Why are bishops better than knights?

[Moderate_THIS]

And how exactly does a bishop go about killing a knight? Maybe a slow death years later by AIDS, contracted during a brief yet passionate homosexual encounter on the battlefield... but this doesn't help my game at hand. I refuse to allow a bishop and his diagonal fairy-walk take my knight. Maybe I should add a new chess piece, the "tattle-tale peasant boy", which when in direct line of sight with a bishop, freezes the clergyman in his square with a sweaty strip-tease and threats of telling the magistrate of the church goings on. Yeah.

 

[Code]

Cuz the bishop is more aerodynamic.

 

[Robert Jan]

I actually prefer knights

They work well with stupid opponents

 

[rsnoble-im-back]

I will trade knights for bishops all day. I also was thinking of inventing another piece. I'm going to make one of my pawns a suicide bomber.

 

[Ulcasterdropout]

I actually prefer knights

They work well with stupid opponents

^^^
Anyone is susceptible. The L patern is money.

 

[BileStew]

King me.

 

[ripper2]

the knights are good against dumb opponents, but the bishops can control a much larger portion of the board as there is no limit to how far along the diagonal they can move.

 

[Moderate_THIS]

I'm more interested in how a bishop could kill a knight. Sort of makes the game unrealistic.

 

[Ulcasterdropout]

I will trade knights for bishops all day. I also was thinking of inventing another piece. I'm going to make one of my pawns a suicide bomber.

See, thinking like that can fuck you.
Humans think(see plan ahead) in linear patterns.
The knight is more like a rouge of chaotic placement.

In scale, the bishop is stronger, but only by surface area.

 

[rsnoble-im-back]

See, thinking like that can fuck you.
Humans think(see plan ahead) in linear patterns.
The knight is more like a rouge of chaotic placement.

In scale, the bishop is stronger, but only by surface area.

Yes, but if im in the situation of trading no prob. I have shoved plenty of bishops up opponets asses even when they do see it coming because I force them into it.

 

[Ish]

Bishops have God in their corner, knights don't.

I'm more interested in how a bishop could kill a knight. Sort of makes the game unrealistic.

 

[Robert Jan]

I have my Rooks equipped with snipers

 

[alien amp pharm]

Buncha high school chess club geeks in this thread.

 

[Longhorn85]

I actually prefer knights

They work well with stupid opponents

When you up your game and stop playing stupid opponents you'll appreciate the long-distance striking power of the bishop.

Knights are great for the ground game though.

 

[The Shadow]

they arent...they are both worth 3 points

 

[jestros]

Back in the day, the church was very powerfull. If a king didnt have the churches support, he wouldnt be king for long. Read a little history jerkass

 

[Moderate_THIS]

Back in the day, the church was very powerfull. If a king didnt have the churches support, he wouldnt be king for long. Read a little history jerkass

A cardinal, maybe. But your average run-of-the-mill bishop? Better than a knight? Come on, destro.

Social stature aside, pray tell how a measly bishop can kill a knight. If this were real life and you were a knight, do you honestly think you'd be looking diagonally just in case you may need to hide if the bishop sees you? Get real.

 

[jestros]

A cardinal, maybe. But your average run-of-the-mill bishop? Better than a knight? Come on, destro.

Social stature aside, pray tell how a measly bishop can kill a knight. If this were real life and you were a knight, do you honestly think you'd be looking diagonally just in case you may need to hide if the bishop sees you? Get real.

LOL, yeah maybe. But I dont think the game of chess really represents and actuall battle. It's the machavellian (sp) power struggle/war. I mean the queen is the baddest ass around? How would she do in hand to hand combat with a knight?
Sorry if I am bringing too much realism into your thread, I rolled a 9 for charisma.

 

[biteme]

THey both can move in all four directions, but a bishop can cover more ground. Although, a knight is much sneakier. Think this is good assessment? I have no idea.

 

[BradG]

this reminds me of Monty Python:

1st soldier: Are you suggesting coconuts migrate?
King Arthur: Not at all. They could be carried.
1st soldier: What? A swallow carrying a coconut?
King Arthur: It could grip it by the husk!
1st soldier: It's not a question of where he grips it! It's a simple question of weight ratios! A five ounce bird could not carry a one pound coconut.
King Arthur: Well, it doesn't matter. Will you go and tell your master that Arthur from the Court of Camelot is here?
1st soldier: Listen. In order to maintain air-speed velocity, a swallow needs to beat its wings forty-three times every second, right?

But for my two bits, it's a matter of range. The bishop can control a very large portion of the board.

 

[Allon]

longer range of movement, thats all.

 

[Ulcasterdropout]

Nothing sets a trap like a knight.

 

[Moderate_THIS]

The knights are the enforcer of the church (think Kinghts Templar). So if a bishop wants a knight dead, who left is there for him to call? Perhaps bishops possess supernatural powers, which a lot of people had in medieval times. This is the only plausible scenario in which I will allow an opposing bishop to take my knight.

I'll be playing battle beasts if anyone needs to reach me.

 

[wutangnomo]

Bishops aren't better then knights. They are of equal value.

Bishops are intended for distance striking and are positional players in a sense that they aren't moved as much as knights. Knights are great for immediate striking within a certain vacinity. The knight's ability to 'jump' opponents is an invaluable asset.

My style of play is that I often position a bishop (and rook) and leave it there, while using my knight to enforce the action.

 

[Testosterone boy]

Bishops are worth 3.5 points in the real world.

 

[The Shadow]

Bishops aren't better then knights. They are of equal value.

LMAO

I said that like 400 posts ago

 

[Testosterone boy]

Bishops are worth 3.5 points in the real world.

Maybe 4 points....they control as much as a rook and are a little sneakier to those who are rusty or new or dumb.

 

[Spartacus]

rooks carry more weight though for their ability to break and trap a King that has castled
as has been mentioned knights and bishops are rated equaly
bishops have longer range
where as knights can "jump" and therefore can set traps better through moves such as "discovered check" which forces the opponent to move his king and then allows you to capture the other piece you placed in jeopardy

 

[Testosterone boy]

Where you been Herr Hung?

 

[Spartacus]

I had a bad 48 hour flu
first 12 hours everything came up
first all the food
and then every fluid I tried to keep down
and then for the next 24 everything came out fluid,didn't even urinate for 24 hours
whole body ached through-out
I started recovering today
and will return to work and the gym tomorrow
got to love the fitness lifestyle
whip the flu in 48
doing well yourself?

 

[Testosterone boy]

I had a bad 48 hour flu
first 12 hours everything came up
first all the food
and then every fluid I tried to keep down
and then for the next 24 everything came out fluid,didn't even urinate for 24 hours
whole body ached through-out
I started recovering today
and will return to work and the gym tomorrow
got to love the fitness lifestyle
whip the flu in 48
doing well yourself?

Well....better than you apparently

Sorry to hear about the misery.

Frankly....I have too much time to worry about the Bushbarians. These guys are too hard headed to adjust their steering a little.


1.4 billion Muslims is a lot of people.

 

[biteme]

Maybe 4 points....they control as much as a rook and are a little sneakier to those who are rusty or new or dumb.

Oh yes. I won most chess matches using the sneaky knights. I'm just a novice. I win more with good defense. Rarely making any mistakes and leaving myself open.

 

[Spartacus]

I'm starting to tend to side a BIT with you,though I do believe the level of the insurgents mayhem is overblown
it's going to be a decade's worth endeavor
might as well observe at this point,and then we can all start raising heel again in 3 years
I don't know if you remember,but I did mention at one point that if the Dems had Leiberman as their man I would have seriously considered voting for him
and as you know he was offered by Bush a prestegious position

 

[Testosterone boy]

I'm starting to tend to side a BIT with you,though I do believe the level of the insurgents mayhem is overblown
it's going to be a decade's worth endeavor
might as well observe at this point,and then we can all start raising heel again in 3 years
I don't know if you remember,but I did mention at one point that if the Dems had Leiberman as their man I would have seriously considered voting for him
and as you know he was offered by Bush a prestegious position

I don't think we have the staying power to last 10 years over there. Public opinion is going to hell fast and the Republicans have one rule above all others:

Stay in Power

Numbers are power

They are going to be forced to address the economy real soon as well.

Democracy in Iraq?

It can wait as long as the oil pumps are working.

 

[wutangnomo]

LMAO

I said that like 400 posts ago

lol

Don't make me bitch slap you bro.

 

[Testosterone boy]

They have enough time to get our new fangled voting machines over to Iraq. So they can install a puppet government while the world roars with laughter and tears.

 

[wutangnomo]

Oh yes. I won most chess matches using the sneaky knights. I'm just a novice. I win more with good defense. Rarely making any mistakes and leaving myself open.

Knights are the enforcer. Generally you'll find that in the course of a match you'll move the knight way more then the bishop. Bishops are like snipers. They don't really move, they just sit still and wait to pick you off.

Rooks are badass. lol

 

[Spartacus]

Knights are the enforcer. Generally you'll find that in the course of a match you'll move the knight way more then the bishop. Bishops are like snipers. They don't really move, they just sit still and wait to pick you off.

Rooks are badass. lol

I agree,but if you can set your bishops up in tandem so that they control parallel rows,well then you pretty much got your guy beat

 

[wutangnomo]

I agree,but if you can set your bishops up in tandem so that they control parallel rows,well then you pretty much got your guy beat

Hmmm I'm not so sure about that. When the bishop and rook are close to one another that's more of a disadvantage then anything. The knight is an exception to this rule, which is why it's more valuable in my opinion.

 

[Spartacus]

I'm talkin' about having both bishops workin' along side each other so they can place dual diagonal lanes in jeopardy across the board.
I like to attack,early seek to control the middle 8 squares
castle
resume the offensive
have only played about a dozen games though in the last 20 years
computer military strategy games are my preference

 

[wutangnomo]

I'm talkin' about having both bishops workin' along side each other so they can place dual diagonal lanes in jeopardy across the board.
I like to attack,early seek to control the middle 8 squares
castle
resume the offensive
have only played about a dozen games though in the last 20 years
computer military strategy games are my preference

What I meant was having two bishops or two rooks adjacent to one another (so that they control adjacent strips) is a disadvantage. Two bishops along side each other is definitely a disadvantage imo as it leaves you vulnerable for one half the board. Not to mention it takes quite a few moves to get them positioned that way, which is why is rarely happens.

My style is to have the bishops on opposing sides that way they cover both angles. Knights and pawns in the middle to control the action, then get the Queen invovled fairly early on. I use the rooks very sparingly.