Should the Knight be ELIMINATED from the game of chess!!?

Question

It's too sneaky, and ruins all the fun of playing.

Answer 1

not at all.

Answer 2

No, absolutely not! Where would the fun be without the Knight! It's the only piece that can really annoy your opponent :P.

It's a Vital part in any manouver or strategy.

Plus, what would take it's place!

Answer 3

NO!! It's good to be sneaky

Answer 4

No, you can't mess with chess!  Anyway, an opponent's knight may be annoying, but remember: you have two aswell.

Answer 5

no

Answer 6

no, it's the piece you really have to pay attention to

Answer 7

No that is half of one the key battles of chess. One of the first key decisions in the game is if you want to try for an open or closed game (IE trade off the bishops for the knights). Knights are worth just as much as a bishop, but the key differences between them are the bishops range, and the knights ability to attack pieces on both colors.

Answer 8

It would be a shame to eliminate or change the Knight which is only one of two pieces that has retained its original powers from the ancient game of chaturanga (circa India 6th century AD and believed by most people to be the first chess game).  The other piece that has retained its original moves is the King.

Besides the Knight provides the spice needed to make the game truely a hair pulling experience! :o)

Answer 9

You both get two of them. It adds an element to the game. Besides, you can't just go and change an ancient game like Chess. It hasn't been changed for centuries, for God's sake.

Answer 10

So go out there and capture em both! (the ultimate revenge).

Answer 11

Its my favorite piece. You can attack 8 squares at once.

Answer 12

No. There is such a thing as "sight of the board" which means how quickly you can see where pieces can move. You get much better at this the more you play. Beginners find the knight move partuicularly difficult to see as it is non-linear. This is also the reason why it is the second most feared piece after the queen (but not the second strongest). The knight is very different and without it the game would lose a lot of interest. Some of the most fascinating combinations ever played would lose their beauty.

There is an exercise you can do to improve your "knight vision". Start a single knight from one corner of an empty board and move the knight legally such that it lands on every square of the board successively row by row. So if the knight starts on a1, move it by knight moves to b1, c1, d1, etc until you end up on h8. Strictly speaking place pawns of the knights colour on c2, c7, f2 and f7. The knight is not allowed to land on the pawns at any time. Time how long it takes you (it's a race). Keep a record. If you do this twice a day for two weeks, you will be amazed at how much faster you can do it. It really increases your sight of a knights move, and you will then enjoy playing with it. It's then YOU who will be sneaky with it.

By the way, at all higher levels, if you swap off your opponent's knights for your bishops you will be penalising yourself, as the bishop is usually slightly better than a knight. The two bishops (versus two knights) constitute a definite advantage in chess.

Answer 13

NO WAY!!

i think it should not be eliminated for the following reasons

1) it is the only piece which the queen cannot move like ( for example diagonal, straight etc.)

2) it is good to set up somebody into a fork or a checkmate.

3) when the kings of india used to plan their battles ( they used chess for that) the knights or the horses were a very vital part in doing so

3) yes, it is sneaky, but it makes you be more aware of what is going on, becuz it could sneak into the middle of nowhere and checkmate u

Answer 14

He is kind of a little sidestabbing, hopping over cheater,

isn't he? I guess it's realistic that something should be

able to scale or hop over the ramparts.

Answer 15

If the knight is gone it ruins all the fun any sneakiness.