Upgrade to Chess.com Premium!

A Pretty good example of 2 rooks crushing a queen


  • 3 years ago · Quote · #1

    wardexe

    This game is one of my better displays of coming back from a bad position.  I feel like it illustrates the necessity of active pieces and also the imbalance of 2 rooks vs a queen.  Comments and feedback are appreciated!

  • 3 years ago · Quote · #2

    Zelenkooo

    Developing is not just moving pieces from their starting postions but putting them on good position. 

    Think about that

  • 3 years ago · Quote · #3

    AndyClifton

    Yes, your continuation does yield a winning position.  But 25 Rbb7 was simpler, since  25... Rg8 26 Rxg7 Rxg7 27 Rxg7 ends up winning a piece.

  • 3 years ago · Quote · #4

    easylimbo

    instructive on the two rooks versus a queen idea, but i did feel you knight was much better than his light square bishop.

  • 3 years ago · Quote · #5

    wardexe

    AndyClifton wrote:

    Yes, your continuation does yield a winning position.  But 25 Rbb7 was simpler, since  25... Rg8 26 Rxg7 Rxg7 27 Rxg7 ends up winning a piece.


    True, however my move was still the strongest in the position

    Easylimbo, my knight was better, but after he challenged my knight i had no choice but to give it up as moving it back becomes passive and would lead to me losing.

    And I know what developing is, relax

  • 3 years ago · Quote · #6

    AndyClifton

    A matter of semantics.  But suit yourself (no doubt you always will anyway)...

  • 3 years ago · Quote · #7

    wardexe

    AndyClifton wrote:

    A matter of semantics.  But suit yourself (no doubt you always will anyway)...


    Theres nothing wrong with either of our moves, happy?

  • 3 years ago · Quote · #8

    AndyClifton

    Nah, I'm actually still a little grumpy.  But that's better anyway. Smile


Back to Top

Post your reply: