knights
FICGS - Search results for knights
There are 62 results for knights in the forum.
Elmer Valderrama (2006-04-22 15:44:16)
bug?
Dear Thibault
On-going game 49 has "6.Nb5" although both knights (from c3 and d4) could move to b5 (correct is either 6.Ncb5 or 6.Ndb5)
Anyway, the interface (or the player Ghisi) moved the knight from c3 (more obvious was to move the knight from d4, according to theory at least) and, as a result, the move 7...e5 won a piece..(can't see a post from the concerned players so it could have been played as intended, but the "Nb5" needs correction for sure)
Heinz-Georg Lehnhoff (2006-05-29 20:47:01)
Big chess
The middlegame could be a challenge, particularly if you have no board to test the consequences of your move. And what do you think about an endgame with 12 pawns and 3 rook or 5 knights on each side? What are the values of the pieces? There is much to investigate there. Perhaps I should write a computer program ... (just a joke)
Amir Bagheri (2006-06-23 12:26:28)
Blinfolded chess ( part II )
Very recently, however, all the honors of Europe, in this department of indoor games, have been run away with by two young Americans, Morphy and Paulsen. Paul Morphy, a native of New Orleans, seemed to be born with chess in his blood; he played almost from childhood; and at thirteen years of age he proved a formidable antagonist to Herr Lowenthal, a noted Hungarian. In 1857, when just twenty years of age, Morphy encountered Paulsen, a native of Iowa, only a little older than himself, at a chess congress in New Orleans (Editor: It was New York!). All the gray-beards struck their flag to Paulsen, and then he struck to Morphy. Of Morphy's subsequent achievements in regular play, which stamp him as perhaps the first living chess-player (we say this with fear and trembling; however, for the knights of the game are a sensitive race), we will not speak here, for our purpose is only to notice the blindfold performances. At the chess congress above mentioned, he finely played a blindfold game with a leading German player. Early in 1858, he struck the New Orleanists with amazement by playing six games simultaneously, without seeing any other the boards; winning five of them, and exhibiting beautiful play throughout. He then came to Europe, not only to "lick the Britishers," but "all creation;" and it must be admitted that he made great progress towards that achievement. At a meeting of the Chess Association at Birmingham, in August 1858, he played eight games simultaneously, without sight of the boards. His opponents were Lord Lyttelton, and seven other persons, mostly presidents or secretaries of provincial chess clubs. Against such players, and under such tremendous conditions, he won no less than six games out of the eight, drawing a seventh, and losing the eighth. In the following month, he went over and astonished the Parisians in a similar way; he contended blindfold against eight practised players at once, at the Cafe de la Regence, a famous resort of chess-players; and out of these did not lose even one; he was the victor in six, and drew the other two. In the spring of 1859, Morphy contended against eight of the most experienced members of the London Chess Club, including Mr. Mongredien and Mr. Walker, two distinguished players. He won two games, and drew the other six--all the players except himself being wearied out by a very protracted sitting. A few days afterwards, he played with eight members of the St. George's Chess Club, including Lord Cremorne, Lord Arthur Hay, and Captain Kennedy; he won five, and the rest were drawn through want of time to finish them.
Nevertheless, inconceivable as these mental labors are, Morphy yields to Paulsen in blindfold play. There are whispers of twelve or fifteen games having been tried simultaneously by the latter; but the number ten has been most certainly reached, under conditions of the utmost publicity.
On the 7th of October in the present year, at a Divan in the Strand, ten players accepted Mr. Paulsen's challenge to grapple with them all simultaneously, the boards being placed out of his sight. One of the players was M. Sabouroff, secretary to the Russian Embassy in London; the other nine comprised many names well known among chess-players. Ten chess-boards were placed on ten tables in the room. An arm-chair, turned away towards a window, was mounted on a dais. At two o'clock in the afternoon, Mr. Paulsen, a quiet, courteous young man, with not a trace of "brag" in him, took his seat in this arm-chair. For twelve mortal hours he never rose, never ate, never smoked, and drank nothing but a little lemonade. What were his mental labors during that time, we shall see. His ten antagonists took their seats at the ten tables; and each table speedily became the centre of a group of spectators, whose comments were not always so silent as in fairness they ought to have been. Paulsen could not see any of the chess-boards. Herr Kling, a noted player and teacher of chess, acted as general manager. He called the boards by numbers--No. 1 to No. 10. Paulsen audibly announced his first move for board No. 1; Kling made that move; the antagonist replied to it; Kling audibly announced the reply; Paulsen considered what should be his second move, and when he had audibly announced his decision, Kling made the proper move on the board. Here No. 1 rested for awhile. No. 2 now made his move, leading to the same course of proceeding as before. Then No. 3 in the same way; then No. 4; and so on to No. 10; after which No. 1 began a new cycle, by playing a second move; and thus they proceeded over and over again.
Now let us see what all this implies and involves. Chess is not one of the most frolicsome of games; indeed, ladies generally declare it to be very dull, seeing that a chess-player is apt to be "grumpy" if spoken to on other matters while playing. The truth is, there is a demand for much mental work in managing a game well; the combinations and subtleties, the attacks and counter-attacks, are so numerous and varied, as to keep the mind pretty fully occupied. Nevertheless, a fine game between two fine players is mere child's play compared with this wonderful achievement of Paulsen. He was obliged to form ten mental pictures; and every picture changed with every move, like the colored bits in a kaleidoscope. Most persons, even though knowing nothing of the game, are aware that it begins with thirty-two pieces of different colors and forms, and that these move about over a board of sixty-four squares. After every change of position in any one of the pieces, Paulsen must have changed his mental picture of the board, the field of battle, and then made that a fixture until the next move was made. This is hard enough in even one game, against an antagonist who has his eyes to help him in planning attacks and defences; but how hard must it be against ten! It is difficult to conceive what is the condition of the mental machinery under such circumstances; and yet, there he sat, the calmest man in the room. When told of his antagonist's doings, one by one, he looked quietly out of window, and rubbed his chin, as a man often does when thinking, and then announced his move--never mistaking No. 1 for No. 7, No. 9 for No. 3--never failing to recover the proper mental picture, and making the proper change in it; never embarrassed; never making an unlawful move, or likely to lose sight (mental sight) of any unlawful move made by his antagonists. Nor did he obtain the least pause for mental rest. Without one minute's interval, as soon as he had announced a move for one board, he was required to attend to the move of another antagonist at another board. Hour after hour did this continue--all the afternoon, all the evening, midnight, until two in the morning. He made two hundred and seventy moves in the twelve hours, twenty-seven per game average; this gave two minutes and a quarter for the consideration of each move. As all his moves were met by corresponding moves on the part of his antagonists, he was called upon to form five hundred and forty complete mental pictures in twelve consecutive hours, each picture representing the exact mode in which all of the sixty-four squares of a chess-board were occupied. Paulsen won two games, lost three, and drew five.
Mark Carroll (2006-08-01 00:49:20)
Trouble adding lines
I am trying to add articles to wikichess and most of the time it works fine. But for some reason I cannot add some moves. One example, both knights can move to the same square so I tried Nb d2, b1 d2, Nb1 d2, and several others but to no avail. I also could not get e4xd5 to work before either (as well as PxP etc). Any help informing me of the correct way would be appreciated.
Thibault de Vassal (2006-09-19 16:38:37)
2 knights defense : Traxler variation
Really ? .. What about 5.Nxf7 Bxf2+ ?
A line already exists in Wikichess for Traxler counterattack... Let's improve it ?! :)
Benjamin Aldag (2006-09-30 15:57:58)
e4-Line !
The e4-Line is the only line, which gives white the possibility of an clear advantage. All other lines are really bad for white. The point of this opening is, to have with the black color good knights versus a bad bishop-pair of white. Roman Dzindzihasvili is the founder of this Defense and i think, "Beefeater" is not the right name. I call it "Dzindzi-Indian-Defense". There are many interesting lines and some of them, transpose the game to other openings (Pirc, Sicilian-Dragon, Kings-Indian etc.). The move 5...f5 was played to prevent black of 6.e4, but 6.e4! is the best move, white can play. I've played last year in Litomysl in a Simultan versus GM Sergey Movsesian this "Dzindzi-Indian-Defense". Sergey played 6.h4?! and after 15 moves, we draw the game. The Dzindzi-Indian-Defense is an easy to learn opening and i've got good results with it in many tourneys. Last time i've saw this Defense at the Chess-Olympic, played by players around 2400-2500. 6.e4! is the best move, but many many players don't know it and the possibility for black, to get a good result in a game is very high. I can say, i know all variations about this opening and this thematic tournament will be my first tourney here, where i will not use computer-assistence. Its funny to see, that an Engine (Rybka,Fritz etc.) dont understand the ideas behind this defense and without an opening-book, engines dont see that 6.e4! is the only way, to get an advantage.
I luv Dzindzi-Indian-Defense
Benny
Ovidiu Baron (2007-03-01 16:12:17)
Big chess. An idea!
Interesting game, but I think the Big chess has a small(?) problem, the 16 squares on the vertical. It takes too much time to bring the pawns into the game, and the risk is that they will not participate at the "battle" at all. Wouldn't be more efficient to reduce the vertical lines a little bit, maybe not to 8 squares, because of the central knights positioning, but to 10 or 12?
Tano-Urayoan Russi Roman (2007-03-10 23:24:38)
This is called the 4 knights sicilian
This line is a very complicated line of play. You could play the scheveningen with e6 as your second move,the difference is you chose as your second move Nc6 that allows this line of play. So e6 is a perfect line of play neither good nor bad. Just for your tastes :)
Charlie Neil (2007-03-14 13:38:39)
4 Knights Scilian
Alex Raetsky has a book published by Everyman called "Meeting 1.e4". He recommends the 4 Knights and also covers the other methods white employs to avoid the semi-open scilians after 1...c5 Such as the 2.c3 and 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bb5 variations and also the closed systems. It is a "workable" repertoire book. ps I am not on commmission.
Alexander Shalamanov (2007-06-20 16:44:27)
Junior my love!
He reminds me in style of the wonderful chess game knights of the past: Bronstein, Tal, Kasparov and the present: Shirov, Morozevich. Are brilliance of tactics and sacrificial chess more precious than cool and pitiless tecnique skills? Wait and see!
Thibault de Vassal (2007-12-14 15:40:44)
Tablebases on R+B vs. N+N
Good to know this endgame (Rook + Bishop wins against 2 Knights in 150 to 220 moves in the longest cases - tablebases 6 pieces), as there's no draw granted after 50 moves without any capture according to FICGS rules.
Karjakin, Sergey (2694) - Shirov, Alexei (2739)
World Cup Khanty-Mansiysk RUS (6.3), 11.12.2007
http://www.chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp?newsid=4322
Normajean Yates (2008-12-16 20:20:46)
about game... (to llmars)
llmars, with or without engine help? I'd prefer with engines.
Meanwhile, you can discover the various "fool's mates" in this variant... - a knights will give a smothered mate if one is not careful!
Scott Nichols (2009-04-06 02:40:34)
A couple more thoughts
Maybe the history of updating ratings every 2-6 months was necessary with slow mail by letter or postcard games. I've played in the Golden Knights back in the 80's where games easily take over a year. But now with the instant moves, there might be cause for change. Also, (#1)towards the end of a rating cycle, the games noticably slow down because players do not want to resign and lose their chance to enter a particular tournament. #2. A player may achieve a rating milestone and want to enter a tourn. right away, but can't because his/her rating doesn't change for another few weeks. So he/her may delay resigning lost games and prolong others waiting for the change. If it had changed right away, he/her would enter the tournament and proceed with his/her other games at a normal pace.
Just a couple of thought...would love to hear more opinions on this, :)
Philip Roe (2009-04-28 19:50:26)
Thanks for the appreciation, Normajean
I hadn't seen Sophies post. Do you have a line, Sophie? The knight looks awfully slow! Perhaps Big Chess needs Big Knights.
Normajean Yates (2009-04-29 13:39:24)
sorry: correction: sophie said Q+B!
I typed Q+N but I was thinking of Q+B which is what Sophie leclerc had posted: I was slightly puzzled by Philip's reference to Knights in this context and I just realised I must have mistyped 'N' for 'B'; saw that I *had* ! :(
Sorry for the confusion, the misquotation and the inconvenience...
Thibault de Vassal (2009-05-03 14:09:17)
First team : "The Dark Knights" :)
Name : The Dark Knights
#1 William Taylor-2140
#2 Scott Nichols-2089
#3 Don Groves-1991
#4 Josef Riha-1989
.. brr, frightening :) kind of Monthy Python tribute ?
About team tournament ethics, I don't think that the best player would play all moves for his team in any case, FICGS rules should still apply, I don't think it will be a problem, particularly in an unrated "for fun" tournament :)
Don Groves (2009-05-03 23:04:30)
Dark Knights
Thibault escrit: .. brr, frightening :) kind of Monty Python tribute ?
Or could it be Darth Vader and Batman ;-)
Scott Nichols (2009-05-05 04:09:49)
The "Theme"
You are missing the theme, it's not Batman, Darth Vader, or even Monty Python. It is how you will feel when trying to "see" into this teams strategy. You will see shadows of Bishops sliding in front of you, you will see Knights suddenly appearing behind you, you will see pawns at every turn wielding their swords of death. You will only feel the Queen's presence, something all powerful hidden behind the veils of darkness. You pray for some sort of light, but all you can see is a brief reflection before the axe ends your existence.
William Taylor (2009-05-07 14:42:13)
Thibault's team
Don't be too sure of winning...The Dark Knights are ready to take on all comers! ;)
Normajean Yates (2009-05-11 02:07:31)
thoughts on Big Chess... and tips...
I find bigchess more and more fascinating.. I Think it is a wonderful creation of Thibault's (I presume it is Thib. who created it: any way he offers it seriously on this site...) - the starting position is very well-concieved..
I think Bigchess needs more publicity. This is about the only place one can play it - and here there are 2-3 top-class players; less than 20 middle-standard players (including me); others try it once or twice and for some reason get scared or overwhelmed and give up - I see no reason why..
Bigchess gives no advantage on account of huge memorisation of theory, or of better engines: there are *no* theory books; and there are no known engines in existence (probably there isnt one - too little demand, and writing a *good* engine is somewhat laborious, coming up with a *good* static-eval function is tricky, fast board-implementation issues...), so it is all wits...
In fact last week I spend part of two days writing down whatever theory I could discover [with help from top games], it comes to half a page..
Tips for people who want to try bigchess:
1. Bishops are much more powerful than Knights. (because of much longer range compared to 8x8 chess).
The consensus on the values of bigchess pieces is David Grosdemange's valuation:
pawn=1
knight=2.5 (written 2,5 in the continent, of course)
bishop=4
rook=6
queen=11
2. In the opening position, the c,f,L and o-pawns are unprotected.
So, if white's opening move is with the j2-Knight ( freeing the queen), then on move 2 white can move the Queen and threaten to pick up a pawn by forks.. Similarly for black.
*However*, such pawn gambits are quite playable because the Queen can be forced to make many moves to capture a pawn, while the gambitting side develops their pieces.
3. Most Important For Many People: board for offline analysis.
Best of course, is to take time to draw a 16x16 board on paper and stick it on cardboard. And get hold of four sets of chess pieces.
Another way: print a position, and after a move is made - just update the position using correction fluid (typewriter/printer-ink erasing fluid) or something. That way you don't have to keep printng a lot of positions.
Normajean Yates (2009-05-12 00:33:50)
response to Thib's post:
But that is true of 8x8-chess also (about value of knights) - there, 'P=1, B=N=3,R=5,Q=9' is a very rough guideline. Ditto for bigchess piece values.
What is it that Reti (or was it Breyer said) - about move depending on particular position, *not* general principles? ;)
Vadim Khachaturov (2009-05-13 01:10:06)
Team tournament
Finally! So, here is our team, called "The Ghost Knights". 1. Vadim Khachaturov, 2. Yugi Inving, 3. Sophie Leclerc, 4.Jorge Orden.
Thibault de Vassal (2009-05-17 23:11:38)
Complete teams !
The team tournament should start very soon, complete teams are :
>> Yellow-Blue Warriors
Iouri Basiliev
Dmytro Romaniuk
Ostap Hladky
Yura Lemehov
>> Happy Pawn
Stephane Legrand 2209
Garvin Gray 2125
Daniel Parmet 1961
Ilmar Cirulis 1805
>> FSF En Passant
Heinz-Georg Lehnhoff (2270)
Volker Koslowski (2264)
Sebastian Boehme (2175)
Roland Markus (2096)
>> The Ghost Knights
Vadim Khachaturov
Yugi Inving
Sophie Leclerc
Jorge Orden
>> The knights who say "Ni"
Michael Aigner - 2602
Xavier Pichelin - 2577
Hannes Rada - 2559
Thibault de Vassal - 2473
>> The Dark Knights
William Taylor - 2140
Scott Nichols - 2089
Don Groves - 1991
Josef Riha - 1989
Players without a team yet (one team is possible, with 3 more players, we could build one more) :
1. Ranganathan Raman
2. Alexander Blinchevsky
3. Stanimir Denchev
4. Benjamin Block
5. Murray Findlay
Did I forget someone ? So we have 6 complete teams + 5 players without a team.
We should be able to start the tournament in a few days ! :)
Thibault de Vassal (2009-05-18 15:23:59)
Teams
Hi Benjamin, if you read all posts in this thread by reverse chronological order, you'll see that Sophie and Vadim are in the "Ghost Knights" team. (am I wrong ?)
Thibault de Vassal (2009-05-23 00:31:31)
1st team tournament : games & results !
A new thread to comment the games & results in the 1st FICGS team tournament that just started ! The teams are :
>> The knights who say "Ni"
Michael Aigner - 2602
Xavier Pichelin - 2577
Hannes Rada - 2559
Thibault de Vassal - 2473
>> FSF En Passant
Heinz-Georg Lehnhoff (2270)
Volker Koslowski (2264)
Sebastian Boehme (2175)
Roland Markus (2096)
>> The Dark Knights
William Taylor - 2140
Scott Nichols - 2089
Don Groves - 1991
Josef Riha - 1989
>> Happy Pawn
Stephane Legrand 2209
Garvin Gray 2125
Daniel Parmet 1961
Ilmar Cirulis 1805
>> Yellow-Blue Warriors
Iouri Basiliev
Dmytro Romaniuk
Ostap Hladky
Yura Lemehov
>> The Ghost Knights
Vadim Khachaturov
Yugi Inving
Sophie Leclerc
Jorge Orden
>> The Knights with no name (yet)
Alexander Blinchevsky
Stanimir Denchev
Benjamin Block
Ranganathan Raman
You can follow the games here :
http://www.ficgs.com/user_page.php?page=tournament&tournament=FICGS__CHESS__TEAM_EVENT_TABLE_1__000001
http://www.ficgs.com/user_page.php?page=tournament&tournament=FICGS__CHESS__TEAM_EVENT_TABLE_2__000001
http://www.ficgs.com/user_page.php?page=tournament&tournament=FICGS__CHESS__TEAM_EVENT_TABLE_3__000001
http://www.ficgs.com/user_page.php?page=tournament&tournament=FICGS__CHESS__TEAM_EVENT_TABLE_4__000001
Note : The first player displayed in each tournament table is not always the player of the first team because when the 1st & 3rd players of a team play White against another team, the 2nd & 4th play Black against the same team, this is not obvious to read (sorry).
I'm really sorry to the 2 players that were not included in a team, but we had to start the tournament now... The last team may still announce their name (provisional : "The knights with no name")
Have nice games :)
Ranganathan Raman (2009-05-23 00:52:50)
Our Team king
>> The Knights with no name (yet)
TEAM NAME:Our Team King
Alexander Blinchevsky
Stanimir Denchev
Benjamin Block
Ranganathan Raman
Normajean Yates (2009-05-23 07:55:14)
the knights with no name - is fine!
Doesn't someone remember a film (long ago) called 'A horse with no name'? imdb doesn't list this film; but imdb is not infallible!
Alexander Blinchevsky (2009-05-23 09:35:44)
The Knights with no name
I like this name too. Just remove "yet" in brackets ;)
Good luck for all teams in the 1st team tournament and a lot of thanks to you, Thibault!
Rodolfo d Ettorre (2009-05-23 09:58:27)
The Knights with no name
What about the "No Frills Knights"?
Scott Nichols (2009-06-03 03:09:30)
Chess is dead? Not hardly.
In his book "The world of chess" by Anthony Saidy the following paragraph appears. "Later in his (Capablanca) career, his play became ever more technical and drawish. He expressed the idea that with the perfection of modern knowledge it would soon be impossible to win a game against a master. Chess would soon reach a "draw death". He even proposed interchanging the initial positions of the Bishops and Knights to inject new life into the game."
An exact quote found earlier in this same book exemplifies more of what this thread is about---In reply to a Steinitz comment Tchigorin replied "Chess is a limitless forum for the human imagination. Each position is a fresh challenge. Rules and book openings, to the creative player, are no more than guidelines to be transcended. Individualize. Each position is new--terra incognita that may contain the seed of a beautiful combination. Gladly give up a pawn in return for the attack. Play chess with joy."
Thibault de Vassal (2009-07-11 22:28:25)
Results
Table 1 : No results
Table 2 : Nichols 2
Table 3 : Rada 1.5 , Boehme 0.5 , Groves 1.5 , Parmet 0.5 , Hladky 3
Table 4 : Markus 1 , de Vassal 1 , Riha 2 , Lemekhov 2
Quite good for the Dark Knights so far :)
Don Groves (2009-10-31 06:03:19)
Just made it...
You'd better speed it up, William! You're the only member of the Dark Knights with fewer than 24,000 moves ;-)
William Taylor (2009-10-31 13:14:20)
Don
One correspondence game is taking up lots of my time at the moment - a so-called 'Malkovich' game, where you explain all of your moves at length to the audience. It's here if you felt like taking a look: http://www.godiscussions.com/forum/showthread.php?t=10309
Anyway, I have some way to go before I reach 24,000 moves. :O I wonder if I can make it before the team championship is over and the Dark Knights hold the trophy...
Thibault de Vassal (2009-11-16 22:28:27)
Results !
Finally, according to my calculations :
- Finished matches [Team (Points)]
Knights who say Ni (1) - Dark knights (1)
Knights who say Ni (2) - Happy pawn (0)
Knights who say Ni (2) - Ghost knights (0)
Dark knights (2) - Happy pawn (0)
Dark knights (0) - Yellow blue warriors (2)
Dark knights (2) - Ghost knights (0)
Happy pawn (2) - Ghost knights (0)
Yellow blue warriors (2) - Ghost knights (0)
- Unfinished matches
Knights who say Ni vs. FSF : 1-1
Knights who say Ni vs Yellow blue warriors : 2-1
Knights who say Ni vs. Our team king : 2-0
FSF vs. Dark knights : 1.5-1.5
FSF vs. Happy pawn : 1-0
FSF vs. Yellow blue warriors : 3-0
FSF vs. Our team king : 2-0
Dark knights vs. Our team king : 2.5-0.5
Happy pawn vs. Yellow blue warriors : 1-2
Happy pawn vs. Our team king : 1-0
Yellow blue warriors vs. Our team king : 1.5-1.5
Ghost knights vs. Our team king : 0.5-2.5
I hope I didn't make mistakes for the unfinished matches. Nice victory by Yellow blue warriors against The dark knights !
So Garvin, in your match against FSF (Koslowski), FSF leads by 1-0
Thibault de Vassal (2009-11-18 16:58:36)
Results
True, I meant :
FSF vs. Yellow blue warriors : 2-1
FSF vs. Ghost knights : 3-0
My bad, sorry...
Scott Nichols (2009-12-22 03:36:06)
very unofficial results so far...
This includes games which may still have one playing, but will not alter the result. Of course, many are unreslved as yet.
#1. (as expected, :)) Dark Knights 8.0
#2. The Knights who say "Ni" 5.0
#3. Yellow-Blue Warriors 4.0
#4. Two with 2.0
William Taylor (2009-12-22 12:16:38)
Go Dark Knights!
Well done to all of us for performing above our rating, and congrats to Josef and particularly Scott for finishing with plus scores. Let's hope The Knights who say 'Ni' don't catch us.
Lazaro Munoz (2010-01-29 06:05:09)
Piece Values in Big Chess
I am amazed at the number of opponents that are still applying piece value from regular chess in big chess.
I made some regression analysis based on what we value in regular chess in terms of mobility and applied to big chess. Using the pawn and knight as the standard since in both games 3 pawns will probably beat a knight (if they are separated far enough). I assigned the pawn the value of 1 and and knight a value of 3 and extrapolated variables that we seem to use in valuing the other pieces such as number of squares it can reach, and penalty for being stuck on the same color.
I got the following values:
Pawn=1
Knight=3
Bishop=7 **
Rook=9
Queen=16
** The bishop value changes by pairs available, for example 4 white square bishops don't even come close to value 2 white squares and 2 black squares bishops so this is best value but it can go down to 6 or even 5 as pairs are lost.
Interesting, just like in chess a rook+bishop almost equals a queen and two rooks beat a queen. And a queen equals the value of the pawns (ok similar).
I still find opponents who exchange bishops for knights with impunity, not knowing the true values of the pieces.
I notice that nobody has ever mentioned this. I hope I did not give out some deep secret.
Of course you mileage may vary.
--laz
Scott Nichols (2010-01-31 01:04:06)
1st team tournament : games & results !
Hello everyone! I thought it was time for an update to our first team tournament. I will give my totally (doesn't mean a thing) IMHO the outcome here. After looking at all the unfinished game positions, consulting the stars, and taking into account there is a full moon tonight...here is what I think will be the first four teams. Tied for third will be---The Dark Knights & The Yellow-Blue Warriors! One point ahead of them will be----The Knights who say "Ni"!, give them a hand. And finally, a full two points ahead of the field is the winners-----FSF En Passant!! Of course, like I said this is just my humble opinion. Seriously, one game to watch is #32188 between two up and coming players who just broke over 2300 each and still climbing, Boehme vs Hladky.
Thibault de Vassal (2010-03-17 14:42:57)
1st team tournament : games & results !
Hi Iouri... Well, my old computer can't even see it (just realized that modern computers are about 40x faster :/) , but I just checked the shredder bases online, this is checkmate in 21 moves indeed. It was predictable anyway :) .. I just resigned.
Table 1 : 4 unfinished games remaining (Iouri leading)
Table 2 : 0 unfinished games remaining (Volker won)
Table 3 : 2 unfinished games remaining (Ostap leading)
Table 4 : 0 unfinished games remaining (Yura won)
One thing is sure already, our yellow-blue chessfriends did it very well !
So...
"Team 1" - "Team 2" : points (score)
"Ni" - "FSF" : FSF leads by 1 point
"Ni" - "Dark" : 1-1 (2-2)
"Ni" - "Happy" : 2-0 (3-1)
"Ni" - "YB" : 1-1 (2-2)
"Ni" - "Ghost" : 2-0 (3.5-0.5)
"Ni" - "No" : 2-0 (leads by 2 points)
"FSF" - "Dark" : 1-1 (2-2)
"FSF" - "Happy" : FSF leads by 1 point
"FSF" - "YB" : 2-0 (2.5-1.5)
"FSF" - "Ghost" : 2-0 (leads by 3 points)
"FSF" - "No" : 2-0 (3.5-0.5)
"Dark" - "Happy" : 2-0 (2.5-1.5)
"Dark" - "YB" : 0-2 (1.5-2.5)
"Dark" - "Ghost" : 2-0 (3.5-0.5)
"Dark" - "No" : 2-0 (3-1)
"Happy" - "YB" : YB leads by 1 point
"Happy" - "Ghost" : 2-0 (3.5-0.5)
"Happy" - "No" : 2-0 (3-1)
"YB" - "Ghost" : 2-0 (2.5-0.5)
"YB" - "No : 2-0 (2.5-1.5)
"Ghost" - "No" : 0-2 (1.5-2.5)
Total :
Knights who say Ni : 8 points (-)
FSF en passant : 7 points (++)
Dark knights : 8 points
Happy pawn : 4 pawns (--)
Yellow Blue warriors : 7 points (+)
Ghost knights : 0 points
Our team king (knights with no name) : 2 points
(+) meaning : leads in a match yet, (-) meaning : is leaded in a match yet
Nothing is decided yet... but it looks like Yellow-Blue have good chances, which is particularly impressive with a player who made 0/6 !
Thibault de Vassal (2010-06-08 14:42:06)
Problème d'affichage
:-) Sorry, Vincent explained that he encountered a strange problem with his browsers, he cannot see the black knights on the chessboard that is not square anymore, probably due to the cache... but I'm not sure.
Thibault de Vassal (2010-06-29 12:23:17)
Encyclopedia of gambits
[Two Knights: Fegatello (Fried Liver) Attack] 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Nf6 4.Ng5 d5 5.ed5 Nd5 6.Nf7
Good one also, indeed.
Thibault de Vassal (2010-08-03 12:46:54)
Congratulations to "FSF en passant"
Finally here are the final results !!!
"FSF En passant" won this very interesting tournament by 1 point ahead of 2 teams !! The suspense was until the very last games to know the final team ranks.
The fact to note: Yellow Blue warriors finish second while they were actually 3 players in the team, Yura Lemekhov played an amazing tournament (5.5/6 , perf 2456) ... (the last player stopped to play :/)
Thanks to all players, it was lots of fun! I'll try to make the things clearer in the tournaments pages for the next edition...
10 points for : FSF En Passant
Heinz-Georg Lehnhoff (2270)
Volker Koslowski (2264)
Sebastian Boehme (2175)
Roland Markus (2096)
9 (tot: 15.5) points for : The knights who say "Ni"
Michael Aigner (2602)
Xavier Pichelin (2577)
Hannes Rada (2559)
Thibault de Vassal (2473)
9 (tot: 13.5) points for : Yellow-Blue Warriors
Iouri Basiliev (2173)
Dmytro Romaniuk (1937)
Ostap Hladky (2176)
Yura Lemehov (2171)
8 points for : The Dark Knights
William Taylor (2140)
Scott Nichols (2089)
Don Groves (1991)
Josef Riha (1989)
4 points for : Happy Pawn
Stephane Legrand (2209)
Garvin Gray (2125)
Daniel Parmet (1961)
Ilmar Cirulis (1805)
2 points for : Our team King
Alexander Blinchevsky
Stanimir Denchev
Benjamin Block
Ranganathan Raman
0 point for : The Ghost Knights
Vadim Khachaturov
Yugi Inving
Sophie Leclerc
Jorge Orden
Ni FSF Dark Happy Blue Ghost King
Aigner 1 = = = = =
Pich 0 = = 1 1 1
Rada = = 1 = 1 =
DeVas = = 1 0 1 1
0 Lehnh = = = = =
1 Koslo = = 1 1 1
= Boehm = 1 = 1 1
= Marku = 1 = 1 1
= = Taylo = = = =
= = Nicho = 1 1 1
= = Grove = 0 1 =
= = Riha 1 0 1 1
= = = Legra = = =
= = = Gray 1 1 1
0 0 = Parmet 0 1 =
0 0 0 Ciruli 0 1 1
= = = = Basili = 1
0 0 0 0 Romani 0 0
= = 1 1 Hladky 1 =
1 = 1 1 Lemekh 1 1
= 1 = = = Khacha =
0 0 0 0 1 Inving 0
0 0 0 0 0 Lecler 0
0 0 0 0 0 Orden 1
= = = = 0 = Blinch
0 0 0 0 1 1 Denchev
= 0 = = = 1 Block
0 0 0 0 0 0 Raman
"Team 1" - "Team 2" : points (score)
"Ni" - "FSF" : 1-1 (2-2)
"Ni" - "Dark" : 1-1 (2-2)
"Ni" - "Happy" : 2-0 (3-1)
"Ni" - "YB" : 1-1 (2-2)
"Ni" - "Ghost" : 2-0 (3.5-0.5)
"Ni" - "King" : 2-0 (3-1)
"FSF" - "Dark" : 1-1 (2-2)
"FSF" - "Happy" : 2-0 (3-1)
"FSF" - "YB" : 2-0 (2.5-1.5)
"FSF" - "Ghost" : 2-0 (3.5-0.5)
"FSF" - "King" : 2-0 (3.5-0.5)
"Dark" - "Happy" : 2-0 (2.5-1.5)
"Dark" - "YB" : 0-2 (1.5-2.5)
"Dark" - "Ghost" : 2-0 (3.5-0.5)
"Dark" - "King" : 2-0 (3-1)
"Happy" - "YB" : 0-2 (1.5-2.5)
"Happy" - "Ghost" : 2-0 (3.5-0.5)
"Happy" - "King" : 2-0 (3-1)
"YB" - "Ghost" : 2-0 (2.5-0.5)
"YB" - "King" : 2-0 (2.5-1.5)
"Ghost" - "King" : 0-2 (1.5-2.5)
Definitely, even if the "Knights who say Ni" team decided before the match to play unusual openings in most games, this tournament shows again that the strength gap between top players and players rated 2150-2300 is not big at all as many of these players tend to reach the 2400 barrier...
Don Groves (2011-09-26 02:01:37)
Au revoir
The Dark Knights will miss you, William. Good luck in your endeavours and see you later.
Scott Nichols (2011-09-26 02:53:28)
Au revoir
I agree, long live the Dark Knights!
Thibault de Vassal (2015-07-05 14:49:03)
Wch Match Tie Break Rules
Also, Arno Nickel suggests:
"Therefore, I specifically suggest enhancing the score system to include a ¾ point for a performance with an added value as compared to a regular draw:
a) stalemating the opponent;
b) being a piece up against the naked king."
What about King vs King + 2 Knights?
I'm not sure if this b) point is really "natural" (and clear enough).
Pablo Schmid (2015-07-05 15:07:19)
Wch Match Tie Break Rules
King + 2 knights = forced stalemate. I was wondering if a king + bishop or king + knight can stalemate by force a lone king.
Thibault de Vassal (2015-07-05 23:34:17)
Wch Match Tie Break Rules
True Peter!
And one other thing, if King vs. King + Knight is not draw, why King + Knight vs. King + 2 Knights would be draw?
Thibault de Vassal (2015-07-11 02:18:11)
E. Riccio on his win in the 10th CC WCH
Once again, Eros kindly answered a few questions after his win in the 10th FICGS correspondence chess championship. His answer on tie break rules meets the discussion in this thread:
http://www.ficgs.com/user_page.php?page=forum_read&id=11773
____________________________
- Hello Eros and congrats again for this new win in the FICGS correspondence chess championship! This time, your opponent was Peter W. Anderson and you're playing him once again in the next final match. Actually, all games finished in less than 3 months, which looks like superfast, how did it happen?
Hello once again Thibault! Yes, the match with Anderson was very quick. The reasons are that he moves very fast, and like me, I don't seem to remember that he took any day of leave.
Also, our games were not played until the very end; many draws were agreed with many pieces on the board, as soon as we thought that none of us had winning chances.
- For many players, it is quite impossible to beat you in such a 12 games match (probably because of the tie rule). After all these won matches do you start to think that the advantage is too big?
It's a fact that a very high percentage of correspondence games played at the top level ends up in a draw... (and that percentage is even higher in my case, as my strategy is to avoid taking risks) so yes, talking against my interests, I think that something in the rules should be changed.
- By the way, your opponent suggested an interesting tie rule in the forum ( Chess, Poker & Go forum - Topic 11773 ), in the context of more general new ideas for correspondence chess rules (e.g. article by GM Arno Nickel - Correspondence Chess – the draw problem ) in order to increase the interest of the game. Do you have any opinion on all this?
The idea GM Nickel launched could be interesting, even if before we can say for sure if it can be applied in serious tournaments, it needs to be tested.
If I understood correctly, having a piece more in a draw endgame, after the game is over, a little plus on the score would be given to the player who had the small advantage.
I always thought like: How unfair! That player had King and two Knights against a lone King of his opponent... still he only got a half point anyway! Or even worse, in theory, one player could have this position: King in e1, Bishop in h1 and 6 Pawns from h2 to h7. (Black King in h8) Counting the value of pieces that would be a a +9 advantage, like a Queen more, but still it would be a draw. Another crazy scenario, more common, are those blocked positions were 16 pawns block the center (or more simply any fortress position) and not rarely it happens that a color has a huge material advantage but can't break through in any way. In this last case the player with material disadvantage could have found a genial idea to reach that blocked position, should his opponent with extra pieces still be given an advantage after the game?
Another important consideration is that this rule could discourage attacking players to play gambits or make sacrifices, as if the attack fails, their efforts to try to win would be punished! This last case would even increase the draw rate.
Probably Nickel didn't talk about giving a plus after games finished with advantage but still many pieces on board, anyway those positions (except the 16 Pawns one) could very well be played on until only one piece would be left.
After these examples we can see that there are so many different ways that a position with material advantage can be reached... but it's not always fair that the player with the advantage should be given a plus after the game. As a paradox, an advantage should be given to the opponent if he smartly managed to sacrifice one or more pieces in order to reach a draw endgame which he would have lost if he didn't give away material.
- Of course, the level of chess programs is for much in it. Do you feel that high level correspondence chess and centaur chess evolved much this year, or did it reach a kind of peak?
The level of correspondence chess increases in a parallel way as computers, databases and chess programs improve. Slowly everything keeps improving. Of course, due to the more thinking time, correspondence chess will always have a higher draw percentage than blitz games played by computers.
- Finally, what can you tell us about your correspondence chess path this year, particularly at ICCF where you're currently ranked #13?
On ICCF I am fighting with the Italian Team (I am playing in second board behind the World Champion Finocchiaro) in the 9th European Team Championship.
---> https://www.iccf.com/event?id=44123
George Jempty (2016-09-12 15:22:36)
Thematic tournaments?
How about the Four Knights Game?
Bogoljub Teverovski (2016-09-12 23:18:32)
Thematic tournaments?
Yes, 4 Knights or Belgrade Gambit
Bogoljub Teverovski (2016-11-01 11:53:06)
Thematic tournaments?
It's time for new thematic, say, Belgrade Gambit in 4-Knights
George Jempty (2016-12-23 13:06:42)
Thematic tournaments?
Belgrade Gambit is good. The only reason I would have preferred the Four Knights proper is to try 4...h6!?
Thibault de Vassal (2018-02-16 19:33:12)
New FICGS app: beta test
3 new FICGS applications based on the "Chess Trainer" app :
- Blindfold chess : same, but on en empty board... for experts, IM & GM.
- Chess 960 : the famous Fischer random chess version... much fun!
- Random : even more random, up to 7 knights, bishops, rooks or queens.
As for me, I quite like the "Random chess" app :)
Vadrya Pokshtya (2022-02-17 08:52:23)
Grand Dice Chess
Hello,
I am the author and inventor of chess variants. My chess variants are published on chessvariants.com and some of them can be played on Game Courier.
I would like to present to you a variant of chess with dice that I invented relatively recently and which can already be played on two sites on the Internet.
Grand Dice Chess
The Rules
The game uses a 12x12 board.
Each player has:
4 Kings
24 Pawns
8 Knights
8 Bishops
8 Rooks
4 Queens
White and black occupy the 1st-6th and 7th-12th ranks, respectively, as shown in the diagram.
Unfortunately I can't post an image here, but you can always find it here:
https://granddicechess.blogspot.com/2022/01/grand-dice-chess.html
https://www.chess.com/blog/Pokshtya/grand-dice-chess-battle
https://www.chess.com/forum/view/chess-variants/grand-dice-chess
White starts the game first.
The game uses four dice.
Opponents make moves alternately, throwing 4 dice. The piece to move is determined by a die:
1 = pawn, 2 = knight, 3 = bishop, 4 = rook, 5 = queen and 6 = king.
The player makes four moves at the same time based on the indications of the dice and has the right to refuse (pass) any move that does not suit him, unless it is a pawn move. Unlike in regular dice chess it's allowable to pass moves. And this rule was already applied about a thousand years ago in old variant of Shatranj (Shatranj al-Mustatîla or Oblong Chess), the Arabic pre-decessor of modern chess. However it's not allowed to pass on pawn-moves, except when they are blocked.
Chess pieces move across the board as they do in ordinary chess - according to the standard rules of move and capture.
The only minor exception is for a pawn that is not allowed to move forward two squares from its starting position.
Upon reaching the last rank, the pawn can be promoted to any piece except the king and itself.
There is no castling, check and checkmate in the game.
The goal of the game is to capture four enemy kings.
The first test tournament was held on the site http://abstractgames.ru/index.php
The tournament is attended by 10 people and I received the most positive feedback from them.
The game has proven itself so well that regular tournaments have already been launched.
Yesterday the game was added to Dagaz server https://games.dtco.ru/map
And it's a great place to test the game in person, as registering on the site is very easy and doesn't require any personal information.
The game turned out to be extremely interesting and exciting, replete with puzzling combinations. Surprisingly, with this size of the board and the number of pieces, the average game lasts no more than 30 turns.
Ilmars Cirulis (2021-07-08 11:36:01)
Big Chess theory?
I will start with a low-hanging fruit: bishops are much more worthy than knights, maybe even twice as much.
Thibault de Vassal (2021-07-09 02:02:20)
Big Chess theory?
I don't think a bishop is worth 2 knights... maybe 6 paws IMO, but bishops of opposite colors also matter.
Juri Eintalu (2021-10-29 03:38:54)
Big Chess theory?
It seems that you need bigger knights.
Ilmars Cirulis (2021-10-29 17:36:26)
Big Chess theory?
Do you mean replacing knights with some other type of piece, smth from fairy chess?
A. T. S. Broekhuizen (2023-08-18 14:32:53)
Next thematic tournament
1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bc4 Nf6 4. d3 h6 5. c3 d6 6. Nbd2 g5
Two knights defence, pianissimo invitation, declined. Played by some top gm's like Caruana. Seems to give white an edge, but is it winning?
Ilmars Cirulis (2024-07-09 20:13:02)
Big Chess theory?
Big Chess endgames with pawns and knights are from outer space, imho. :) I can't say that I understand them.
George Jempty (2025-11-17 23:41:26)
a 2300-player tried the Budapest
Actually I was not happy having to defend so precisely, and probably could not have done so OTB, so I'm giving up on it, and instead will take up a variation of the Two Knights
There are 9 results for knights in wikichess.
Thibault de Vassal (2407)
e4 e5 Bc4
The Bishop's Opening is one of the oldest openings to be analyzed; it was studied by Lucena and Ruy Lopez. Later it was played by Philidor. Larsen was one of the few grandmasters to play it often, after first using it at the 1964 Interzonal Tournament. Although the Bishop's Opening is uncommon today, it has been used occasionally as a surprise by players such as Kasparov and Nunn.
White attacks Black's f7-square and prevents Black from advancing his d-pawn to d5. By ignoring the beginner's rule, "develop knights before bishops", White leaves his f-pawn unblocked allowing the possibility of playing f4. This gives the Bishop's Opening an affinity to the King's Gambit and the Vienna Game, two openings that share this characteristic. In fact, the Bishop's Opening can transpose into the King's Gambit or the Vienna Game, and transpositions into Giuoco Piano and Two Knights Defense and other openings are also possible. In particular, White should remain alert for any chance to transpose into a favorable variation of the King's Gambit, but with careful play Black can avoid this danger.
According to Chessbase, white chances are about 55%
============
Contributors : Thibault de Vassal
Thibault de Vassal (2407)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bc4
The Italian Game is a chess opening, or more accurately a family of chess openings, characterized by this move.
The openings arising from the Italian Game are among the oldest recorded openings and the sequence of moves is known as the Épine Dorsale. The Giuoco Piano (Italian: "quiet game") was played by the Portuguese Damiano at the beginning of the 15th century, and the Italian Greco at the beginning of the 16th century. The Italian Game received its name because of Greco's work, while Damiano has the misfortune to have his name attached to the Damiano Defense, 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 f6?, a line he rightly condemned. The Two Knights Defense was analyzed by Giulio Cesare Polerio (c.1550–c.1610) in 1580.
According to Chessbase, white chances are about 52%
============
Contributors : Thibault de Vassal
Bradley Gooding (1700)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bc4 Nf6
The "Two Knights Defense", an aggressive alternative to Bc5 which leads to dynamic play for both sides.
============
Contributors : Pablo Schmid, Bradley Gooding
Thibault de Vassal (2424)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 d4 exd4 Bc4
The Scotch Gambit.
Instead of 4.Nxd4, White has two ways to offer a gambit. The Scotch Gambit starts with 4.Bc4
Black can transpose into the Two Knights Defense with 4...Nf6 or he can continue the Scotch with 4...Bc5 5.c3 and now 5...Nf6 will transpose into a safe variation of the Giuoco Piano. Black can instead accept the gambit with 5...dxc3 but this is riskier because White will gain a lead in development. A possible continuation is 6.Nxc3 (Grandmaster Sveshnikov has played 6.Bxf7+!? Kxf7 7.Qd5+ followed by 8.Qxc5) 6...d6 7.Qb3 Qd7 8.Nd5 Nge7 9.Qc3 0-0.
============
Contributors : Thibault de Vassal
Telmo Escobar (2086)
d4 d5 c4 c6 Nf3 Nf6 e3 Bf5 Nc3 e6 Nh4 Bg6 Nxg6 hxg6 a3 Nbd7 g3 Be7 f4 dxc4 Bxc4 O-O e4 c5 e5 Ne8 d5 exd5 Nxd5 Nb6 Nxe7+ Qxe7 Be2 Nc7
Despite having 2 knights vs 2 bishops, Black has slightly better chances because of his superior development, good coordination of pieces, control of the "d" file, and pawn majority in the queenside.
============
Contributors : Telmo Escobar
Gavin Wilson (1400)
e4 e6 d4 f5 e5 Ne7 Nh3
Slightly mysterious, but does create the option of putting the knight on f4, which might put useful pressure on g6 if the White queen comes out to h5+.
One reason why we are advised not to develop knights onto rook-3 is in case they are captured by an enemy bishop and you have to re-capture with the pawn. But in this opening, there are currently three of the opponent's own pawns preventing this capture.
============
Contributors : Gavin Wilson
Mike Hoogland (1760)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 a6 Bxc6 dxc6 d4 exd4 Qxd4 Qxd4 Nxd4 Bd7
A very useful move. Black prepares castling long and retains the possibility of playing c5. The immidiate c5 chases away the white knight, but weakens the d5 square. White can then develop accordingly and try to take advantage of this weakness.
They say develop knights before bishops, because the bishop often does not know yet where to go. In this case the bishop knows better where to go than the knight. It only has one good square, because on g4 it can be chased away by the useful move f3. The knight on the other hand could go to d7, f6 or even h6.
Black's bishop pair, his control over d5, the fact that his pawn structure has no weaknesses and the weakness of the white pawn on e4 give black an edge.
============
Contributors : Mike Hoogland
Utku Tuluoglu (1626)
e4 c5 Nf3 e6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 Nc6
Known as the Sicilian Four Knights....rarely seen at Master levels
============
Contributors : Dave Grobler
Gregory Kohut (1592)
Nf3 c6 e4 d5 Nc3
Caro-Kann: Two knights variation
A move which may look weak, but one which has stood the test of time and has no hard refutation. Similar to the Mexican defense for black, this c3 knight will often be active, travelling to g3 and then attacking g7 later in many games. Black should resist the urge to force this manoeuvre and instead try to bolster the centre with a quick e6 and kingside development.
============
Contributors : Kieran Child
FICGS : knights , Wikipedia : knights , Dmoz : knights , Google : knights , Yahoo : knights
In Chess, as it is played by masters, chance is practically eliminated. (Emanuel Lasker)
If your opponent cannot do anything active, then don't rush the position; instead you should let him sit there, suffer, and beg you for a draw. (Jeremy Silman)
Look at Garry Kasparov. After he loses, invariably he wins the next game. He just kills the next guy. That's something that we have to learn to be able to do. (Maurice Ashley)
Back to FICGS , Wikichess