Editing Bishop (chess) (section)

==Game use==

===Good bishop and bad bishop===
{{chess diagram
|tright
|Krasenkow vs. Zvjaginsev, 2004
|  |  |bd|  |  |  |kd|
|  |  |  |nd|qd|rd|  |pd
|  |  |pd|  |pd|  |pd|
|  |pd|pl|pd|pl|  |  |
|  |pl|  |ql|  |pl|  |
|  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
|  |nl|  |  |bl|  |pl|pl
|rl|  |  |  |  |  |kl|
|Position after 23.Rxa1. White's bishop is good, while Black's bishop is almost entirely useless.
}}
In the middlegame, a player with only one bishop should generally place friendly pawns on squares of the color that the bishop cannot move to. This allows the player to control squares of both colors, allows the bishop to move freely among the pawns, and helps fix enemy pawns on squares on which they can be attacked by the bishop. Such a bishop is often referred to as a "good" bishop.

Conversely, a bishop which is impeded by friendly pawns is often referred to as a "bad" bishop (or sometimes, disparagingly, a "tall pawn"). The black light-squared bishop in the [[French Defense]] is a notorious example of this concept, as playing 1...e6 and 2...d5 results in there being two pawns impeding its ability to join the game. A bad bishop, however, need not always be a weakness, especially if it is outside its own {{chessgloss|pawn chains}}. In addition, having a bad bishop may be advantageous in an [[opposite-colored bishops endgame]]. Even if the bad bishop is passively placed, it may serve a useful defensive function; a well-known quip from GM [[Mihai Suba]] is that "Bad bishops protect good pawns."<ref>Discussions on the strength of bishops is covered e.g. in "The Art of Planning, part 2" by [[Jeremy Silman]] published in the July 1990 issue of ''[[Chess Life]]''. Suba's quote is mentioned e.g. in ''Secrets of Modern Chess Strategy, Advances Since Nimzowitsch'' by [[John L. Watson|John Watson]].</ref>

In the position from the game Krasenkow–Zvjaginsev, [[FIDE World Chess Championship 2004]],<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.chessgames.com/perl/chessgame?gid=1292300 |title=Krasenkow vs. Zvjaginsev, 2004 |website=[[Chessgames.com]] }}</ref> a thicket of black pawns hems in Black's bishop on c8, so Black is effectively playing with one piece fewer than White. Although the black pawns also obstruct the white bishop on e2, it has many more attacking possibilities, and thus is a good bishop vis-à-vis Black's bad bishop. Black resigned after another ten moves.

===Fianchetto===
{{main|Fianchetto}}
A bishop may be ''[[fianchetto]]ed'', for example after moving the g2 pawn to g3 and the bishop on f1 to g2. This can form a strong defense for the [[Castling|castled]] king on g1 and the bishop can often exert strong pressure on the long diagonal (here h1–a8). A fianchettoed bishop should generally not be given up lightly, since the resulting {{chessgloss|holes}} in the pawn formation may prove to be serious weaknesses, particularly if the king has castled on that side of the board.

{{Chess diagram small
|tleft
|
|  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
|pd|bd|pd|  |  |pd|bd|pd
|  |pd|  |  |  |  |pd|
|  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
|  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
|  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
|  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
|  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
|Archetypal fianchettos (for Black)
}}

There are nonetheless some modern opening lines where a fianchettoed bishop is given up for a knight in order to double the opponent's pawns, for example 1.d4 g6 2.c4 Bg7 3.Nc3 c5 4.d5 Bxc3+!? 5.bxc3 f5, a sharp line originated by [[Roman Dzindzichashvili]]. Giving up a fianchettoed queen's bishop for a knight is usually less problematic. For example, in [[Anatoly Karpov|Karpov]]&ndash;[[Walter Browne|Browne]], [[San Antonio, Texas|San Antonio]] 1972, after 1.c4 c5 2.b3 Nf6 3.Bb2 g6{{chesspunc|?!}}, Karpov gave up his fianchettoed bishop with 4.Bxf6! exf6 5.Nc3, doubling Black's pawns and giving him a hole on d5.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.chessgames.com/perl/chessgame?gid=1035250 |title=Anatoly Karpov vs. Walter Shawn Browne, 1972 |website=[[Chessgames.com]] }}</ref>

===Endgame===
An [[Chess endgame|endgame]] in which each player has only one bishop, one controlling the dark squares and the other the light, will often result in a [[Draw (chess)|draw]] even if one player has a pawn or sometimes two more than the other. The players tend to gain control of squares of opposite colors, and a deadlock results. In endgames with same-colored bishops, however, even a positional advantage may be enough to win.<ref>{{harvcol|Mednis|1990|pp=133–34}}</ref>
{{Clear}}

====Bishops on opposite colors====
{{main|Opposite-colored bishops endgame}}
{|align="right"
|[[Image:Chess klt45.svg]]
|[[Image:Chess bll45.svg]]
|[[Image:Chess plt45.svg]]
|[[Image:Chess kdt45.svg]]
|[[Image:Chess bdd45.svg]]
|}
Endgames in which each player has only one bishop (and no other pieces besides the king) and the bishops are on opposite colors are often [[draw (chess)|drawn]], even when one side has an extra pawn or two. Many of these positions would be a win if the bishops were on the same color.

{{col-begin|width=auto; float:right; clear:right}}
{{col-break}}
{{Chess diagram small
|tright
|Wolf vs. Leonhardt, 1905
|  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
|  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
|  |  |  |bd|  |  |  |
|  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
|  |  |  |  |  |pd|pd|kd
|  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
|  |  |  |  |bl|  |kl|
|  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
|Draw with either side to move
}}
{{col-break}}
{{Chess diagram small
|tright
|Bogoljubov vs. Blümich, 1925
|  |  |bd|  |  |kd|  |
|  |  |  |  |  |pd|pd|
|pd|  |pd|  |  |  |pd|
|  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
|  |  |pl|  |pd|  |  |
|  |pl|  |  |bl|  |  |pl
|pl|  |  |  |  |pl|pl|
|  |  |  |kl|  |  |  |
|Position after 28...Kf8
}}
{{col-end}}

The position from the game H. Wolf–P. Leonhardt, 1905 (see diagram) shows an important defensive setup. Black can make no progress, since the white bishop ties the black king to defending the pawn on g4 and it also prevents the advance ...f3+ because it would simply {{chessgloss|capture}} the pawn&nbsp;– then either the other pawn is exchanged for the bishop (an immediate draw) or the pawn advances (an easily drawn position). Otherwise the bishop alternates between the squares d1 and e2.<ref>{{harvcol|Müller|Lamprecht|2001|p=118}}</ref>

If two pawns are [[Connected pawns|connected]], they normally win if they reach their sixth {{chessgloss|rank}}, otherwise the game may be a draw (as above). If two pawns are separated by one {{chessgloss|file}} they usually draw, but win if they are farther apart.<ref>{{harvcol|Fine|Benko|2003|pp=184–204}}</ref>

In some cases with more pawns on the board, it is actually advantageous to have the bishops on opposite colors if one side has weak pawns. In the 1925 game [[Efim Bogoljubov]]–[[Max Blümich]] (see diagram), White wins because of the bishops being on opposite colors making Black weak on the dark squares, the weakness of Black's [[isolated pawn]]s on the {{chessgloss|queenside}}, and the weak [[doubled pawns]] on the {{chessgloss|kingside}}.<ref>{{harvcol|Reinfeld|1947|pp=80–81}}</ref> The game continued:<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.chessgames.com/perl/chessgame?gid=1030793 |title=Efim Bogoljubov vs. Max Bluemich, 1925 |website=[[Chessgames.com]] }}</ref>

:29.Kd2 Ke7 30.Kc3 f6 31.Kd4 Be6 32.Kc5 Kd7 33.Kb6 g5 34.Kxa6 Kc7 35.Bb6+ Kc8 36.Bc5 Kc7 37.Bf8 f5 38.Bxg7 f4 39.Bf6 f3 40.gxf3 exf3 41.Bxg5 Bxh3 42.Bf4+ {{chessAN|1–0}}

====Wrong bishop====
{{Main|Wrong bishop|Wrong rook pawn}}
In an [[chess endgame|endgame]] with a bishop, in some cases the bishop is the "[[wrong bishop]]", meaning that it is on the wrong color of square for some purpose (usually [[promotion (chess)|promoting]] a pawn). For example, with just a bishop and a {{chessgloss|rook pawn}}, if the bishop cannot control the promotion square of the pawn, it is said to be the "wrong bishop" or the pawn is said to be the [[wrong rook pawn]]. This results in some positions being [[draw (chess)|drawn]] (by setting up a [[fortress (chess)|fortress]]) which otherwise would be won.