Author: Ryan B.
Date: 17:12:37 11/02/05
Go up one level in this thread
On November 01, 2005 at 10:36:47, Jonas Cohonas wrote: >>>Also Fruit does not know the power of queen/knight over >>>queen/bishop. I have not won becuase of this yet but in theory it is the better >>>combo >> >>I am not a sufficiently strong player to have any intelligent opinions of >>my own about this, but according to John Watson (in his widely praised book >>"Modern Chess Strategy") the frequently claimed superiority of Q+N over Q+B >>is nothing more than a widespread myth. >> >>Tord > >It is totally dependent on what type of position is on the board, but there are >many intructional examples that even strong players struggle with, where the Q+N >is better, it is easier in many cases for humans atleast to find the strength in >Q+B and that is how this came about i think. In many cases the Q+N is stronger due to attack patterns. The bishop does not attack in any way that the queen can not. Notice that Bishops are so much stronger as a pair. Each bishop attacks squares the other can not. What piece can attack in a way the queen can not? I do not know why someone would call it a myth but I trust Karpov and Henley (in their book "Golden Rules of Chess") on this issue. Both Grufeld and Silman cover this issue as well. Ryan
This page took 0 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.