Yeah, I agree, would that be with/out pawn structure destablization? (i mean, would you still trade if your opponent's pawn structure was not affected?)
I would rather pick up a pawn or two instead of a bishop if I was going for a pawn storm.
Queen Trade vs Sac?
Sort:
One chess saying goes, look at the pieces on the board not the pieces traded off. Good advice for this sort of situation. It's not so much what you've traded her for, but if your remaining pieces can collectively be more effective than your opponents even though he's going to have a queen and you wont.
Just messing up their pawn structure isn't enough by itself. Generally you'll need better compensation for this lovely lady like dangerous passed pawns or an attack on the king.
As for a straight queen for queen trade it's really the same kind of conversation. I'll ask, is my queen going to be more useful then theirs? If so (maybe I have a great diagonal or file for her to operate on) then I'll avoid the trade. Other times it's their queen that's more dangerous so I'll trade given any chance. But still always useful to look at what's left ON the board. How useful will your remaining pieces be? This is the sort of conversation to have when debating a trade. Pawn structure too, so sounds like you're doing some of this already :)
Dec 20, 2011
0
#4
Three minor pieces is usually equal to a queen and often better. I had a game where I captured an opponent's rook and pawn but my opponent was able to trap my queen in the corner. I let him capture her but forced him to lose an addition rook and knight to do it. This is a material advantage of +5 and in this particular position I went on to win very easily. I will show it here:
As you can see, two rooks and a knight easily overpower the queen.
browni3141 wrote:
Three minor pieces is usually equal to a queen and often better. I had a game where I captured an opponent's rook and pawn but my opponent was able to trap my queen in the corner. I let him capture her but forced him to lose an addition rook and knight to do it. This is a material advantage of +5 and in this particular position I went on to win very easily. I will show it here:
As you can see, two rooks and a knight easily overpower the queen.
Well it depends on the situation, I guess
If all your pawns are isolated then the queen will have an easy time picking them off and queening a passed pawn
On the other hand, if your pawns are connected and you have few pawn islands then you can form a chain and use your pieces to defend the base and the queen will be running around cause she can't touch anything and your forces will eventually overpower her( after all what can 1 person do against 2-3 warriors?)
Being an agressive player by nature, I'm more willing to trade queens than most. This being the case, I'll often force the choice on my opponent- either force them to trade queens and get a messed up position, or don't and be down material. Even for as small an advantage as an extra pawn, I'd be willing to trade queens (I doubt she appreciates it)
Alright, so I'm familiar with people trading Queens for another queen, but which is the most important (what's your priority) if in a situation where you can:
1) Trade for an opponent's Queen
2) Devestate your opponent's pawn structure eventually leading to a Queen sacrifice.
I know the queen is worth 9 pieces, but what how many of your opponent's pieces would you trade for your lovely lady?