trading bishop and knight for pawn and rook?

Not sure if it's been covered in the past. But. Is it a good or bad idea to trade your knight and bishop for a pawn and rook. I had the chance to do this after about 6 moves but not sure if it's wise. Points for bishop,knight is 6 and points for pawn, rook is 6. Even . Your views.

These guys are right: it's usually a bad idea in the opening/middlegame.

In the opening and middle game the bishop and knight are stronger. In the end game the pawn and rook are stronger

yeh their right

Is not the endgame much more important than the opening though?

Well, they are "mostly" right.  Generally speaking, the Bishop and Knight are stronger in the middlegame (Bishop and Knight vs Rook and 2 Pawns are often equal).  However, just remember, there are always exceptions, and you must assess the situation at hand, not go based on generalities.  Too many players fail to realize that generalities are not the same thing as Geometric Theorems, like Vertical Angles are Congruant, which are true 100% of the time.

Thank you all.

Pippychess and Thrillerfan have offered good answers. 

But, in the endgame R+P is only about equal to B+N. The side with the B+N have a definite advantage in most middlegames. 

Larry Kaufman's calculation of the relative value of the pieces is based on this, not the other way around. 

All these numerical evaluations are fine, but they are based on observations of many games. They aren't drawn out of thin air and then applied. Kaufman's evaluation of Rooks is merely a reflection that in most endgames, the two rooks will beat a Q, but a R+P won't beat B+N. 

I dare to disagree with Kaufman in that even a single Bishop is slightly better than a single Knight in most endgames, as John Watson has mentioned. 

Bad exchange,think in terms of a attack by black w/ a white b. on h2  -q. on g file and queen r. on f8...use your b./n focused on f2.              Good luck

I personally believe that a bishop and knight are better pieces throughout the game until the endgame.

endgame i'd do it, since even if i blundered and lost both, most people wouldnt be able to checkmate.

early mid game i would rearely do it, since a bishop and knight can influence the board much more than a pawn and rook if there are still a fair few pieces on the board.

Above all though, chess is a *situational* game, you cant rely on rules of thumb like this or whether or not you should trade a queen for two rooks/ It all depends on the position.