Generally, and with exceptions, the way you win an exchange ahead is to trade rock for bishop at the right time into a winning pawn ending. With extra pawns it gets more complex and depends on whether there are open files, weak pawns, constrained king etc. I have a book ,rock vs minor piece, that I played thru and didn’t see many general principles , just lots of examples. I can suggest getting some endgame books and after you play one, look up and study similar examples. Bill. Ps. G m s sometimes fail to win these theoretically won endings too.
Bishop and more pawns vs rook and fewer pawns in end game
Sort:
Looking for resources: lessons, theory, etc. on the following issue I've been having.
In several instances lately, I have managed to get to the endgame with a rook or two while my opponent has just one or zero. In most cases, my opponent will have at least a bishop and more pawns than me, but materially we are equal or I have a slight advantage. I've let several of these games slip through my fingers because I just cant seem to handle the powerful pawn/bishop combination. I feel like I'm plodding along with my rook(s) while the agile bishops are darting in and out of action, picking me apart.
I clearly need to get a better grip on the rook endgame. Can anyone point me in the right direction concerning this deficiency in my game? (Taking my opponent's bishops off the board early is a bandaid solution - but maybe one I will employ in the interim!)
Any help/advice is appreciated!