Answers.Body: <p>As you so amply put it: It depends.</p>
  
  <p>It really is down to the how the pawns are placed. If you have all your pawns locked on white and you have a white-squared bishop, your opponent's knight can sit on a black square, be defended by a pawn and attack several pawns and your bishop at the same time, and there's nothing you can do about it. Obviously the knight is better.</p>
  
  <p>If there are no pawns in the middle of the board, and the bishop can harass the knight from a distance, there's nothing the knight can do about it, and the bishop is obviously better.</p>
  
  <p>There is a difference, though. It is sometimes possible to open a closed position. It is never possible to close an open position. And so in general, people prefer the bishop. Two bishops in an open position can be vicious.</p>
  
  <p>If you have a closed position, you reckon there is no way it can ever be opened and you have a bishop of the 'wrong' colour, exchange it. ASAP. Doesn't really matter what with.</p>
  
  <p>If the center is still mobile and you have ideas of opening it, exchange your knights for your opponent's bishop.</p>
  
  <p>With the caveat of the exceptions. If your knight has a really good outpost (hard-to-attack or defended weak square in the opposing camp) use it. Oh, and if the exchange weakens a pawn structure in a non-repairable way, it's worth considering. Or if there are other tactical concerns, obviously.</p>
  
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2016-08-12T00:02:41.737Z
Answers.LastActivityDate: 2020-03-22T15:58:50.473Z
Answers.LastEditDate: 2020-03-22T15:58:50.473Z
Answers.UserDisplayName: IWonderWhatThisButtonDoes
Answers.Body: <blockquote>
    <p>When would it be beneficial to trade a knight for a bishop, or vice versa?</p>
  </blockquote>
  
  <p>Obviously, bishops are more interesting when there's an open position, where you can aim at long distance on the chess set along diagonals, with no pawns on your path. So the choice would be to avoid the exchange in such positions. In tighten positions, with entangled pawn structures, Knights however can be more effective. So I would keep them in that situations. </p>
  
  <p>This is the <em>absolute</em> point of view, but depending on the game, you can find a specific utility to keep a knight in an opened position or not exchange a bishop in a closed one. </p>
  
  <blockquote>
    <p>How does the value of a knight or bishop change depending on the current situation in game?</p>
  </blockquote>
  
  <p>I played a game recently when I had a good bishop, that I wanted to use for my attack, but then my opponent played his knight in a strategic place, where he would have made a lot of problems and have me lose my tempo because of a threat, so after evaluating the situation I decided it was better to make the exchange with my <strong>(so good !)</strong> bishop. </p>
  
  <p>I would have preferred to keep it, but it was the position and the dangerous square occupied by the knight (that increased its value) that decided my move. </p>
  
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2016-08-24T15:25:29.883Z
Answers.LastActivityDate: 2020-03-22T15:58:28.523Z
Answers.LastEditDate: 2020-03-22T15:58:28.523Z
Answers.UserDisplayName: Koblenz
Body: <p>After looking at <a href="https://chess.stackexchange.com/questions/4001/fianchetto-bishop-vs-normal-bishop">bishop placement</a> and <a href="https://chess.stackexchange.com/questions/9309/bishop-vs-knight">bishops compared to knights</a> i came to the following question:</p>
  
  <p><strong>When would it be beneficial to trade a knight for a bishop, or vice versa?</strong></p>
  
  <p>This includes the following:</p>
  
  <ul>
  <li>Trading a fianchettoed bishop and a centralised bishop</li>
  <li>Trading a bishop of a particular colour and a bishop of the other colour</li>
  <li>Trading a knight and a bishop</li>
  <li>Trading an outposted knight for a bishop</li>
  <li>Trading a bishop for a centralised knight</li>
  <li>Trading two knights when one side would be left with a bishop while the other would be left with a knight</li>
  <li>Trading an undeveloped, or otherwise "out of the game" piece for a developed and active piece, both knights and bishops.</li>
  </ul>
  
  <p><strong>How does the value of a knight or bishop change depending on the current situation in game?</strong></p>
  
  <p>What examples are there of this?
  Why does this happen and how can I trade these pieces to my own advantage?</p>
  
  <p>Example from GM (or other high level) games demonstrating one or multiple points would be greatly appreciated.</p>
  
Comments.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 3.0
Comments.CreationDate: 2016-08-24T15:37:26.970Z
Comments.Text: I think a modification of the question is in place here. There are no general "rules" which guarantee that you will make the right trades all the time - it is an art in and of itself, and thus it requires tons of experience to do it well. The only answers that could prove useful in this SE format are examples of "good trades", or short answers like the ones given already. Otherwise what you're asking from the community is to produce an entire book on the subject.
Comments.UserDisplayName: Scounged
Comments.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 3.0
Comments.CreationDate: 2016-08-24T19:14:06.937Z
Comments.Text: It's not simple enough to be answered in a few paragraphs, if it was, everybody would be a grandmaster. If you want to learn the basics, Reassess your chess by Silman is recommended.
Comments.UserDisplayName: limits
Tags: <knights><bishops><fianchetto><trading>
Title: When and why should I trade minor pieces?
ThreadText: # When and why should I trade minor pieces?
  
  (Asked by: username_0 on 2016-08-10)
  
  After looking at [bishop placement](https://chess.stackexchange.com/questions/4001/fianchetto-bishop-vs-normal-bishop) and [bishops compared to knights](https://chess.stackexchange.com/questions/9309/bishop-vs-knight) i came to the following question:
  
  **When would it be beneficial to trade a knight for a bishop, or vice versa?**
  
  This includes the following:
  
  * Trading a fianchettoed bishop and a centralised bishop
  * Trading a bishop of a particular colour and a bishop of the other colour
  * Trading a knight and a bishop
  * Trading an outposted knight for a bishop
  * Trading a bishop for a centralised knight
  * Trading two knights when one side would be left with a bishop while the other would be left with a knight
  * Trading an undeveloped, or otherwise "out of the game" piece for a developed and active piece, both knights and bishops.
  
  **How does the value of a knight or bishop change depending on the current situation in game?**
  
  What examples are there of this?
  Why does this happen and how can I trade these pieces to my own advantage?
  
  Example from GM (or other high level) games demonstrating one or multiple points would be greatly appreciated.
  
  **Tags:** knights, bishops, fianchetto, trading
  
  > **Comments:**
  > **username_1**: I think a modification of the question is in place here. There are no general "rules" which guarantee that you will make the right trades all the time - it is an art in and of itself, and thus it requires tons of experience to do it well. The only answers that could prove useful in this SE format are examples of "good trades", or short answers like the ones given already. Otherwise what you're asking from the community is to produce an entire book on the subject.  
  > **username_2**: It's not simple enough to be answered in a few paragraphs, if it was, everybody would be a grandmaster. If you want to learn the basics, Reassess your chess by Silman is recommended.  
  
  ---
  
  ## 2 answers
  
  ### Answer by username_3 on 2016-08-12. Score: 2
  
  As you so amply put it: It depends.
  
  It really is down to the how the pawns are placed. If you have all your pawns locked on white and you have a white-squared bishop, your opponent's knight can sit on a black square, be defended by a pawn and attack several pawns and your bishop at the same time, and there's nothing you can do about it. Obviously the knight is better.
  
  If there are no pawns in the middle of the board, and the bishop can harass the knight from a distance, there's nothing the knight can do about it, and the bishop is obviously better.
  
  There is a difference, though. It is sometimes possible to open a closed position. It is never possible to close an open position. And so in general, people prefer the bishop. Two bishops in an open position can be vicious.
  
  If you have a closed position, you reckon there is no way it can ever be opened and you have a bishop of the 'wrong' colour, exchange it. ASAP. Doesn't really matter what with.
  
  If the center is still mobile and you have ideas of opening it, exchange your knights for your opponent's bishop.
  
  With the caveat of the exceptions. If your knight has a really good outpost (hard-to-attack or defended weak square in the opposing camp) use it. Oh, and if the exchange weakens a pawn structure in a non-repairable way, it's worth considering. Or if there are other tactical concerns, obviously.
  
  
  ---
  
  ### Answer by username_4 on 2016-08-24. Score: 1
  
  > When would it be beneficial to trade a knight for a bishop, or vice versa?
  
  Obviously, bishops are more interesting when there's an open position, where you can aim at long distance on the chess set along diagonals, with no pawns on your path. So the choice would be to avoid the exchange in such positions. In tighten positions, with entangled pawn structures, Knights however can be more effective. So I would keep them in that situations.
  
  This is the *absolute* point of view, but depending on the game, you can find a specific utility to keep a knight in an opened position or not exchange a bishop in a closed one.
  
  > How does the value of a knight or bishop change depending on the current situation in game?
  
  I played a game recently when I had a good bishop, that I wanted to use for my attack, but then my opponent played his knight in a strategic place, where he would have made a lot of problems and have me lose my tempo because of a threat, so after evaluating the situation I decided it was better to make the exchange with my **(so good !)** bishop.
  
  I would have preferred to keep it, but it was the position and the dangerous square occupied by the knight (that increased its value) that decided my move.
  
  
  ---
  
  