Answers.Body: <p>As with many things in chess, the answer is: It depends on the position. You touched on this by discussing open vs closed positions, but it can go much deeper than that. In high level play, the middle game may be closed, but the bishops may be preferred as part of an anticipated endgame strategy. </p>
  
  <p>Knights are superior to bishops in more aspects than just closed vs. open positions. A knight is generally the better option when it comes to blocking an opponent's passed pawn, for instance. </p>
  
  <p>The biggest differences come in endgame strategy, especially when there is only 1 bishop or knight. There may be two knights vs. two bishops at some point in the middle game, but that can easily change as part of a forced exchange, with the resulting position being that the remaining bishop is poorly suited for the emerging endgame position.</p>
  
  <p>In the case of two knights vs a rook -- it depends on the position. Two well placed knights, or knights that are participating in a plan, are going to be better than an inactive, semi-active, poorly placed rook -- open position or not. </p>
  
  <p>The knights also do not need to be linked in order to be effective. There are certainly situations where it is useful for them to be able to cover each other, but there are disadvantages to this as well -- namely that they will limit each others mobility. </p>
  
  <p>With all other things being equal, the bishop pair is generally superior to a knight pair. However, all things are very rarely equal, and taking maximum advantage of the positional imbalances is a cornerstone of any good chess strategy. </p>
  
  <p>IM Jeremy Silman has some excellent books on learning how to do this. </p>
  
  <p>Here are some articles you might find useful:</p>
  
  <p>Bishop vs. Knight in endgames</p>
  
  <p><a href="http://www.chess.com/article/view/start-of-the-series-bishop-vs-knight">http://www.chess.com/article/view/start-of-the-series-bishop-vs-knight</a></p>
  
  <p>Bishop pairs</p>
  
  <p><a href="http://www.chess.com/article/view/the-bishops-the-complete-guide">http://www.chess.com/article/view/the-bishops-the-complete-guide</a>
  <a href="http://www.chess.com/article/view/bishop-pair">http://www.chess.com/article/view/bishop-pair</a></p>
  
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 3.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2013-09-21T08:12:39.097Z
Answers.LastActivityDate: 2013-09-21T08:12:39.097Z
Answers.UserDisplayName: James Christopher
Answers.Body: <p>Show me any instance where a bishop can protect the other bishop. Once an opponent decides that removing one of the opposition bishops is timely, the value of a bishop in my opinion drops one half a point.  Where as one knight in the end game is far more an aggressive tool than one bishop.  Knights are not bound to one color on the board.</p>
  
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2020-08-01T12:25:08.623Z
Answers.LastActivityDate: 2020-08-01T12:25:08.623Z
Answers.UserDisplayName: j.bero
Answers.Body: <p><a href="https://www.chess.com/article/view/the-evaluation-of-material-imbalances-by-im-larry-kaufman" rel="nofollow noreferrer">According to GM Larry Kaufman</a>, who has worked on the chess engines Rybka and Komodo, and has done extensive database analysis of material imbalances,</p>
  <blockquote>
  <p>The bishop pair has an average value of half a pawn (more when the opponent has no minor pieces to exchange for one of the bishops), enough to regard it as part of the material evaluation of the position, and enough to overwhelm most positional considerations. Moreover, this substantial bishop pair value holds up in all situations tested, regardless of what else is on the board.</p>
  </blockquote>
  <p>although he goes on to note some exceptions. The whole article is worth reading.</p>
  
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 3.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2015-09-21T17:54:05.300Z
Answers.Text: Something in quote doesn't make sense. The bishop pair has an average value of half a pawn? Is it supposed to be six and a half? The "more" is inside the parenthesis so I'm not sure what is intended.
Answers.UserDisplayName: AturSams
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 3.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2015-09-21T18:10:39.190Z
Answers.Text: It's worded a little confusingly, but "the bishop pair" factor is something you add in after you have already summed the points for all your material. So if you have two bishops, that is 3 for the first bishop, 3 for the second, and 0.5 for the fact you have both of them, for a total of 6.5.
Answers.UserDisplayName: dfan
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 3.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2015-09-21T18:11:25.527Z
Answers.Text: The "more" refers to the fact that the bishop pair bonus can be even more valuable than 0.5 under certain circumstances (the opponent has no minor pieces at all).
Answers.UserDisplayName: dfan
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2020-08-02T04:36:41.753Z
Answers.Text: submitted an edit fixing the link- it's broke now, https://www.chess.com/article/view/the-evaluation-of-material-imbalances-by-im-larry-kaufman is the correct link it appears
Answers.UserDisplayName: pulsar512b
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2021-08-27T02:24:48.717Z
Answers.Text: wait the question is about bishop pair vs knight pair. this answer seems to be talking about just the bishop pair in general. what's going on?
Answers.UserDisplayName: BCLC
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2021-08-27T10:37:34.073Z
Answers.Text: "It also does not appear to matter much whether the bishop pair is opposed by bishop and knight or by two knights; in either case it is worth half a pawn."
Answers.UserDisplayName: dfan
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2013-09-21T12:20:07.737Z
Answers.LastActivityDate: 2020-08-02T09:13:30.690Z
Answers.LastEditDate: 2020-08-02T09:13:30.690Z
Answers.UserDisplayName: dfan
Body: <p>A bishop and knight are considered to be about equal in value (three points each). There are even some (closed) positions, where a single knight is worth more than a "bad" bishop, although there are more positions where a bishop is worth a bit more.</p>
  
  <p>But unless they're linked and extremely well placed, (e.g. d4 and e6), two knights are seldom worth more than six points. Some masters put the bishop pair at seven points in an open position because the two bishops together can cover squares of both colors, while moving faster. Does this make two bishops worth more than two knights?</p>
  
  <p>I have read that a fairly open position, two knights may be worth no more than one rook (five points instead of six, or two and a half each). I've never heard this about two bishops. Does this strengthen the case that two knights are worth less than two bishops?</p>
  
Comments.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Comments.CreationDate: 2020-08-02T09:33:17.180Z
Comments.Text: The entire "points" system is just an approximation to judge big differences (like, "a queen is better than two minor pieces" or "two rooks are better than a knight and two pawns"). Don't take it too seriously when analyzing these small imbalances. Particular characteristics of each position will always be of greater importance than general rules.
Comments.UserDisplayName: David
Tags: <minor-pieces>
Title: Are two knights generally worth less than two bishops?
ThreadText: # Are two knights generally worth less than two bishops?
  
  (Asked by: username_0 on 2013-09-20)
  
  A bishop and knight are considered to be about equal in value (three points each). There are even some (closed) positions, where a single knight is worth more than a "bad" bishop, although there are more positions where a bishop is worth a bit more.
  
  But unless they're linked and extremely well placed, (e.g. d4 and e6), two knights are seldom worth more than six points. Some masters put the bishop pair at seven points in an open position because the two bishops together can cover squares of both colors, while moving faster. Does this make two bishops worth more than two knights?
  
  I have read that a fairly open position, two knights may be worth no more than one rook (five points instead of six, or two and a half each). I've never heard this about two bishops. Does this strengthen the case that two knights are worth less than two bishops?
  
  **Tags:** minor-pieces
  
  > **Comments:**
  > **username_1**: The entire "points" system is just an approximation to judge big differences (like, "a queen is better than two minor pieces" or "two rooks are better than a knight and two pawns"). Don't take it too seriously when analyzing these small imbalances. Particular characteristics of each position will always be of greater importance than general rules.  
  
  ---
  
  ## 3 answers
  
  ### Answer by username_4 on 2013-09-21. Score: 6 | Accepted answer
  
  [According to GM Larry Kaufman](https://www.chess.com/article/view/the-evaluation-of-material-imbalances-by-im-larry-kaufman), who has worked on the chess engines Rybka and Komodo, and has done extensive database analysis of material imbalances,
  
  > The bishop pair has an average value of half a pawn (more when the opponent has no minor pieces to exchange for one of the bishops), enough to regard it as part of the material evaluation of the position, and enough to overwhelm most positional considerations. Moreover, this substantial bishop pair value holds up in all situations tested, regardless of what else is on the board.
  
  although he goes on to note some exceptions. The whole article is worth reading.
  
  > **Comments:**
  > **username_5**: Something in quote doesn't make sense. The bishop pair has an average value of half a pawn? Is it supposed to be six and a half? The "more" is inside the parenthesis so I'm not sure what is intended.  
  > **username_4**: It's worded a little confusingly, but "the bishop pair" factor is something you add in after you have already summed the points for all your material. So if you have two bishops, that is 3 for the first bishop, 3 for the second, and 0.5 for the fact you have both of them, for a total of 6.5.  
  > **username_4**: The "more" refers to the fact that the bishop pair bonus can be even more valuable than 0.5 under certain circumstances (the opponent has no minor pieces at all).  
  > **username_6**: submitted an edit fixing the link- it's broke now, https://www.chess.com/article/view/the-evaluation-of-material-imbalances-by-im-larry-kaufman is the correct link it appears  
  > **username_7**: wait the question is about bishop pair vs knight pair. this answer seems to be talking about just the bishop pair in general. what's going on?  
  > **username_4**: "It also does not appear to matter much whether the bishop pair is opposed by bishop and knight or by two knights; in either case it is worth half a pawn."  
  
  ---
  
  ### Answer by username_2 on 2013-09-21. Score: 5
  
  As with many things in chess, the answer is: It depends on the position. You touched on this by discussing open vs closed positions, but it can go much deeper than that. In high level play, the middle game may be closed, but the bishops may be preferred as part of an anticipated endgame strategy.
  
  Knights are superior to bishops in more aspects than just closed vs. open positions. A knight is generally the better option when it comes to blocking an opponent's passed pawn, for instance.
  
  The biggest differences come in endgame strategy, especially when there is only 1 bishop or knight. There may be two knights vs. two bishops at some point in the middle game, but that can easily change as part of a forced exchange, with the resulting position being that the remaining bishop is poorly suited for the emerging endgame position.
  
  In the case of two knights vs a rook -- it depends on the position. Two well placed knights, or knights that are participating in a plan, are going to be better than an inactive, semi-active, poorly placed rook -- open position or not.
  
  The knights also do not need to be linked in order to be effective. There are certainly situations where it is useful for them to be able to cover each other, but there are disadvantages to this as well -- namely that they will limit each others mobility.
  
  With all other things being equal, the bishop pair is generally superior to a knight pair. However, all things are very rarely equal, and taking maximum advantage of the positional imbalances is a cornerstone of any good chess strategy.
  
  IM Jeremy Silman has some excellent books on learning how to do this.
  
  Here are some articles you might find useful:
  
  Bishop vs. Knight in endgames
  
  <http://www.chess.com/article/view/start-of-the-series-bishop-vs-knight>
  
  Bishop pairs
  
  <http://www.chess.com/article/view/the-bishops-the-complete-guide>
  <http://www.chess.com/article/view/bishop-pair>
  
  
  ---
  
  ### Answer by username_3 on 2020-08-01. Score: -1
  
  Show me any instance where a bishop can protect the other bishop. Once an opponent decides that removing one of the opposition bishops is timely, the value of a bishop in my opinion drops one half a point. Where as one knight in the end game is far more an aggressive tool than one bishop. Knights are not bound to one color on the board.
  
  
  ---
  
  