14

This endgame is completely winning for black with best play. While there are some cases where the weaker side can build a fortress, those only occur with 1 or 2 pawns per side, not with 3 undoubled pawns. For example, here is the most common fortress (with 2 pawns each): [FEN "6k1/1R6/4K1p1/7p/8/2b3P1/7P/8 w - - 0 1"] White cannot break down black's ...


12

The line usually quoted is 4.Bd3 Bxd3 5.Qxd3 Qa5+ 6. Bd2 Qa6! If White now exchanges Queens or allows the Queens to be exchanged he already has a poor endgame structure with a bad dark-square Bishop. Otherwise he will have difficulty Castling. Certainly White is not lost, but he has given away his first-move advantage. [FEN ""] 1. e4 c6 2. d4 d5 3. e5 Bf5 ...


10

But I have never seen 4. Bd3 played in titled games. The reason could be that Black gets a superior version of the French Defense. In the French, Black blocks the natural diagonal of the c8-bishop and then struggles to solve this issue. They lose a lot of tempi to exchange the bad c8-bishop via b6, and Ba6. Here Black immediately trades the light-squared ...


9

You say your opponent had a strong attack against your king and you had to "sacrifice" your rook for two minor pieces and went on to lose. I think you have it the wrong way round. It sounds like your opponent had a strong attack against your king and sacrificed two minor pieces for your rook, your one active piece by the sound of it. In general a rook and ...


9

This is a great example for explaining the concept of the bad bishop. In the center, we see an example of a pawn chain. White has pawns on d4 and e5, and black c6, d5 and (soon) e6. These are pretty immobile (until either side plays some pawn break). White's pawns are on dark squares, black's on white squares. As a result, black's white squared bishop is ...


8

In this case, the pawn on d4 is not just a target. It's also restricting white's bishop on c3. For that reason, it's very important that black not allow white to sacrifice this pawn by playing d4-d5 when white would have very good chances to hold. Black would like to trade off light square bishops and then put a rook on d5. The immediate 1...Bxe4 2.Qxe4 ...


6

After the exchange of white squared bishops black will play e6 cementing the center, leaving all his pawns on white squares. The white squared bishop is Black's bad piece in these structures and conversely it is white's best piece. The exchange very much favours black. With black pawns on d5 and f5 white isn't going to be opening the center any time soon so ...


5

First, it is just one way to play it. It is not really better or worse than other plans at this juncture. Really, the big problem is that I am not a fan of 7...g6 since what is the Bf8 really going to do on g7? It is biting on granite, and is better placed on e7 defending the k-side, and eyeing the white q-side, or even Bd6 eyeing a trade for the active Bf4....


5

Castling (9. 0-0) is not a very bad move. You still have a very solid advantage after it due to being a pawn up and having the better pawn structure (black's pawns on a7, c7, c6 are weak and vulnerable). However you had a better move... The pawn on c6 is hanging and you could have simply taken it. Both 9. Nxc6 or taking the pawn after queen trades (9. Qxd8 ...


5

The problem with that move is a number of things. You gave up the bishop pair. His attack on your king is stronger than yours on his king, and you traded off a defender. You have no time to go after his king since yours is threatened with mate on the move. Already with three minors traded, his threats aside, there might not be enough firepower to attack his ...


5

It's an oversimplification to think of the bishop pair to be worth 0.5 points on average. There are cramped positions where a bishop is barely better than a pawn. It's very difficult to generalize based on your question, it will vary greatly from position to position. But in case you're only interested in an "on average" answer, then the side with the rook ...


4

Only a general answer can be given for this: Generally the exchange of R+P (sometimes an extra pawn) for a Bishop and Knight favors the player who has the Bishop and Knight afterwards due to the simple fact that the Minor Pieces are much stronger during the middlegame than the Rook. You have two attacking pieces vs. one attacking piece. The side with the ...


4

9.Qxd8 followed by 10.Nxc6 wins you another pawn. Meanwhile, 9.0-0 gives Black time to protect the c6-pawn. Given this, 9.Nxc6 is almost as good as 9.Qxd8 for the same reason (winning a pawn). However, 9.Qxd8 is slightly preferable since Black's bishop is out of play on d8 when it recaptures via 9...Bxd8 (if Black recaptures with 9...Rxd8 then 10.Nxc6 ...


3

Your experience doesn't speak too much to the general question. Your opponent apparently was more skilled than you, which means several things. First, they probably would have won if you hadn't traded. Second, part of dominating a game is making it so that all of the options available to their opponent are bad; thus, it's likely that they deliberately ...


3

It is just a matter of taste. There are pluses and minuses to the move, but the strategic idea is gaining a better pawn structure. I have played the Exchange 4.Bxc6; the Deferred Exchange 4.Ba4 Nf6 5.Bxc6; and the Double-Deferred Exchange 4.Ba4 Nf6 5.0-0 Be7 6.Bxc6. All have unique flavors and Black has to know the ideas in each or risks a very bad game. ...


3

It's more than just a pawn difference (as stated in other answers). Being an exchange down, you'd still have a minor piece playing against the rook. This is not always a disadvantage, as a knight with a good outpost or a bishop with good diagonals actually value as much as a rook. Your knight could still potentially fork your opponent's queen and king, your ...


3

As a general rule of thumb I would say Knight + Bishop = Rook + 2 pawns Following factors influence evaluation of this material imbalance Static position of King Whether Queens are present Number of open files Strong positions for light pieces thanks to pawn structure Rook + passed pawns or non-passed pawns Rook + blocked pawns or non-blocked pawns ...


3

In general, it is better to be an exchange (rook vs. minor piece) down than a minor piece. If you look at the standard table for piece value, you see that being an exchange down is only 5-3 = 2 points, while being a minor piece down is 3 points.


2

" Adding the better cooperation of the rook with the bishops, many Soviet theoreticians believed that, in active positions, rook and two bishops outperform two rooks and a knight. "


2

First of all, I think white can only play to hold. The question is whether black can really create winning chances. All the h3-h4-Kf3-Kg4-Kg3 stuff in the game and your line, is pretty much just white doing nothing. Personally I would put the king on f4 straight away to free up the rook. And then put the rook on the c-file. This should limit blacks ...


2

It depends on the situation. Sometimes players lose 3 points, but have an advantage in position. [FEN ""] 1. e4 e5 2. b3 Bc5 3. f4 Nf6 4. fxe5 Nxe4 5. Qg4 Nf2 6. Qxg7 Rf8 7. d4 Nxh1 8. Nf3 Bb4+ 9. c3 Be7 10. Bh6 d5 11. Qxh7 Qd7 12. Bxf8 Bxf8 * Or for example this game: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kUr_gdKQ8j4


2

This is very situational. Generally, the side with the bishop pair is simply down the exchange.


2

Well, he has to because there is no other option. The black Knight threatens to capture the white Queen, but also a 'sacrifice' on f3 which will eventually win the white Knight on c3. [Title "White to move"] [FEN "1r3rk1/1p4bp/p2p1q2/2pPn1p1/B1PnRp2/PPN2P1P/2QB2P1/3R2K1 w - - 5 27"] 1. Qb2? Ndxf3+ 2. gxf3 Nexf3+ 3. Kg2 Nxd2 4. Qxd2 Qxc3 This might not ...


2

An Exchange (rook for minor piece) is probably worth less than 2 pawns, while a piece averages over 3 pawns. Petrosian once said that the exchange is worth only one pawn. If you are interested, you could read more about this (and other material imbalances) at this page. Also, Andrew Soltis' book "Rethinking the chess pieces" is definitely worth a read.


2

The generally accepted numerical value of those chess pieces are that the rook is worth 5 and the knight is worth 3 (the bishop is also worth 3 and the pawn is worth 1). Looking at the situation numerically, losing two minor pieces is -6 whereas losing a rook is -5, so apparently losing a rook would be the more favorable situation and it would seem favorable ...


1

It's usually a very good trade to get two pieces for a rook. Maybe in the particular game you played it was important to keep the rook on in order to control the file, but in general the two pieces are far preferable.


1

Two minor pieces are generally stronger than a rook, with the advantage becoming more evident when the game heads to the endgame. It is clear that there can be exceptions even in an endgame, like one of the two minor pieces being misplaced (a "bad bishop" may lead to such a situation) or a situation where the two minor pieces are temporary unable to parry ...


1

As already pointed out by user1583209, 9.Qxd8 Rxd8 10.Nxc6 followed by Nxe7+ wins an extra pawn. However I wouldn't say that trading your knight Black's dark-squared bishop is good for you because of the strength of the bishop (your knight is also a great piece). The reason why this continuation is so powerful is, apart from the material advantage, ...


1

4 Bxc6 became popular after Fischer made extensive use of it. He followed up with 5.O-O and although this is no longer fashionable at GM level, a lot of lesser players are uncomfortable. White can choose to develop an attack against the King (because the center is closed to counterattacks) or play for a favorable ending, and can keep the options open for ...


Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible