A bishop can trap (although it cannot then capture) a knight on the rim (see diagram), especially in the endgame. Pawnless endgames are a rarity, and if the stronger side has even a single pawn, an extra knight should give them an easy win. Paradoxically, checkmate with two knights sometimes can be forced if the weaker side has a single extra pawn, but this is a curiosity of little practical value (see two knights endgame). Checkmate can be forced with a bishop and knight, however, or with two bishops, even though the bishop and knight are in general about equal in value. When a bare king faces a king and two knights, a checkmate can never be forced checkmate can occur only if the opponent commits a blunder by moving their king to a square where it can be checkmated on the next move. In an endgame where one side has only a king and a knight while the other side has only a king, the game is a draw since a checkmate is impossible. Knight trapped by an enemy bishop knight trapped by a king
If instead of the knight, White had a bishop on either color of square, White would win with either side to move. Similarly, if the knight were on a black square and it were Black's turn to move, White cannot win. In the position pictured on the right, if the knight is on a white square and it is White's turn to move, White cannot win. Nonetheless, a disadvantage of the knight (compared to the other pieces) is that by itself it cannot lose a move to put the opponent in zugzwang (see triangulation and tempo), while a bishop can. Furthermore, knights have the advantage of being able to control squares of either color, unlike a lone bishop. Knights are superior to bishops in an endgame if all the pawns are on one side of the board. This limitation is less important, however, in endgames with pawns on only one side of the board. A knight can exert control over only one part of the board at a time and often takes multiple moves to reposition to a new location, which often makes it less suitable in endgames with pawns on both sides of the board. White wins if Black is to move.Ĭompared to a bishop, a knight is often not as good in an endgame. In an endgame without other pieces or pawns, two knights generally have a better chance of forming a drawing fortress against a queen than do two bishops or a bishop and a knight. However, Glenn Flear found no game of Capablanca's that supported his statement statistics do not support the statement, either. World Champion José Raúl Capablanca considered that a queen and a knight is usually a better combination than a queen and a bishop. As such, a pair of bishops is usually considered better than a pair of knights. Whereas two bishops cover each other's weaknesses, two knights tend not to cooperate with each other as efficiently. In the diagram, White's knight on d5 is very powerful – more powerful than Black's bishop on g7. a square which cannot be attacked by enemy pawns. For this reason, a knight is effective when placed in a weakness in the opponent's pawn structure, i.e.
A knight occupying a hole (d5) in the enemy pawn structureĮnemy pawns are effective at harassing knights because a pawn attacking a knight is not itself attacked by the knight.
0 kommentar(er)
