knight and bishop vs. rook and pawn

knight and bishop vs. rook and pawn

Only Chess

Cookies help us deliver our Services. By using our Services or clicking I agree, you agree to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Joined
03 Feb 07
Moves
194040
22 Mar 18

Which do you generally consider to be the most advantageous combination? Yes, I know it depends on the position. But which would you rather have?

For some reason, the combination reminds me of the gladiator fights between the retiarius (the knight and bishop being the net and trident) and the secutor (fights with sword and shield).

Cryptic

Behind the scenes

Joined
27 Jun 16
Moves
3093
22 Mar 18

Originally posted by @kunsoo
Which do you generally consider to be the most advantageous combination? Yes, I know it depends on the position. But which would you rather have?

For some reason, the combination reminds me of the gladiator fights between the retiarius (the knight and bishop being the net and trident) and the secutor (fights with sword and shield).
Generally speaking, I'd take bishop and knight. Though the pawn has the potential to promote, it will be a weakness for most of the game.

Joined
12 Nov 06
Moves
74414
23 Mar 18
1 edit

Depends on the phase of the game. In the opening, the bishop and knight will almost always be better. In the endgame it's 50/50. Pawns and rooks increase in value towards the endgame. Until the late middle game/endgame is reached, rooks<5 and pawns <1. Generally speaking of course.

With 3 pawns vs a piece. The piece is almost always better unless it's an endgame. For the same reason.