The specifics of a position notwithstanding, what's generally considered stronger, a Queen or two Rooks?

queen is 9 points.  two rooks are 10.

Queen

i think more often than not, great players will give up their queen for 2 rooks.

Often it's easier to checkmate with two rooks than it is one queen.

In a recent game my opponent gave his two rooks for my queen... ironically, in the endgame, I managed to make a classic two rook mate with his king against the board edge

that's the idea.  not sure there's irony in it.

He he, well I'm sure that my opponent had no such idea when he voluntarily initiated the trade...

There is no answer. It all depends on a position, much like bishop vs. knight.

---

The more I play chess, the more I discover that there IS no such thing as "position nonwithstanding".  In my experience, a queen vs. two rooks depends entirely on the position.

Forget the point-value system. This imbalance depends entirely on the position. One queen may be easier to handle than two rooks, but two rooks well coordinated are powerful.

I remember watching this game unfold while it took place. Kramnik offered the whole world instruction in handling the rooks. The endgame starts at move 37.

 

 

As a basic rule-of-thumb, the queen is better.This is true unless the board is pretty empty or will be soon and the rooks are well connected.

In a fraction of positions it's about equal... the rooks can even be better in a small fraction of positions.

I am glad i made you think.

i still say in general, 2 rooks over a queen.