The English Language

[John McKenna]

"Knights prosper in front of enemy passed pawns" is, I think, a sloppy expression.

Usually a knight is a good piece when on the square immediately in front of an isolated enemy passed pawn.

Usually it will not "prosper in front of" connected "enemy passed pawns".

[Barry Sandercock]

Yes. Very good answer. The knight is not going to "prosper" if the opponent has a mate coming up. It all depends on the position.

[soheil_hooshdaran]

Oh, it is an enemy passed pawn

[soheil_hooshdaran]

Plus, what is a newborn bishop?
This poor, newborn Bishop looks more like a tall pawn.....

[Barry Sandercock]

I've never heard of this term before. It makes no sense to me.

[Clive Blackburn]

Plus, what is a newborn bishop?
This poor, newborn Bishop looks more like a tall pawn.....

The only reason I can think of that a bishop could be described as "newborn" would be if a pawn was promoted to make the bishop.
I haven't seen the positions so I don't know if that is what happened.

[John McKenna]

Like Barry I've never heard of a "newborn bishop" until now.

I agree with Clive that it almost certainly refers to a pawn promoted to a bishop.

Particularly because in the quote in question it is compared to a pawn... "This poor, newborn bishop looks more like a tall pawn..."

I wonder why it is called 'poor', though?

[Barry Sandercock]

Yes, I did think of the pawn promotion. However, the "tall pawn " reference suggests to me that the bishop is so hemmed in by pawns making it of little use and worth only about a pawn. Again, as John said about a previous query, a sloppy expression.

[soheil_hooshdaran]

Plus, what is a newborn bishop?
This poor, newborn Bishop looks more like a tall pawn.....

The only reason I can think of that a bishop could be described as "newborn" would be if a pawn was promoted to make the bishop.
I haven't seen the positions so I don't know if that is what happened.

No, it is that the blockading knight on d6 is, imaginarily, replace by a bishop on d6, blocked by pawns on c5 and e5

[soheil_hooshdaran]

After:
1.¤f3 e6
Peter Clarke wrote:

There are people who play this against any opening move by White. Perhaps it is the only reply that unquestionably deserves such a strange distinction.

What distinction?

[IM Jack Rudd]

After:
1.¤f3 e6
Peter Clarke wrote:

There are people who play this against any opening move by White. Perhaps it is the only reply that unquestionably deserves such a strange distinction.

What distinction?

The one pointed out in the preceding sentence.

[soheil_hooshdaran]

But there is not preceding sentence!

[soheil_hooshdaran]

OK.
What's the difference between
Black willingly weakens an important square
and
Black voluntariy weakens an important square
?

[John McKenna]

It solely lies in the different meaning of the two adverbs.

[soheil_hooshdaran]

Why does he call White, "the handler of White pieces"?