up a good ofence
A bishop on an open diagonal actually targets more squares than a knight.
very true but if you get a knight out in the middle of the board it has a very broad attack spectrum
Try THIS on for size!! lol
The value of bishops as opposed to knights is entirely dictated by the position. Some positions a bishop is superior to a knight, other positions the reverse is true. This is also true of pairs.
In evaluating the value of a piece without considering positions one must compare its attributes. A knight moves to and can attack squares of both colors which can be a plus but at the center of the board where a piece can be said to exert it's greatest power, it attacks only eight squares and as it moves to the edge or a corner it's power decreases considerably. Also a knight cannot "lose" a move which is a drawback. A bishop attacks only squares of the color on which it sits which can be a negative but it can exert its power over more squares which is a plus. Also a bishop can "lose a move" which is a plus. Most authorities hold that a knight is worth 2.5 while a bishop is worth 3 making the bishop slightly stronger generally speaking and without consideration of the specific position which may or may not support that general rule. Another general rule is that bishops in open endings where there are pawns on both sides of the board because of their attacking scope, are better. The reverse is can be true in closed positions.
Kupov wrote:
Try THIS on for size!! lol
lol is right. tell me when you run across that scenario some time
horcrux wrote:
The value of bishops as opposed to knights is entirely dictated by the position. Some positions a bishop is superior to a knight, other positions the reverse is true. This is also true of pairs.
In evaluating the value of a piece without considering positions one must compare its attributes. A knight moves to and can attack squares of both colors which can be a plus but at the center of the board where a piece can be said to exert it's greatest power, it attacks only eight squares and as it moves to the edge or a corner it's power decreases considerably. A bishop attacks only squares of the color on which it sits which can be a negative but it can exert its power over more squares which is a plus. Most authorities hold that a knight is worth 2.5 while a bishop is worth 3 making the bishop slightly stronger generally speaking and without consideration of the specific position which may or may not support that general rule. Another general rule is that bishops in open endings where there are pawns on both sides of the board because of their attacking scope, are better. The reverse is can be true in closed positions.
I completely agree. a bishop can give you an amazing chec mait or cost you the game, it realy just depends on the situation
rich wrote:
But I have always said a Bishop is better, just because if you place a Bishop in the centre of a chess board it can cover 13 squares, but 14 if you count the one it's on, a Knight can only cover eight, nine if you count the one it's on.
true but you rairly run across the situation where you have all ove the squares open llike that. you are only able to target up to 4 peices when a knight can target up to 8
it's all positional
knights are better defenders and are better with closed games, and bishops are better when it is open and are deadly when you have both bishops vs 2 nights
downie78 wrote:
it's all positional
knights are better defenders and are better with closed games, and bishops are better when it is open and are deadly when you have both bishops vs 2 nights
yes I must concur that in endgame scenarios where there are very few spaces ocupied bishops have the upper hand
Plus the bishop can defend/attack pawns on both sides of the board at the same time which is another common occurrence.
Wich is better? That reminds me of witch is better. Perhaps thetman and rich are the same person. Perhaps not. Either way, most people likely won't remember this thread, but Rael might. Oh, and oginschile. Good times.
for me it is a very tough disission. I would have to say that bishops can help you in the end of the game for getting chec mates but knights give you a very good defence at the bigining of the game. I really cant come to a consensison this.