Answers.Body: <p>Once white has put pawns on the central white squares of d3, c4 and e4 his white squared bishop becomes very bad, because its mobility is drastically reduced, and his dark squared bishop becomes essential for protecting the dark squares that have become weak thanks to the pawn moves.</p>
  <p>That means that 7.Bd2 is a blunder because it allows black to exchange the dark squared bishops leaving white with a bad position. Much better would have been 7.Nd2 followed by a3 and b4 to chase the dark squared bishop away.</p>
  
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2020-10-06T15:33:05.017Z
Answers.Text: Blunder sounds like strong language for the move. Maybe a mistake
Answers.UserDisplayName: Cruncher
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2020-10-05T16:03:50.693Z
Answers.LastActivityDate: 2020-10-05T16:03:50.693Z
Answers.UserDisplayName: Brian Towers
Answers.Body: <p>There isn't a sacrifice in the line you gave. I assume you man 6...Bb4+.</p>
  <p>The bishop is a bad bishop because it's blocked by its own pawns in the center. 7.Bd2 is virtually forced trading black's bad bishop for white's good bishop. The alternatives for white just aren't very good.</p>
  <p>It also frees up black's position because he can play d6 to develop the other bishop and he has Ne7 as an option too.</p>
  
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2020-10-06T02:44:42.193Z
Answers.LastActivityDate: 2020-10-06T02:44:42.193Z
Answers.UserDisplayName: Savage47
Answers.Body: <p>Mostly when the engine suggests a such exchange maneuverer it means that either your piece has no future, or the blocking piece has a very good future. Since you need to move the bishop somewhere to get castled, it chooses to exchange it off.</p>
  <p>If you look for plans in the variation you given, the most natural way for White to proceed is to break in the center with f4 at some point, where you can support your center with ...d6. The bishop would find it hard to find a meaningful role in this structure.</p>
  
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2020-10-05T18:59:24.657Z
Answers.LastActivityDate: 2020-10-05T20:10:35.150Z
Answers.LastEditDate: 2020-10-05T20:10:35.150Z
Answers.UserDisplayName: B.Swan
Answers.Body: <p>That is not a sacrifice at all.   It is an exchange.  You get rid of a bad bishop for his better one.  It is positional play for a very minor advantage. But still an advantage.  Enough small ones add up to be enough to win material and the game.</p>
  
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2020-10-06T00:40:59.593Z
Answers.LastActivityDate: 2020-10-06T00:40:59.593Z
Answers.UserDisplayName: yobamarama
Answers.Body: <h2>Three Options</h2>
  <p>After 7.Bd2 Black has three options:</p>
  <p><strong>Retreat</strong>:
  Black can pull the dark bishop back. Retreating to c5 doesn't work, since White can just push the b pawn forward, and force the dark bishop to retreat again, so you'd have to go back to d6 or further. The issue with this is tempo - you've giving white a free turn to develop.</p>
  <p><strong>Defend</strong>:
  You can try to use your Queen or the a pawn to defend the bishop, but these are a little awkward. In the pawn's case, White can exchange for the bishop anyway, and you are left with doubled pawns on b, and now you have to defend the forward pawn or just coincide it. The Queen defense line is more complex, and I'm not sure I'm experienced enough to do it justice. Bottom line is, your Queen is either tied down defending that bishop, since you can't get any other support there easily, or White is going to exchange for the bishop (again) and either push your Queen around or try to exchange for it.</p>
  <p><strong>Exchange</strong>:
  Or exchange for the bishop. Your example ends with White's Queen taking the dark bishop. This doesn't really develop White's Queen, so you gain tempo by following it up with a development move - maybe the knight f6 you mention in your question.</p>
  <p><strong>Bottom line</strong>: the bishop is probably going to be exchanged, so you might as well do it in a way that doesn't give White anything. Moving the White Queen one square forward isn't much in the way of development, so that seems a good exchange.</p>
  
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2020-10-07T14:54:56.803Z
Answers.LastActivityDate: 2020-10-07T14:54:56.803Z
Answers.UserDisplayName: codeMonkey
Answers.Body: <p>I wouldn't say it was a &quot;sacrifice&quot;, it was more like an exchange of bishops.</p>
  <p>My lichess engine was actually giving me <code>...Bd6</code> as the first move.</p>
  <blockquote>
  <p>I don't understand why it wants me to move my bishop to b4 in the first place</p>
  </blockquote>
  <p>Me neither. I doubt anyone here will have an idea. Stockfish doesn't tell us <em>why</em>. If I have to make a guess, I would say the bishop is being blocked by the d4-e5 pawn chain, so it makes sense to exchange the bad bishop off.</p>
  
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2020-10-05T15:11:42.367Z
Answers.Text: I see, that makes sense. So I am essentially just swapping my bishop in a bad position for his free bishop that has a lot more space. Thank you
Answers.UserDisplayName: xate
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2020-10-05T18:12:55.630Z
Answers.Text: 6...Bd6 7.O-O Ne7 8.f4 exf4 9.Bxf4 Bxf4 10.Rxf4 does not look very good for Black
Answers.UserDisplayName: B.Swan
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2020-10-05T18:14:04.770Z
Answers.Text: @B.Swan I don't know, but that's not point of the question.
Answers.UserDisplayName: SmallChess
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2020-10-05T23:11:53.093Z
Answers.Text: @SmallChess, I think he is saying that it could be a factor for why stockfish recommended that.
Answers.UserDisplayName: fartgeek
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2020-10-06T14:20:04.853Z
Answers.Text: Can't you see what situation the engine thinks it will end up in (the PV) and compare that to what would happen after the second best move?
Answers.UserDisplayName: JollyJoker
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2020-10-05T15:03:17.840Z
Answers.LastActivityDate: 2020-10-05T15:03:17.840Z
Answers.UserDisplayName: SmallChess
Body: <p>When reviewing my games on Lichess, I very often find the Lichess engine recommending to me to sacrifice the bishop early on after checking the enemy king. I have created a <a href="http://lichess.org/5hGA9n26" rel="nofollow noreferrer">sample game</a> where you can see it happening. I don't see myself in any better position there, so I am curious what I gain by doing this.</p>
  <pre><code>[FEN &quot;&quot;]
  
  1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. c4 Nd4 4. Nxd4 cxd4 5. d3 e5 6. Be2 Bb4+ 7. Bd2 Bxd2+ 8. Qxd2
  </code></pre>
  <p>I just don't understand why it wants me to move my bishop to b4 in the first place. I'd much rather want to develop my position more by doing c5 or knight f6 or similar.</p>
  
Comments.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Comments.CreationDate: 2020-10-06T01:20:30.663Z
Comments.Text: Engines are good for analyzing tricky tactical lines in openings, but trying to gain insight into opening positions that are more strategic in nature is not a good use of Stockfish.
  
  The engine will tell you which move scores best in its algorithm. Sometimes there are good strategic reasons for it. Sometimes it is a move that humans would rarely want to play. Sometimes it is a good move, but only if you understand how to use it. Sometimes it is barely better for the move that feels more natural to you.
Comments.UserDisplayName: Eric Wilson
Comments.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Comments.CreationDate: 2020-10-06T16:46:16.350Z
Comments.Text: If you retreat, then all you did was let white develop the bishop for free. There's not a good way to defend the bishop, and if you retreat, then white has gained a tempo, you could have played 5 ...Be7 6. Bd2, and it'd be your turn. So in general, it doesn't look like a good move to begin with, and either you trade and you keep tempo, or you retreat to a position you could have gone to in the first place.
Comments.UserDisplayName: Issel
Comments.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Comments.CreationDate: 2020-10-06T19:39:51.043Z
Comments.Text: Thanks everyone for all the great input, especially for all the helpful edits to make my question more clear. This is definitely one of the best stackexchanges I've participated in.
Comments.UserDisplayName: xate
Comments.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Comments.CreationDate: 2020-10-06T20:12:50.343Z
Comments.Text: Maybe everybody is thinking too deeply here. When you are ahead in material, exchange pieces. If white moves the king out of check instead of Bd2, white's development is going nowhere fast and black has pretty much the whole board to choose from.
Comments.UserDisplayName: alephzero
Tags: <opening><analysis><bishops><lichess><exchange>
Title: Why does Stockfish recommend this bishop exchange early on?
ThreadText: # Why does Stockfish recommend this bishop exchange early on?
  
  (Asked by: username_0 on 2020-10-05)
  
  When reviewing my games on Lichess, I very often find the Lichess engine recommending to me to sacrifice the bishop early on after checking the enemy king. I have created a [sample game](http://lichess.org/5hGA9n26) where you can see it happening. I don't see myself in any better position there, so I am curious what I gain by doing this.
  
  ```
  [FEN ""]
  
  1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. c4 Nd4 4. Nxd4 cxd4 5. d3 e5 6. Be2 Bb4+ 7. Bd2 Bxd2+ 8. Qxd2
  
  ```
  
  I just don't understand why it wants me to move my bishop to b4 in the first place. I'd much rather want to develop my position more by doing c5 or knight f6 or similar.
  
  **Tags:** opening, analysis, bishops, lichess, exchange
  
  > **Comments:**
  > **username_1**: Engines are good for analyzing tricky tactical lines in openings, but trying to gain insight into opening positions that are more strategic in nature is not a good use of Stockfish.  The engine will tell you which move scores best in its algorithm. Sometimes there are good strategic reasons for it. Sometimes it is a move that humans would rarely want to play. Sometimes it is a good move, but only if you understand how to use it. Sometimes it is barely better for the move that feels more natural to you.  
  > **username_2**: If you retreat, then all you did was let white develop the bishop for free. There's not a good way to defend the bishop, and if you retreat, then white has gained a tempo, you could have played 5 ...Be7 6. Bd2, and it'd be your turn. So in general, it doesn't look like a good move to begin with, and either you trade and you keep tempo, or you retreat to a position you could have gone to in the first place.  
  > **username_0**: Thanks everyone for all the great input, especially for all the helpful edits to make my question more clear. This is definitely one of the best stackexchanges I've participated in.  
  > **username_3**: Maybe everybody is thinking too deeply here. When you are ahead in material, exchange pieces. If white moves the king out of check instead of Bd2, white's development is going nowhere fast and black has pretty much the whole board to choose from.  
  
  ---
  
  ## 6 answers
  
  ### Answer by username_10 on 2020-10-05. Score: 12 | Accepted answer
  
  I wouldn't say it was a "sacrifice", it was more like an exchange of bishops.
  
  My lichess engine was actually giving me `...Bd6` as the first move.
  
  > I don't understand why it wants me to move my bishop to b4 in the first place
  
  Me neither. I doubt anyone here will have an idea. Stockfish doesn't tell us *why*. If I have to make a guess, I would say the bishop is being blocked by the d4-e5 pawn chain, so it makes sense to exchange the bad bishop off.
  
  > **Comments:**
  > **username_0**: I see, that makes sense. So I am essentially just swapping my bishop in a bad position for his free bishop that has a lot more space. Thank you  
  > **username_7**: 6...Bd6 7.O-O Ne7 8.f4 exf4 9.Bxf4 Bxf4 10.Rxf4 does not look very good for Black  
  > **username_10**: @username_7 I don't know, but that's not point of the question.  
  > **username_11**: @username_10, I think he is saying that it could be a factor for why stockfish recommended that.  
  > **username_12**: Can't you see what situation the engine thinks it will end up in (the PV) and compare that to what would happen after the second best move?  
  
  ---
  
  ### Answer by username_4 on 2020-10-05. Score: 10
  
  Once white has put pawns on the central white squares of d3, c4 and e4 his white squared bishop becomes very bad, because its mobility is drastically reduced, and his dark squared bishop becomes essential for protecting the dark squares that have become weak thanks to the pawn moves.
  
  That means that 7.Bd2 is a blunder because it allows black to exchange the dark squared bishops leaving white with a bad position. Much better would have been 7.Nd2 followed by a3 and b4 to chase the dark squared bishop away.
  
  > **Comments:**
  > **username_5**: Blunder sounds like strong language for the move. Maybe a mistake  
  
  ---
  
  ### Answer by username_6 on 2020-10-06. Score: 4
  
  There isn't a sacrifice in the line you gave. I assume you man 6...Bb4+.
  
  The bishop is a bad bishop because it's blocked by its own pawns in the center. 7.Bd2 is virtually forced trading black's bad bishop for white's good bishop. The alternatives for white just aren't very good.
  
  It also frees up black's position because he can play d6 to develop the other bishop and he has Ne7 as an option too.
  
  
  ---
  
  ### Answer by username_7 on 2020-10-05. Score: 4
  
  Mostly when the engine suggests a such exchange maneuverer it means that either your piece has no future, or the blocking piece has a very good future. Since you need to move the bishop somewhere to get castled, it chooses to exchange it off.
  
  If you look for plans in the variation you given, the most natural way for White to proceed is to break in the center with f4 at some point, where you can support your center with ...d6. The bishop would find it hard to find a meaningful role in this structure.
  
  
  ---
  
  ### Answer by username_8 on 2020-10-06. Score: 3
  
  That is not a sacrifice at all. It is an exchange. You get rid of a bad bishop for his better one. It is positional play for a very minor advantage. But still an advantage. Enough small ones add up to be enough to win material and the game.
  
  
  ---
  
  ### Answer by username_9 on 2020-10-07. Score: 1
  
  ## Three Options
  
  After 7.Bd2 Black has three options:
  
  **Retreat**:
  Black can pull the dark bishop back. Retreating to c5 doesn't work, since White can just push the b pawn forward, and force the dark bishop to retreat again, so you'd have to go back to d6 or further. The issue with this is tempo - you've giving white a free turn to develop.
  
  **Defend**:
  You can try to use your Queen or the a pawn to defend the bishop, but these are a little awkward. In the pawn's case, White can exchange for the bishop anyway, and you are left with doubled pawns on b, and now you have to defend the forward pawn or just coincide it. The Queen defense line is more complex, and I'm not sure I'm experienced enough to do it justice. Bottom line is, your Queen is either tied down defending that bishop, since you can't get any other support there easily, or White is going to exchange for the bishop (again) and either push your Queen around or try to exchange for it.
  
  **Exchange**:
  Or exchange for the bishop. Your example ends with White's Queen taking the dark bishop. This doesn't really develop White's Queen, so you gain tempo by following it up with a development move - maybe the knight f6 you mention in your question.
  
  **Bottom line**: the bishop is probably going to be exchanged, so you might as well do it in a way that doesn't give White anything. Moving the White Queen one square forward isn't much in the way of development, so that seems a good exchange.
  
  
  ---
  
  