Very neat line in the Lopez. After the take on f2, Nigel seems to be floundering for any sort of game plan.
Well the line is called the Dilworth, and if i remember correctly white has to defend and defend and then in the long run he may have a slight advantage, but for like 20 moves every natural move runs into a horrible trap, a fascinating line for analysis at home and great for blitz games, highly recommend a look, it's one of those positions that makes you like chess. In the middlegame, 2 pieces are typically stronger than the rook.
In the endgame, the advantage is typically smaller, and sometimes the rook can be stronger because of it's improved mobility, and the potential for the pieces to be difficult to coordinate. Typically defending such pawns forces the pieces to awkward positions. As far as examples, Beliavsky - Dolmatov is one, and really Kindermann should have won after Kh6 in Miles - Kindermann.
And a key strength of a rook and pawn in the endgame is being able to push a pawn with a rook behind it, obviously. In some positions the other side will be forced to trade a piece for the pawn to prevent a queening.
Hi here are some examples you might want to considder study, when playing rook and pawn vs 2 minor pieces:. Despite his reputation Michail Tal was famous for that kind of material imbalance.
Online Rook Vs Two Minor Pieces
It's not entirely the same I'd think of it less as an equivalency and more as a guide to look for situations where you can make a favorable exchange either direction. For example, while the two pieces are normally stronger, if you can trade two pieces for a rook and a pawn and it gives you connected passed pawns in the endgame, that's often a good move to make. Likewise if you can trade a rook and a pawn for the two bishops when your opponent has a weakness on a specific color complex, that's probably going to be a good idea.
It mostly has to do with development, piece mobility, square control, and pawn structure. Which now that I think about it is most of chess :. I suspect the rook and pawn could only be better than two minor pieces in the middlegame, and that it would be exceptionally rare for the minor pieces to lose in an endgame. This is actually nearly opposite the truth. In the middlegame pawn chains restrict the rook's mobility, while in the endgame it is generally much more free.
See my other post for details.
It feels much more comfortable if i give up to just sac the rook for one of the minor pieces and easily draw, than say, sacking a knight for a pawn and then having to defend a rook vs minor piece endgame. Added thought. I was playing someone points below me a couple of years ago, and managed to royally f up a game where instead of just taking an extra pawn or two, I was instead stuck with two knights and a pawn versus a lone rook.
- Rook vs. Two Minor Pieces – IM Silas Esben Lund;
- Lost Password?;
- Chess piece relative value - Wikipedia.
- Rook Vs. Two Minor Pieces - Esben Lund - Google книги.
- Rook Vs Two Minor Pieces : Esben Lund : .
- Subscribe to RSS;
Bestselling Series. Harry Potter.
Rook versus Two Minor Pieces
Popular Features. New Releases. Rook Vs Two Minor Pieces. Description The chess material imbalance that is the subject of this book may seem a narrow topic, but the lessons to be learned here apply to all areas of chess: those who study this book will improve their general feeling for the pieces and their interrelation.