28 Feb 08
1 edit
Originally posted by Sigmund FreudThat's actually a good question, because it's something that beginners baulk at - they love their queens! However the two rooks can be much stronger than the queen if they are working together and have the initiative. One of the most important ideas is that the rooks can gang up on weak pawns and the lone queen usually isn't sufficient to protect them.
exchange 2 rooks for a queen? Assuming that the exchange would not inevitably lead to the checkmate of your opponent, simply an exchange of material.
Here is a game where my opponent swapped his queen for my two rooks leaving him with a winning position: Game 3583709.
28 Feb 08
Originally posted by Fat LadyGame 3583709.
That's actually a good question, because it's something that beginners baulk at - they love their queens! However the two rooks can be much stronger than the queen if they are working together and have the initiative. One of the most important ideas is that the rooks can gang up on weak pawns and the lone queen usually isn't sufficient to protect them.
H ...[text shortened]... ped his queen for my two rooks leaving him with a winning position: [gameid]3583709[/gameid].
28 Feb 08
Originally posted by Sigmund FreudDepends what is left after the exchange. If the remaining queen has pieces with which to co-operate, and / or an exposed enemy king to have a pop at, then the queen is more than a match for 2 rooks.
exchange 2 rooks for a queen? Assuming that the exchange would not inevitably lead to the checkmate of your opponent, simply an exchange of material.
If after the exchange, the player retaining the queen has no such support, the enemy rooks can gain significant advantage as they can cooperate in defence and attack, and often the queen is fairly impotent to stop them, particularly (as already eluded to) in endings where the focus is queening the remaining pawns.
So of course it depends on the position, but as a real general guideline, such an exchange is roughly equal, on average. As Fat Lady says, novices are often terrified of exchange their queen for anything, but this is regularly misguided. A queen is weakened significantly when she has no support and is tackling pieces that can cooperate.
28 Feb 08
1 edit
Originally posted by Sigmund Freudthis question wasn't quite phrased correctly. What I meant to ask was if you would exchange your own queen for 2 of your opponents rooks (Although the above posts indicate the question was understood as intended).
exchange 2 rooks for a queen? Assuming that the exchange would not inevitably lead to the checkmate of your opponent, simply an exchange of material.
its been a long day 😴
28 Feb 08
1 edit
Originally posted by Sigmund FreudBelieve it or not, it depends on the position.
this question wasn't quite phrased correctly. What I meant to ask was if you would exchange your own queen for 2 of your opponents rooks (Although the above posts indicate the question was understood as intended).
its been a long day 😴
If the side who is going to end up with the two rooks has lots of loose pawns and the rooks are not connected, then the position may suit the side with the queen. Also, a queen is actually that good at attacking on its own - it needs something else (often a knight) to help it.
28 Feb 08
Originally posted by Fat LadyThis is a really good point, and well illustrated by the game provided. but what if neither side has the initiative (i.e. both sides are identical). Would it still be a wise strategy?
That's actually a good question, because it's something that beginners baulk at - they love their queens! However the two rooks can be much stronger than the queen if they are working together and have the initiative. One of the most important ideas is that the rooks can gang up on weak pawns and the lone queen usually isn't sufficient to protect them.
H ...[text shortened]... t swapped his queen for my two rooks leaving him with a winning position: Game 3583709.
28 Feb 08
Originally posted by PolicestateEven though I am undoubtedly exposing myself as one of fat ladys "beginners" here, i would have to opt for the queen, even in a situation where both sides are identical. The main reason being, even if the queen is alone she still has considerable potential to win back material and is the most likely to create a situation in which her opponent is forced to surrender a piece through a fork or pin. This would be especially so in an endgame situation, when there is little material left and the queen is free to control many squares at once.
Depends what is left after the exchange. If the remaining queen has pieces with which to co-operate, and / or an exposed enemy king to have a pop at, then the queen is more than a match for 2 rooks.
If after the exchange, the player retaining the queen has no such support, the enemy rooks can gain significant advantage as they can cooperate in defence ...[text shortened]... een is weakened significantly when she has no support and is tackling pieces that can cooperate.
28 Feb 08
Originally posted by Sigmund FreudThat's why the rooks would be stronger when placed on the same file or rank, particularly if they were targeting a pawn, as they would have much more protection from any sort of pins or forks.
...even if the queen is alone she still has considerable potential to win back material and is the most likely to create a situation in which her opponent is forced to surrender a piece through a fork or pin...
Again, it depends on the situation.