lordnguyenvo
13 ( +1 | -1 )
how come rook>bishop? they both can control the same amount of squares in favor condition.then how come the rook is a better piece?
More: Free Games Chess
chess_champion
18 ( +1 | -1 )
rooks vs bishops even though both pieces can cover large areas one rook is allowed to go on both colored squares while one bishop remains on the same colored squares...
More: Chess Tables
mate_you_in_fifty
17 ( +1 | -1 )
Only in the center The rook controls 14 squares anywhere in the board. The bishop controls 13 in the center and much weaker in the edges/corner.
But BB is usually more powerful than one rook.
More: Chess Against Computer
lordnguyenvo
28 ( +1 | -1 )
but the fianchetoed bishop is pretty important yes?
the dragon sicilian bishop is just like the best piece of the game.in some situation,people even wish to trade the rook for a bishop.and the rook has no use early because it cant mobilize yet.
---------------------------
best of all,its the 4 moves checkmate!!!!!!
More: Chess Game Free
squijum
olympio
10 ( +1 | -1 )
a rook is weaker than 2 bishops
but 2 rooks are stronger than 4 bishops. especially on the 7th rank
More: Chess Flash
tulkos
caldazar
73 ( +1 | -1 )
You've pretty much hit the nail on the head, lordnguyenvo; it's a question of piece utility. Rooks are clumsy pieces when there are lots of pawns on the board. It's hard to maneuver them around pawns; it's easier to use them if there are open ranks and files available. On the other hand, knights can hop over other pieces and bishops can cross open diagonals that frequently exist because of pawn chains (of course, pawns can block in bishops too leading to 'bad bishops').
Rooks aren't better or worse than bishops; it just depends on the position you're considering as to whether you can get more use out of your bishops or rooks (or any other piece for that matter), both in the short and long term.
More: Chess Players
bartlebie
13 ( +1 | -1 )
Well. Did you ever try to win K+B vs K? It's hard. Really hard. I would prefer K+R vs. K in nearly 100% of all possible positions in these endgames. Just a hint.
jean_marc
olympio
mate_you_in_fifty
27 ( +1 | -1 )
it boils down to whether you want to go straight for your opponent's throat (in which case sacking the exchange makes sense if the position warrants it) or you want to play slowly and steadily,and win an endgame. And there,rooks almost always are better than minor pieces.
shoshin
dlarry
57 ( +1 | -1 )
another example... a simple way to show a rook is stronger than a bishop...
white to move:
black pawns at a7,b7,c7
white bishop c3
blacks goal is to promote with tempo, in very short order white will discover how to neutralize the pawn no matter how they are played; however add a fourth and black must blunder to lose.
white to move:
black pawns at a7,b7,c7,d7,e7
white rook at a1
again blacks goal is to promote with tempo, clearly the white rook can easily win this position
pretty easy to see how they got 3pts and 5pts
caldazar
123 ( +1 | -1 )
Well, since the majority seem to be providing examples where rooks beat bishops, here are a couple of counter-examples where bishops are playing more important roles than rooks:
Troianescu - Petrosian, 1953
1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 d6 3. d3 Nc6 4. Nbd2 g6 5. g3 Bg7 6. Bg2 e6 7. O-O Nge7 8. Re1 O-O 9. c3 b6 10. Nf1 Ba6 11. d4 cxd4 12. Nxd4 Ne5 13. Bg5 h6 14. Qa4 Bb7 15. Bxe7 Qxe7 16. Rad1 Rfc8 17. Ne3 Rc5 18. f4 Nc6 19. Nxc6 Bxc6 20. Qc2 Rd8 21. Qe2 Qb7
22. Nc2 b5 23. Rd2 Rc4 24. a3 a5 25. Ne3
Now Petrosian played:
25... Rxe4 26. Bxe4 Bxe4 27. Nc2 d5 28. Nd4 b4 29. cxb4 axb4 30. a4 and Black's bishops are quite active while White's rooks aren't doing a whole lot.
Play continued:
30... Qa7 31. Qf2 Rc8 32. b3 Bf8 33. Nb5 Qa6 34. Qe2 Qb6+ 35. Kf1 and now 35... Rc3 36. Nxc3 bxc3 with a far superior endgame for Black.
-----
One of my favorite modern games:
Kasparov - Shirov, 1994
1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 e6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 Nf6 5. Nc3 Nc6 6. Ndb5 d6 7. Bf4 e5 8. Bg5 a6 9. Na3 b5 10. Nd5 Be7 11. Bxf6 Bxf6 12. c3 Bb7 13. Nc2 Nb8 14. a4 bxa4 15. Rxa4 Nd7 16. Rb4 Nc5
Now:
17. Rxb7 (Black's bishop is more useful than White's rook) Nxb7 18. b4 with excellent piece play for White. All his pieces have good homes and the bishop can go to either c4 or d3. Meanwhile, Black has no easy way to activate his rooks. Black eventually tried ...a5 with rook play down the a-file but lost in the end.
-----
And since someone mentioned the Dragon:
1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 d6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 Nf6 5. Nc3 g6 6. Be3 Bg7 7. f3 O-O 8. Nb3 Be6 9. Qd2 Nbd7 10. O-O-O Nb6 11. g4 Rc8 12. Bh6 Bh8 13. Bxf8 Qxf8 when Black's dark-squared bishop is as useful as any rook.
shoshin
15 ( +1 | -1 )
caldazar :) I like you....It might really confuse players if I proposed that many times Knights are more valuble than Bishops or Rooks! :)
caldazar
27 ( +1 | -1 )
Hehe Then you could talk about all kinds of interesting "sacrifices."
Seriously though, my point is that it's not particularly useful to talk about one piece being better than another unless its within at least some general context of a position.
olympio
16 ( +1 | -1 )
i see bishops as more mobile than rooks.. but rooks pack a greater punch with their ability to slide. try to see what i mean by slide
badjessie
17 ( +1 | -1 )
yep good ole Janowski would roll over in his grave if he heard this talk about rooks better than his two beloved JANS ha ha ha . I hear him rolling now ha ha
dlarry
44 ( +1 | -1 )
of course... Of course you have to consider their perspective strength in any given position. On a more fundamental level it is important to quickly analyze your pawns/pieces to your opponents pawns/pieces. I realize this has little value here with days to consider a position or for your computer to work out a continuation. But I am an OTB player and with 2 minutes left its important to conserve thinking time whenever possible.