why 2 minor > rook and how to execute • page 2/2 • Game analysis • lichess.org

CM Sarg0n

#12

@boilingFrog said in #11:

B + N > R

With coordination resp. coordinating heavy piece.

Without:

R = B + N

@boilingFrog said in #11: > B + N > R With coordination resp. coordinating heavy piece. Without: R = B + N

CM Sarg0n

#13

Quoting Sarg0n:

As I mentioned before if both sides had an additional rook it would be an easy win probably because white has an coordinator then. That"s the text book case normally: two pieces are stronger than a rook in the middlegame. The two pieces alone in the endgames are hard to coordinate against flank attacks, passed pawns and so on: the rook is equal in most cases.

There's a beautiful "classic" example played by Dolmatov in the endgame manual analyzed over many pages by Dvoretzky where he even succeeds with the rook and one could think the pieces where better. Pawns are even equal at certain times but you cannot simply add the material values given for beginners for the two pieces vs. rook:

http://www.chessgames.com/perl/chessgame?gid=1552975

Quoting Sarg0n: As I mentioned before if both sides had an additional rook it would be an easy win probably because white has an coordinator then. That"s the text book case normally: two pieces are stronger than a rook in the middlegame. The two pieces alone in the endgames are hard to coordinate against flank attacks, passed pawns and so on: the rook is equal in most cases. There's a beautiful "classic" example played by Dolmatov in the endgame manual analyzed over many pages by Dvoretzky where he even succeeds with the rook and one could think the pieces where better. Pawns are even equal at certain times but you cannot simply add the material values given for beginners for the two pieces vs. rook: http://www.chessgames.com/perl/chessgame?gid=1552975