Timeline for Why does a knight combine better with the queen than a bishop does?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
7 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jan 5, 2020 at 18:49 | comment | added | Mike Jones | Before 1900, the champions said that the knights were better than the bishops. Before AlphaZero, lots of things were assumed to be correct. In every game that I played against masters, I've always won when I had a knight versus their bishop. My experience goes against today's general principles. | |
| Jan 5, 2020 at 2:18 | comment | added | WGroleau | Sometimes, “well established” means someone respected made a guess and hundreds of people repeated it as fact. | |
| Jan 5, 2020 at 1:26 | comment | added | PhishMaster | but even with Watson's opinion, there seems to be a lot of his opinion in there still, the stats aside. For example, his opinion about whether positions are already better. Maybe they are, maybe not, and even if they are, it does not prove that it still did not make that much more difference. The difference could also be simply practical: The positions are just harder to defend for humans. Again, I will still stick with the world champions' opinions. | |
| Jan 5, 2020 at 0:20 | comment | added | Michael West | It happens sometimes that human judgement fails to reach a truth that can be supplied by statistics/logic. The supremacy of chess computers hints that this may be true in chess. But chess is not a game of pure reason when people play it. My own experience is that Queen + Knight is superior. I can feel that is true. If I am making a practical decision in a actual game, or evaluating a position or gauging the strength of a speculative attack what will most likely lead to the best practical result? Thinking about statistics or going with how I feel? I'll take the Queen + Knight. | |
| Jan 4, 2020 at 19:50 | comment | added | PhishMaster | I have seen Watson's opinion on this before, but as the old saying says: "there are lies, damned lies, and statistics". I have seen more World Champions (the most recent was Karpov in "The Karpov Method" videos), who believe that the Q+N is superior to the Q+B, so I will take their opinion over Watson, who I like a lot. Their judgment is far superior. | |
| Jan 4, 2020 at 15:23 | history | edited | Michael West | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
just read this statement from Karpov move by move so thought to add it to the discussion
|
| Jan 4, 2020 at 13:54 | history | answered | Michael West | CC BY-SA 4.0 |