Answers.Body: <p>I have no mathematical formula to calculate the value of a knight or bishop depending on the time control (which is a related question and was asked <a href="https://chess.stackexchange.com/questions/6249/worth-of-a-piece-in-time/6373#6373">here</a>), but as I am mainly a <a href="http://www.chess.com/" rel="noreferrer">Chess.com</a> user and thus play blitz and rapid on the internet, I'll try to make an educated guess. My answer will be based on chess played with a mouse, not OTB.</p>
  
  <p>There are several factors while considering the numerical value of the knight and the bishop that have to be taken into account.</p>
  
  <p>1.1. The bishop is a long range piece, and this means that you have to make longer moves when moving it and consider more squares it can attack and defend.</p>
  
  <p>1.2. The knight is a short range piece, and thus you only have to care about a smaller part of the board when moving it.</p>
  
  <p>2.1. The bishop can only control half the board, and thus your opponent may easily avoid it by simply placing his pieces on the opposite color.</p>
  
  <p>2.2. The knight, albeit slower, can control the whole board, this means that your opponent's king is not safe of checks anywhere, and checks are quite time consuming (at least from a couple to a handful of seconds).</p>
  
  <p>3.1. The bishop moves (diagonally) are very predictable.</p>
  
  <p>3.2. The knight moves (L shape and able to jump over pieces) are hard to predict, and it's easy to blunder forks when one is hopping around you.</p>
  
  <p>The references to time consuming moves may look quite odd to players that do not use the internet. However, they do play an important role, since the time control is so reduced that almost instant answers are needed in the endgame, and these cannot be easily reached by long-range pieces.</p>
  
  <p>There may be more, but I consider these points, specially the last one, the most important. If we consider the pros and cons, clearly the surprise factor of the knight and the fact that he is more consuming to your opponent than the bishop, give him the upper hand. By experience, I have lost many games and draw winning positions being low on time and blundering a fork to a knight, and also spent a few extra seconds on the clock due to an unexpected check and ended up losing on time.</p>
  
  <p>This is why I consider the knight to be at least <strong>4.00</strong> pawns, while the bishop keeps his <strong>3.25</strong> pawns. However, in some positions (all the pawns in one side, or all the pawns blocked, or the enemy king cut off, or similar positions where the knight can easily outmaneuver the bishop) I would give the knight a full pawn advantage at <strong>4.25</strong> pawns.</p>
  
  <p>I am well aware that this answer is completely subjective, but as said, I couldn't find a way to quantify these advantages.</p>
  
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 3.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2014-10-15T13:37:58.717Z
Answers.LastActivityDate: 2014-10-15T13:37:58.717Z
Answers.LastEditDate: 2017-04-13T12:48:53.737Z
Answers.UserDisplayName: Pablo S. Ocal
Answers.Body: <p>The Knight is not stronger in blitz, such a statement is nonsense.</p>
  
  <p>It is you that are weaker at calculating at blitz, and the Knight is simply more difficult to handle with less time to calculate due to the kind of moves you can make with it.</p>
  
  <p>So it's matter of how your brain handles Knights nothing intrinsic in the Knight.</p>
  
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2021-05-21T10:25:55.670Z
Answers.Text: I don't think the holder of the N has an advantage in calculating in advance, both must calculate the moves, the point is IMHO that it is easy to fall in a fork at high speed no more no less.
  In a game human vs machine the machine vould handle the two pieces at the same speed and it would not change the weight assigned to a N, so the N is not stroger per se, it is pure psychology. And of course you could change the computer engine to use pyshology against a human player too if you like :-).
Answers.UserDisplayName: user1708042
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 3.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2014-08-08T21:05:54.987Z
Answers.LastActivityDate: 2014-08-08T21:05:54.987Z
Answers.UserDisplayName: user1708042
Body: <blockquote>
    <p>In blitz, the knight is stronger than the bishop. - Vlastmil Hort</p>
  </blockquote>
  
  <p>I am using this point value system for classical time controls (at least one hour per player):</p>
  
  <ul>
  <li>Pawn = 1</li>
  <li>Knight = 3.25</li>
  <li>Bishop = 3.25</li>
  <li>Rook = 5</li>
  <li>Queen = 9.5</li>
  <li>Bishop pair = +0.5</li>
  </ul>
  
  <p>But as we all know, the Knight gets a little bit stronger in Rapid (from 15 minutes to 60 minutes per player), and it perhaps gets even more powerful in Blitz (from 3 minutes to 15 minutes per player). I would like to quantify/evaluate the average strength of the Knight in Rapid and in Blitz.</p>
  
  <p>Therefore my two questions are:</p>
  
  <ul>
  <li>How many centipawns does the Knight gain in Rapid?</li>
  <li>How many centipawns does the Knight gain in Blitz?</li>
  </ul>
  
  <p>Even though it may not be easy, please try to make estimations as precise as possible.</p>
  
  <p>.</p>
  
  <p>.</p>
  
  <p>@Wes : Well I have at least three sources that confirm that Knights get stronger in Rapid and Blitz.</p>
  
  <p>The first is GM Vlastmil Hort which I previously quoted. He had a peak rating of 2620 Elo and even reached the 1977–78 Candidates Tournament.</p>
  
  <p>The second is <a href="http://www.chess.com/news/krushs-last-minute-run-edges-kosintseva-in-death-match-4693" rel="noreferrer">this news report from Chess.com</a> about a "death match" which happened only a week ago.</p>
  
  <blockquote>
    <p>"Before the match, I thought it was easier to play in blitz with the knight, not the bishop," GM Kosintseva said, reflecting the popular notion that knights can be very tricky with minimal time.</p>
  </blockquote>
  
  <p>The third source is <a href="http://www.chess.com/forum/view/general/knights-gt-bishops-in-blitz-games" rel="noreferrer">this Chess.com thread</a>, where a National Master said:</p>
  
  <blockquote>
    <p>It does matter and knights are better in blitz !  Take it from someone who has played more than 50,000 blitz games ! Most titled players I talk about this with agree that knights are better in blitz than bishops.</p>
  </blockquote>
  
Comments.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 3.0
Comments.CreationDate: 2014-12-16T06:48:36.387Z
Comments.Text: how far standards must have fallen for misinformation to result in questions like this
Comments.UserDisplayName: prusswan
Comments.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 3.0
Comments.CreationDate: 2014-10-12T20:42:48.513Z
Comments.Text: @Petrosian: different strokes for different folks, that's exactly why you can't put a centipawn value on how much worse some people play with bishops when the time they have is lower.
Comments.UserDisplayName: RemcoGerlich
Comments.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Comments.CreationDate: 2020-01-11T20:12:55.417Z
Comments.Text: there are standards?
Comments.UserDisplayName: yobamamama
Comments.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Comments.CreationDate: 2021-02-06T09:10:43.017Z
Comments.Text: wait 10min + no increment each is rapid? or not? i could swear it counts as rapid on chess.com, though chess.com could just have a different definition of rapid
Comments.UserDisplayName: BCLC
Comments.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 3.0
Comments.CreationDate: 2014-08-05T17:40:01.310Z
Comments.Text: "as we all know, the Knight gets a little bit stronger in Rapid" - I honestly didn't know this and don't think this is true, and I'm a 2150+ FIDE rated player!
Comments.UserDisplayName: NM Wesley Falcao
Comments.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 3.0
Comments.CreationDate: 2014-08-05T19:21:20.093Z
Comments.Text: @Wes: I responded to your comment by editing my question.
Comments.UserDisplayName: Fate
Comments.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 3.0
Comments.CreationDate: 2014-08-05T19:31:24.853Z
Comments.Text: Basically I would wonder why you're asking. If it's purely for chess skill purposes, this information is probably worse than useless-you mentioned elsewhere that you're about 1700 and this is a level where you should be moving away from numerical piece evaluations, not towards them.
Comments.UserDisplayName: Cleveland
Comments.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 3.0
Comments.CreationDate: 2014-08-06T01:30:43.130Z
Comments.Text: @Cleveland: Maybe you are indeed correct and this information would be useless for most people, but I am 100% sure that for me it would be useful. (Of course I am not going to think something like "A Knight is always worth 3.25 whatever the position". I know that a Knight can sometimes be as strong as a Rook. But knowing its average value can't be harmful.) Each person is different and has their own ways of doing things. Different strokes for different folks.
Comments.UserDisplayName: Fate
Comments.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 3.0
Comments.CreationDate: 2014-08-06T03:24:00.030Z
Comments.Text: This is a dubious claim at best. Any proof of such would seem to include how much more it is worth. Do you think that a GM thinks a knight is tricky at any time control?
Comments.UserDisplayName: Alan
Comments.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 3.0
Comments.CreationDate: 2014-08-16T19:36:14.710Z
Comments.Text: The quote sounds more like an aphorism than a scientific statement.
Comments.UserDisplayName: Dag Oskar Madsen
Tags: <knights><evaluation><blitz><point-value><rapid>
Title: The Knight is stronger in Rapid/Blitz than it is in classical time controls. How many centipawns does the Knight gain in Rapid and in Blitz?
ThreadText: # The Knight is stronger in Rapid/Blitz than it is in classical time controls. How many centipawns does the Knight gain in Rapid and in Blitz?
  
  (Asked by: username_0 on 2014-08-04)
  
  > In blitz, the knight is stronger than the bishop. - Vlastmil Hort
  
  I am using this point value system for classical time controls (at least one hour per player):
  
  * Pawn = 1
  * Knight = 3.25
  * Bishop = 3.25
  * Rook = 5
  * Queen = 9.5
  * Bishop pair = +0.5
  
  But as we all know, the Knight gets a little bit stronger in Rapid (from 15 minutes to 60 minutes per player), and it perhaps gets even more powerful in Blitz (from 3 minutes to 15 minutes per player). I would like to quantify/evaluate the average strength of the Knight in Rapid and in Blitz.
  
  Therefore my two questions are:
  
  * How many centipawns does the Knight gain in Rapid?
  * How many centipawns does the Knight gain in Blitz?
  
  Even though it may not be easy, please try to make estimations as precise as possible.
  
  .
  
  .
  
  @Wes : Well I have at least three sources that confirm that Knights get stronger in Rapid and Blitz.
  
  The first is GM Vlastmil Hort which I previously quoted. He had a peak rating of 2620 Elo and even reached the 1977–78 Candidates Tournament.
  
  The second is [this news report from Chess.com](http://www.chess.com/news/krushs-last-minute-run-edges-kosintseva-in-death-match-4693) about a "death match" which happened only a week ago.
  
  > "Before the match, I thought it was easier to play in blitz with the knight, not the bishop," GM Kosintseva said, reflecting the popular notion that knights can be very tricky with minimal time.
  
  The third source is [this Chess.com thread](http://www.chess.com/forum/view/general/knights-gt-bishops-in-blitz-games), where a National Master said:
  
  > It does matter and knights are better in blitz ! Take it from someone who has played more than 50,000 blitz games ! Most titled players I talk about this with agree that knights are better in blitz than bishops.
  
  **Tags:** knights, evaluation, blitz, point-value, rapid
  
  > **Comments:**
  > **username_5**: "as we all know, the Knight gets a little bit stronger in Rapid" - I honestly didn't know this and don't think this is true, and I'm a 2150+ FIDE rated player!  
  > **username_0**: @Wes: I responded to your comment by editing my question.  
  > **username_6**: Basically I would wonder why you're asking. If it's purely for chess skill purposes, this information is probably worse than useless-you mentioned elsewhere that you're about 1700 and this is a level where you should be moving away from numerical piece evaluations, not towards them.  
  > **username_0**: @username_6: Maybe you are indeed correct and this information would be useless for most people, but I am 100% sure that for me it would be useful. (Of course I am not going to think something like "A Knight is always worth 3.25 whatever the position". I know that a Knight can sometimes be as strong as a Rook. But knowing its average value can't be harmful.) Each person is different and has their own ways of doing things. Different strokes for different folks.  
  > **username_7**: This is a dubious claim at best. Any proof of such would seem to include how much more it is worth. Do you think that a GM thinks a knight is tricky at any time control?  
  > **username_8**: The quote sounds more like an aphorism than a scientific statement.  
  > **username_2**: @Petrosian: different strokes for different folks, that's exactly why you can't put a centipawn value on how much worse some people play with bishops when the time they have is lower.  
  > **username_1**: how far standards must have fallen for misinformation to result in questions like this  
  > **username_3**: there are standards?  
  > **username_4**: wait 10min + no increment each is rapid? or not? i could swear it counts as rapid on chess.com, though chess.com could just have a different definition of rapid  
  
  ---
  
  ## 2 answers
  
  ### Answer by username_9 on 2014-10-15. Score: 4
  
  I have no mathematical formula to calculate the value of a knight or bishop depending on the time control (which is a related question and was asked [here](https://chess.stackexchange.com/questions/6249/worth-of-a-piece-in-time/6373#6373)), but as I am mainly a [Chess.com](http://www.chess.com/) user and thus play blitz and rapid on the internet, I'll try to make an educated guess. My answer will be based on chess played with a mouse, not OTB.
  
  There are several factors while considering the numerical value of the knight and the bishop that have to be taken into account.
  
  1.1. The bishop is a long range piece, and this means that you have to make longer moves when moving it and consider more squares it can attack and defend.
  
  1.2. The knight is a short range piece, and thus you only have to care about a smaller part of the board when moving it.
  
  2.1. The bishop can only control half the board, and thus your opponent may easily avoid it by simply placing his pieces on the opposite color.
  
  2.2. The knight, albeit slower, can control the whole board, this means that your opponent's king is not safe of checks anywhere, and checks are quite time consuming (at least from a couple to a handful of seconds).
  
  3.1. The bishop moves (diagonally) are very predictable.
  
  3.2. The knight moves (L shape and able to jump over pieces) are hard to predict, and it's easy to blunder forks when one is hopping around you.
  
  The references to time consuming moves may look quite odd to players that do not use the internet. However, they do play an important role, since the time control is so reduced that almost instant answers are needed in the endgame, and these cannot be easily reached by long-range pieces.
  
  There may be more, but I consider these points, specially the last one, the most important. If we consider the pros and cons, clearly the surprise factor of the knight and the fact that he is more consuming to your opponent than the bishop, give him the upper hand. By experience, I have lost many games and draw winning positions being low on time and blundering a fork to a knight, and also spent a few extra seconds on the clock due to an unexpected check and ended up losing on time.
  
  This is why I consider the knight to be at least **4.00** pawns, while the bishop keeps his **3.25** pawns. However, in some positions (all the pawns in one side, or all the pawns blocked, or the enemy king cut off, or similar positions where the knight can easily outmaneuver the bishop) I would give the knight a full pawn advantage at **4.25** pawns.
  
  I am well aware that this answer is completely subjective, but as said, I couldn't find a way to quantify these advantages.
  
  
  ---
  
  ### Answer by username_10 on 2014-08-08. Score: 1
  
  The Knight is not stronger in blitz, such a statement is nonsense.
  
  It is you that are weaker at calculating at blitz, and the Knight is simply more difficult to handle with less time to calculate due to the kind of moves you can make with it.
  
  So it's matter of how your brain handles Knights nothing intrinsic in the Knight.
  
  > **Comments:**
  > **username_10**: I don't think the holder of the N has an advantage in calculating in advance, both must calculate the moves, the point is IMHO that it is easy to fall in a fork at high speed no more no less. In a game human vs machine the machine vould handle the two pieces at the same speed and it would not change the weight assigned to a N, so the N is not stroger per se, it is pure psychology. And of course you could change the computer engine to use pyshology against a human player too if you like :-).  
  
  ---
  
  