I have read the derivation of the knight move relates to flanking manuevers. So, the knight's moves are more suited to flanking manuevers? It seems to be somewhat contrary to the notion of keeping them off the rim. Also, they aren't all that nimble. It can take more moves to advance shorter distances...that's funny.
The pattern formed by potential forks reminds me of the results of a hand grenade or land mine.
The knight's movement pattern predates the bishop's ability to move any number of spaces diagonally. The bishop used to move diagonally two squares, hopping over the first just like how the knight hops over the squares between it's starting point and destination, so in that context the "jumping" part isn't unique to the knight.
The rook and knight moved as they do now, but what we now call the bishop and queen were far weaker pieces until 1490 or so. Given the old bishop and a queen (fers) that could only move one space diagonaly and the knight was a powerhouse.
I've been reading a lot of chess history and I don't recall running across why exactly the knight moves as it does, probably impossible to know given how old the rule is, it exists in games that are precursers to chess. Just like the 1490ish bishop/queen/move the pawn two spaces rule changes it was probably just game balancing as someone mentioned above. A two space jumping knight would result in only three back row pieces (two rooks and a king) that could change color.
I suspect the origin of the knight move has to do with the "golden ratio"/"golden rectangle."
By the by, now I have Bob Seger's song running through my head..."working on our knight moves."
I'm doomed.
"Ain't it funny how the knight moves
When you just don't seem to have as much to lose
Strange how the knight moves"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mKaHci9Mc4A
Well if you go by the idiotic matrix system of chess they dont consider knights to move in an L shape, they consider it to move in a diamond :p.
I don't know "why", but I like the idea that the closest squares a queen can't get to are the ones a knight can get to if they were on the same square.
I've found it useful sometimes to consider the knight's influence to be on a circle of a specific radius from the starting point. I've often wondered if a "circle" wasn't part of the original idea.
Good question... I've also never seem foot soldiers prancing through the battlefield to reveal themselves queens.
from Wikipedia:
The original idea was that a foot soldier that advanced all the way through the enemy lines was promoted to the lowest officer. In medieval ages, the weakest piece was the queen, earlier called farzin or ferz, as its only move was one square diagonally and not at all in any other direction. When the queen and bishop got their new moves, chess was radically altered. When the fers became the queen, there were objections that a king should not have more than one queen (Davidson 1981:59–60).
I don't know "why", but I like the idea that the closest squares a queen can't get to are the ones a knight can get to if they were on the same square.
Interesting!
i think its cause the motion for knighting someone is to take a sword and put it over their right and left shoulder
Well, they tried using the “Z” pattern - kind of a Zorro thing - but after a few moves, they fell asleep. Zzzzzzs...
Does no one else on this site study wars? I guess that's why I'm the guy with the hammer and you aren't.
Calvery are for flanking! Actually, any really mobile unit is for flanking, but especially calvery. (They're also used as scouts in wars, but not so in chess). This is why the United States still has Armored Calvery units - to flank and attack from the side or rear while the main force confronts the bulk of the enemy.
Yes that is my thought as well. Also, it's cavalry.
Why does the knight move in a L shape?
Why does only one guy get a ball in Soccer (Football)?
Why not give every player their own ball?
One of the French kings (Louis XII, perhaps?) was playing chess with a gentleman of the court. As the courtier reached forward and picked up his Knight to move it, he farted loudly. The king glanced up at him and raised an eyebrow. Thinking quickly, the courtier said "Sire, my Cavalry will not advance unless they hear the trumpet-call".
True story.
Send me a freind request please...I just want to be friends with more and more chess lovers across the globe.
Knights do not move in L shape but they move in any direction in Original game called Dashpaad. Like HH HD DD DH.. But persian only understood L shaped.
Why does the knight move in a L shape? I always wondered that.. sometimes i see a horce race on t.v. and i never see them run zigzag or anything.. so why the L shape? Why didnt they make it so they can jump 2 sqaures in front of them or on the side and are allowed jump over pieces?
I think it’s so the knight can fork/attack pieces (other than the knight) and still be safe from the pieces it’s currently attacking.
If you fork the queen and king with a rook, chances are that the queen will likely take the rook, even if the rook is defended by another piece just so you can at least win some material. If you were in this scenario with a knight, you could fork the king and queen without a threat from the queen or king! So I think the old designers of chess tried to make a piece that could attack without being in a diagonal, horizontal or vertical cross hair from an enemy it’s currently threatening!
tell me what you think of this idea 
Why does the knight move in a L shape?
They don't. That is a modern interpretation that violates FIDE laws.
The knight moves one square orthogonally, then one square diagonally.
While the chess community has allowed the "little L" heresy to slowly overtake the FIDE correct knight movement, it is important to know the true knight movement if you play Xiangqi, since knights don't jump, so correct knight movement is important.
It also explains why knights move the way they move, since horseback soldiers are often used to flank standing soldiers, and the knight is constantly flanking his enemies.
Every time the war-horse bucks, the warrior falls off?