Killing the rooks with bishops

 Isn't the option to take just one of them a satisfying one? You still get one bishop to play the middlegame with . Try it!

If you think it's anywhere near "a huge disadvantage" to have a Rook instead of a Bishop any time after move 10 or so, you're probably not using your Rooks to their full effectiveness.

Once again =>  permanent factors such as material TRUMP positional/temporary factors.   There is NO way to argue around this ... it's the same as saying "I can take your piece for a pawn, but oh no, that doubles my pawns so I won't."

It's just plain silly.

 Besides, if you are being beaten "early"  on, it is NOT because of your lack of bishops. It is because you are not playing the opening properly (Good opening guidelines, understanding activity, king safety)

Never trade a bishop for a rook, bishops rule over rooks, here's a game I played that showed how obvious this is:

Here's another example of a game I played where you can see how clearly better a bishop is than a rook:

I apologize in advance to anyone who takes this seriously.

You did notice his little footnote at the bottom of his post? :)

Are you kidding? Did you see how awesome those bishops were and how impotent the rooks were? Did you read the fine print?

So since we have come to a conclusion that you should kill the rooks, how can I get my rooks into a position that will be good for the middle game?

Step 1: O-O
Step 2: Re1 (...Re8)
Step 3: Profit 

yes but im wondering how to use my rooks effectively

Rooks should be placed on files for one of two reasons:

(1) You have no pawn(s) on that file
(2) You are planning to push your pawn on that file

In case 1, you're aiming to control squares on the file, either to create a spot for one of your minor pieces, to penetrate the position with your Rook, or else to add pressure to a weak opposing pawn on the file.

In case 2 you're adding a constant source of protection to your pawn as you push it towards your opponent's side of the board. You still need a way to break and potential blockades, but it's very valuable to have a piece protecting your pawn no matter how much it gets pushed.

 In my earlier post #4 in this thread which you might have not read,  I've already acknowledged the fact there are exceptions such as those you mentioned, but that's just it.    They are exceptions  ... which I'm sure the OP will pick up once he gets the "norm" part of the game figured out. 

it would be nice if you didnt try to trick people by putting tiny small print at the bottom

I'm sorry I made you read.

Crawl before you walk, that's all I'm saying.   It is unlikely that the OP will follow this thumbrule to his chess grave or become a material grabber for life.  What it does TRY to do is to get him past this "positional vs. material" confusion hump where he's currently at, which I believe was the point of this thread.   Until he knows what the black and white basics are, there's really no point exploring the gray.

Btw, King safety is a tactical, not positional concept.  Once again, in the presence of a tactic like back-rank checkmate (once again, not positional criterion), material doesn't matter at all.  As is the pawn-promotion scenario (which you quoted earlier) that happens to be a tactical, NOT positional situation.   

If I had said "Material trumps tactical considerations", your argument holds more water.

its just that you put information then have strange small print at the bottom

That's much easier to do with wooden pieces than plastic ones. And the wood pieces are high in fiber.

lol but were getting away from the point of this forum

yes but how do i get through themiddle game without bishops?

Are you reading what anyone is saying? A Rook becomes much better than a Bishop after about 15 moves in most games.

same in arabic