Devin asked in Games & RecreationBoard Games · 2 months ago

Chess: Why does the computer recommend that you take the horse?

Isn't a bishop considered more valuable than this piece? What is the advantage/disadvantage to taking this piece? You hurt their pawn structure, but now they have open file for the rook. Do you recommend I take?

Attachment image

8 Answers

  • 2 months ago
    Favorite Answer

    Where knights and bishops fall in power in relation to each other is somewhat debated and personal preference, but generally considered very close to each other. I personally feel that a lone knight is better than a lone bishop, but two bishops are better than two knights. This is mainly because, once you take one of your opponent's bishops, you can better protect your own pieces by keeping them on the opposite color space as much as possible. So, since both sides currently have both bishops and both knights, I would consider taking this trade (ignoring anything else like board positions) bad, but only slightly so.

    Looking at the board more broadly:

    --If you take, he most likely won't take with the pawn, but with the queen, as this will bring the power of the queen out into the open. Given how undeveloped your situation is (with the game being very early), that's probably not something you want.

    --Another option is to make some unrelated move to threaten him somewhere else, and make it so his next move shouldn't be to take your bishop with the h6 pawn. But for this to work, you have to be threatening something at least as valuable that you can take safely, or something big like the queen. The only move I see where taking your bishop isn't his next move would be queen to a4 (because that's check), but that still turns out bad for you if they answer with bishop to d7, resulting in you retreating the piece you just moved, trading two moves for 1 and not gaining much if any board position value.

    --But then you have to look to retreat.

    ----Going to F4 would leave your bishop pinned down, and if he's willing to ruin his king-side pawn wall for castling, he can be aggressive and move the g7 pawn out 2 spaces, and force you to choose trades of either a knight for 2 pawns, or bishop for bishop and ruin your own king-side pawn wall (when you've already ruined your queen-side pawn wall, effectively making castling something that provides no defense for you).

    ----Otherwise, you have to go to one of e3, d2, or c1. All of these set your bishop back to where it's not doing much, and e3 blocks potential options for developing your queen. I'm assuming based on board position that your immediately previous move was to move your bishop out to g5, at which point you've traded 2 moves to 1 just to get his pawn to h6, because you didn't intend to trade for the knight. (And if I'm playing black here, I'm thanking you for that, as moving the king's rook's pawn out 1 is something I want to do, as it makes castling to that side safer, as your king then has an escape route if the rook is lost and your opponent gets their rook or queen into your back row, and it barely reduces the defensive capabilities of the pawn wall at all. Normally I have to feel like I'm wasting a move when I have the luxury to be able to do that, but this situation gives an excuse and a free move after that on top!)

  • 2 months ago

    I would move the pawn to c 5, after the bishop attacks you or moves back, move the other bishop to b 5 CHECK

  • 2 months ago

    Most likely, the computer thinks a horse will do some damage and gets the advantage.

  • 2 months ago

    This play gains time in that it allows White to play c5 next. Retreating with the Bishop(s) loses time.

    Source(s): Stockfish
  • How do you think about the answers? You can sign in to vote the answer.
  • Anonymous
    2 months ago

    The choice is yours, you can either retreat or take.

    By the way, the ' horse ' is called a knight.

  • 2 months ago

    Because Black's next move will be to take the bishop. Taking it with the pawn on G7 causes a doubled pawn AND blacks the queen, slowing down Black's development. Taking it with the queen opens up the threat of c6 (threatens that black bishop on D6) and Kn to C5, which would win the rook. There are other threats as well, with the black queen so exposed, with few places to go.

    However, it's a matter of whether one considers knights and bishops as equal  value pieces. The difference in value is not great, far less than the dynamics of gaining a move that the opponent MUST respond to (that's worth about 1/3 of a pawn)

  • 2 months ago

    Thanks to Bobby Fisher and his use of bishops,  it is generally listed that a knight is worth 3 and the bishop is worth 3+.    However I love to take out my enemy knights and one bishop.   In trade I will give him both my bishops and one knight.   Then I park all my remaining pieces on the color OPPOSITE of what his bishop is on rendering that bishop ineffective as he can not attack ANY of my pieces.   In the meantime I can jump everywhere and hit his pieces no matter what color he parks them on.    As far as this,  they would use the QUEEN to take the bishop keeping the pawn file intact.   Remember,  castling is one of the best moves you can make to protect the king but it does no good if you open up the pawns in front of him. 

  • 2 months ago

    It is not my game!

    But to answer your question, the knight (horse as you call it) is a very dangerous piece. It can attack over another piece and not be subject to a counter attack. I like using my knights to "Fork" two pieces and get out with out a loss. For example i often attack the king and queen with a knight. The player has to move the king, I get his queen. Sometimes it is a rook and the king.

    Now this is early in the game, the layout looks like a familiar chess problem. The answer is actually in the long term goal and I an not going to take an hour analyzing the rest of the game.

Still have questions? Get your answers by asking now.