Richard Réti, author of Masters of Chess, continues the comparison: Erenburg says, “Generally, knights are better in closed positions, while bishops are stronger in open positions.” This is because a knight’s ability to jump means it can navigate a clustered board more easily. That the relative values pieces are highly dependent on positioning is especially true for bishops and knights. A Grandmaster, though, will frequently sacrifice for less tangible compensation, such as a lead in development or a superior pawn structure.” Grandmaster Daniel Naroditsky, ranked ninth in the U.S., explains, “The point system certainly governs a Grandmaster’s decisions, but it can be outweighed in any given position by more important factors.” He continues, “Most beginners who have learned the point system will only consider a sacrifice if it leads directly to checkmate or if the material can be won back by force. In fact, at the highest level, relative value systems are barely considered. When forced to say one is better than the other, most anoint the bishop.
Thus, the real answer is that there is no definitive answer. He continues, “Of course, I’m not sure this does us much good, as we only get to play one position at a time.” Mayer concludes, “I think it’s true that the bishops are better than the knights in a wider variety of positions than the knights are better than the bishops.” Mayer explains, “The queen and knight are to work together smoothly and create a greater number of threats than the queen and bishop.” Steven Mayer, the author of Bishop Versus Knight, contends, “A pair of bishops is usually considered to be worth six points, but common sense suggests that a pair of active bishops (that are very involved in the formation) must be accorded a value of almost nine under some circumstances.” This is especially true if the player can plant the bishops in the center of the board, as two bishops working in tandem can span up to 26 squares and have the capacity to touch every square.īishops are also preferable to knights when queens have been exchanged because, Grandmaster Sergey Erenburg, who is ranked 11th in the U.S., explains, “ complement each other, and when well-coordinated, act as a queen.” Conversely, a knight is the preferred minor piece when the queen survives until the late-middlegame or the endgame. For example, two bishops are better than two knights or one of each. There are distinct situations where a bishop is preferred. A bishop’s biggest drawback is that it’s relegated to one square-color and is therefore limited to half the squares on the board.
It covers as many as 13 squares, but it cannot jump over pieces, so its range is more dependent on positioning and on a less-clustered board than is a knight’s. It is a long-range piece that moves diagonally and can swoop from one corner to the other if unimpeded. It has the potential to touch all 64 squares, as, on each move, it alternates between white and black squares.Ī bishop functions completely differently from a knight. Further, that it can jump over other pieces means it can defend without suffering a drop in offensive power. It has as many as eight potential moves and as few as two, and it can attack up to five opposing pieces without being subject to counterattack. Thus, it is a short-range piece, meaning it is unable to cover the length of the board in one turn. Comparing bishops and knights is so complicated that a Grandmaster declined to comment for this article because, “The concept you are trying to discuss is ridiculously complex and would go right over the head of anyone who is not a serious chess player,” he told me.Ī knight moves in the famous L-shape-two squares straight and one either right or left. Talk to experienced chess players and the limitations of the points system quickly become clear. Parental Leave Is American Exceptionalism at Its Bleakest Joe Pinsker
0 kommentar(er)
