This was interesting, thanks for sharing. Maybe you can back it up by showing how the bishop can so often outshine the knight in endings with pawns on both sides of the board, or maybe middlegame examples where the center is open so the knight can't find squares in the center while the bishops rain fire from the wings? Just food for thought, love your stuff as always.

@R.Akerman-oz1tf

5 ай бұрын

The elementary diff is the colour. Bish remains; where Knts alternate. I like Ur suggestion though. Mid games) GM's might even sac a Bish. End games ?) that would be something.

The bishops range making it superior to knights is not new to experienced players, but explaining it this way is beautifully illustrative and really drives the point home. Great job.

Glad you've been living your life, and excited to see my favorite, most instructive chess channel back on YT!

The bishops are advisors, putting influence over the board and forcing weaknesses. Knights are your warriors, finding the weakness left behind and helping find the kill. Bishops have the time, and knights have harmony.

Interesting . Thanks for the content Irina! Very underrated channel.

I really like the knight but the bishop has the ability to simulate a sniper, which makes him more advantageous for the checkmate.

‘’Short and sweet.’’ Some unintentional humor there!

Wonderful, came to hear an opinion on why a bishop might be preferred over a knight .. got a valuable lesson on attacking chess ❤

Actually, the 3 examples show how tremendously strong and devastating knights are when supported by the queen! Much stronger than bishops, usually.

great job with the lighting, looks really sharp!

Love your videos. Thanks again very much.

Hey! I'm so happy you haven't stopped uploading, was worried for a bit. Love the content, keep it up

Thanks very much Irina. I was one of the people who asked this question about bishops v knights. Really appreciate the video

Thank you! Was always confused about the bishop vs knight talks

Love your videos thanks Irina and great to see you back!!

very instructive , appreciate it !!

Thanks Irina, hope you had a great holiday in Australia!

Thanks for the instructional videos, great teaching style

Excellent explanation, glad you're back!

hooray! glad you're back posting for then new year. Your content is golden

always nice to watch your videos 😺 glad you're back

Great content. A pleasure to have such a wonderful teacher. Thank you.

Great examples...very helpful!

Great video! Good explanation.

While it took the knight four moves, it was the star of the show in the first game. It prevented retaking on f6 and was the foundation for a checkmate threat, and the final checkmate (that did not materialise). In all games, the knights did the heavy lifting, while the bishops only removed pieces (which could have been accomplished with another kind of piece as well). According to the games chosen, the best use of bishops is to sacrifice them. :) I believe knights are fantastic, because their square coverage is unlike that of any other piece which means one can attack any piece (with the exception of another knight) without giving the attacked piece the option of removing the attacker. Furthermore, knights seem to be much more capable of creating forks, probably due to how other pieces tend to need to support each other. I don't think I've ever seen a bishop creating a fork but knights do or threaten it very frequently. Moreover, knights cannot be blocked by moving a piece between the knight and the attacked piece. A knight is therefore not only great at circumventing defensive walls and exploiting cramped positions, it is the only piece to deliver the fabulous smothered mate. Finally, bishops really suffer in endgames when one loses the bishop pair as half of the board is inaccessible for a single bishop. In contrast a single knight can reach any square of the board (granted, while taking its time to do so). For these reasons, I like knights a lot more than bishops. This is just an amateur's view, of course.

@62calum

5 ай бұрын

I totally agree. It's funny how people see chess differently. None of that stuff happens without the knight. The bishop can pin you tho that's a really strong move.

5:11 Holy hell!

@sandeepranga1

5 ай бұрын

It's a special move in chess lol 😉😂😂

Thank you..🙏🥰 Welcome back...

BEST NEWS ever! new instructions and your content!!! but wow you had an amazing time that you needed so great!!!

Love your content ❤

Glad you had a great holiday here in Australia.

Naturally cuddling 🐨 takes precedence above making chess videos, we understand. So glad to see you back though, you make the most instructive chess videos on KZread. Although bishops are generally better than knights I'm always aware for chances getting a good knight vs a bad bishop, I really love playing these endgames.

Lovely to see you back after soo long, thank you Irina

Oh we've waited for a new video so desperately long!

Happy to see you again on youtube😊

Good to see you back!

Just found this channel love it

Insightful lecture.

I anxiously waited for you to make any video, missed you and your videos 💞 Thank You Dear

First lesson of the year! Let's go!!! 🎉🎉❤

Good lesson!

One advantage knights have over bishops is its harder to predict their movements. Where could this knight be in 3 or 4 moves? That takes more time to calculate than a bishop. Im only ever blindsided by knights.

Very helpful

I like having a knight over a bishop in some end games. I like that it's the only piece that can jump over other pieces. A knight can sometimes penetrate a "fortress" when a bishop cannot. Speaking in generalities, however, I can see why people prefer knights over bishops.

Good you enjoyed your time in Australia. Great video, Irina :)

In the end game a bishop can wind up dominating a knight, a knight can never wind up dominating a bishop.

Thank you Irina!

Welcome home, mate! Bh6 was extremely nasty!

The thumbnail says it all, Knights are the koalas of chess.

Any Catalan opening is a good example of a super powerful bishop in "g2". I play it with White.

Thanks

Thank you

Welcome back Irina! We missed you!

Really cool

Nice to see your pretty face again. It feels so refreshing.❤😊

Something I learned recently is that if you place a bishop on an empty chessboard it can get to any square of its designated color in no more than 2 moves.

it's a bit of a truism that i fully agree with (800 but been playing regularly for a couple years) that I'd rather have a knight when there's lots of pieces and pawns obstructing the long movement but I'd rather have a bishop the board is open; and the more things get taken off the board, the more i like my bishops, so i almost never want to trade a bishop for a knight and treat doing so almost like a full piece sacrifice. I think that last game is a great example of this because the bishops played that vital role with the sacrifices but in the very cramped position it's the knights that actually played the checkmating role

@davidjames149

5 ай бұрын

800 after playing regularly for years?

@yukari_katsuragi

5 ай бұрын

@@davidjames149 yes, I'm naturally untalented i also wish i was less bad at chess but don't be rude

Why a bishop is better than a knight: "hey, let's sacrifice some of them😂"

@ruthxk7844

5 ай бұрын

Ps just joking of course. I loved the examples! I just didn't expect them to be sacrificed after stating they are so much better😂

Very nice ! ✍️🎊👏😀

The Knight can do things no other piece can do, namely jump over other pieces. The Queen can do everything a Bishop can do, but a Queen can’t do what a Knight can do.

I've seen players do wonderful things with knights, years ago, that I still haven't learnt to do, so, there are also some strong arguments in favour of the knights being superior.

The Bishops were put in the same rank as those filthy Knights from the royal guard, but they proved themselves over time and now the Kingdom recognizes their true value: *4*

I get a kick out of how Irina doesn't tout the GM title on her channel (in her youtube channel name or handle) like most others do who have the title. It's like hey, I'm Irina Krush, you know who I am and this is why you're watching. Even though a GM title is greater than a number of lesser titles of content creators who created good content I also enjoy watching. I sometimes wonder if there's a material difference in what is taught at my low 1000s level depending on what level of Mastery the various demigods of chess have reached. In theory the higher you get to the better you should understand things however being able to convey things in a way that elevates people rapidly is another matter entirely.

What about in a B vs N (plus many/ few pawns) endgame?

Your back 😊

Dang, wish I had known you were in Australia. Next time you could do some chess event?

I am not sure if you're open to suggestions but i love endgames videos

could u please make a video on anand vs kamsky round 9 game from candidates tournament in 1995 which anand won

Surf, scuba diving, etc… that’s an excuse we only accept once 😏. Thx for the return 😊

A knight may be better in closed positions, but, in general, a bishop is better.

Did you lunch the wall 🧱 😅?!

Hope you enjoyed Australia!

1 bishop and one night are equivalent, however a bishop pair and a pair of knights are not.

@mister-8658

5 ай бұрын

Someone just liked this comment and I realized how lackadaisical it was. 2 bishops are able to checkmate an opposing king. However two knights are not compatible of doing so thus less valuable than the bishop pair.

@mister-8658

5 ай бұрын

The way my chest coach explained it when I was a kid. You need seven points of material to checkmate a king. You can achieve this with 2 knights and a pawn or a bishop pair. Making bishops worth 3.5.

Interesting video, as ever, although I wonder if it really answered the question of a Bishop being *better* than a Knight when in each example it was the Knights who remained to win the game. The Bishops made their long range, 1-move flashy sacs, but those Knights, however long they took to get there, were the menaces 🤔 Still enjoyed the video and examples though, and they definitely showcased the idea of the Bishop's long-range advantage!

next video: Why a knight is better than a bishop in chess pretty sure there are plenty of scenarios where a knight can be more valuable than a bishop, like a well-anchored knight vs a bishop blocked by opponent's pawn structure. bishops are also inherently blockable whereas knights can't be blocked, which allows knights to setup some checkmates that bishops can't.

Knight is good at preventing early Queen moves and defending it's own Queen. It's unblockable, yet Knight promotion is more common than bishop promotion despite lack of pieces by that point (largely due to stalemate prevention, though). Playing chess most of my life (only around 15yrs, since I was 4 lol), I've always loved the knight, and my view is that both bishops are better than both knights, but 1 knight is better than 1 bishop.

Worth mentioning the value of the Bishop pair against N v B. Bishops also perform better during endgames with pawns on both sides and while a N+N v K endgame is a draw, N+B v K is winning.

❤

Walter Browne vs Arthur Bisguier US Championship 1974 14. Bh6 !!

personally I consider the knight better than the bishop because the bishop is very easy to block his path and especially when you have only one bishop left you are stuck on a single color while the knight can change color as many times as possible. time he wants, moreover the knight is practically impossible to block because he can always bypass the pieces which block him and the knight is the only piece which can jump over any piece, often the end of the game is very closed in terms of position that the rider dominates all the pieces

The knight is the only piece that can attack a king and or a queen with impunity. So, the knight foils the queen and also fills in gaps in defense. Your video really illustrates though how the knight and bishop work well as a team. So while I say the knight is a stronger piece you could argue that the queen and bishops allow the knights to shine and are much faster than the knights. So, in that sense maybe you're right but it is just hard to agree with any piece other than the queen being stronger than the knight. Yes, I think the knight is even stronger than the rook unless the board is wide open of course.

snipers!

Don't all three games show us the knight-queen attack is stronger than most defenses can handle?

@coolcat23

5 ай бұрын

I agree. While the bishops were great in terms of tempo, in principle their sacrifices could have been accomplished by other piece types as well, whereas the way the knights supported the queen to attack the opposite king could not be replicated by any other piece.

I hope that you liked Australia, sorry that it was so hot. One of my opponents is very wily with his Knights, but after I've taken one with a Bishop, attacking feels lopsided. It's just poor play on my part. Love your content.

Because a bishop can travel the board quicker done

I don't really think that illustrates why a bishop is better than a knight. You say it only takes the bishop one move, but you have to move a pawn to get a bishop out and you don't have to move a pawn to get a knight out.

K. Opocensky vs A. Alekhine Duras60 1942 23...Bh3 !!

The Bishop is only strong in open games or half open. That's how i learned it😊 your examples were beautiful 👌😎

Hi Irina. Heard you punched a hole through a wall. What a bad ass!!

i will fight to the last knight but I can't say that about bishop.

A bishop is not better than a knight. It is the position that makes a bishop or a knight better or not.

@videofudge

5 ай бұрын

And if more positions favour the bishop over the knight... The bishop is, generally speaking, better.

@HongwareeChannel

5 ай бұрын

@@videofudge According to who or what book or serious study?...

Because of Koalas?

A knight can be also better than a bishop, it all depends. In blitz knight is even better than bishop.

why there is a koala in the thumbnail

What about the endings where the single bishop is the wrong color and can't attack or defend the pawns (it can only control half the squares on the board) whereas the knight can get to the whole board and capture the key pawn? What about the Sicilian structure where the White knight is dominating from d5 against Black's one remaining minor piece, the dark square bishop? Must be other examples too. Not quite so simple...

💯🙏🏽🌞❤️

I beg to differ that bishops are all that better than knights. And these examples didnt show why bishops are better. Its more like giving away your bishops so the knight can get maximized. Bishops have a range advantage. Knights can attack and defend every colour. Also knights are the only piece that can attack the queen without being attacked back. Also queen and knight pair are said to be better than queen and bishop pair more times. Another advantage of bishops over knights is that bishops dont need a home square; whilst knights normally need weak squares to act as their base. Also bishops can geometrically stop forward movement of the knight. Another disadvantage of the knight is it operates in one colour. So you can put all of your pieces on the opposite colour and never have to worry about the bishop. All in all, I think both knight and bishops are worth 3 pawns. And a rook is worth 2 minor pieces. And a queen is worth 2 rooks. But in alot of positions a queen still out performs two rooks.

these examples don't show bishop power but good pieces cooperation

You are comparing the strengths of one to the weaknesses of the other

Im here to tell you that a bishop can be better then a knight. But in fact there are a lot of situations where a knight is a lot better then a bishop. A knight for example can play on 2 colour complexes. A bishop is limited to only 32 squares on the board.

No doubt some of my games will become famous and be used in examples but likely none that I won.