4 ms·
> In particular, bishops and knights are very close with bishops being worth a tiny bit more. I don’t think so, and I would like to see the author look in the
by rmetzler 3y ago
> In particular, bishops and knights are very close with bishops being worth a tiny bit more.
I don’t think so, and I would like to see the author look in the data for 2 knights vs 2 bishops. My gut feeling is that knights are hard to block and can attack every square, while bishops can only attack their color, so half the board. They can’t protect each other and rely on pawns for this.
I’m happy to trade my knights for the pawns, but I would like to see if I’m wrong.
- compiler-guy 3y agoBishops have a great deal more mobility than knights. A knight in the wrong corner takes several moves to catch up to a distant passed pawn. A bishop needs far fewer. Generally the trade off is a bishop pair, where you do have all the squares covered, vs the slower knights, who are also the only pieces that can threaten a piece without being threatened back. The advantages are highly position dependent, with closed games largely going to the knights and open games going to the bishops pair. But most games turn into open games at some point, so statistically the bishops end up better.