2 Minor Pieces vs Rook

Very often I get the question: what is better Rook or 2 Minor Pieces?
The answer to such a question is pretty simple: 2 Minor Pieces. Simple math says that 3+3 is bigger than the 5.

The next question, a little bit harder, might be: what is better Rook and a pawn or 2 Minor Pieces? In that case, the material is equal: 3+3=5+1. But still answer remains the same, you can coordinate 2 minor pieces and attack something with a bigger power (a pawn is not that mobile).

But how it is when it comes to the Rook and 2 pawns vs 2 Minor Pieces? Material is better for the Rook team (3+3<5+2). On the other hand, you can still coordinate 2 minor pieces in the attack.
So you can see that the answer to such a question is not so clear. You can answer it in the favorite way of every economics student: it depends.

The general principle says that the more pieces on the board and the more complicated position is - the better for 2 minor pieces team.
On the other hand, the closer to the endgame, the bigger advantage the Rook team has got.
Below you can see 2 examples.

In the first position, Black is very slightly better because it has got 2 Minor Pieces and can create threats with them.

In the second position, White has got a big advantage. The fewer pieces on the board, the more important pawns are.

A couple of days ago I also played an interesting game in which I showed how to play in that kind of position (I had got 2 Minor Pieces). You can watch it with my comments:

If you like the post, you can watch my educational streams on Twitch and sign up for my newsletter (you will get a FREE EBOOK).