Endgame:2 rooks or 1 rook and 1 knight?

dimitros

Maybe the answer is obvious, maybe is not.

What would you prefer in an endgame,2 rooks or a rook and a knight if there are also some pawns in the game?

Edit:Sorry for the mistake,it's BLACK to move and i don't know why it shows me white.

Zalmeth

bit of an odd question. The answer should be the same for most people - 2R unless particular circumstances mean a knight is more effective.

2 rooks are far more powerful, cover more territory, switch between attack and defence quicker and you can link them.

In an endgame where there are no other pieces, 2 rooks are greater then the sum of their parts: linked they're worth something like 11 or 12 points, while the R and N are equal to the sum of their parts : 5+3. I hate using "points" to describe something, because it doesnt reflect positioning. Of course, in some (a far minority) of positions, a knight might be better then a single rook. But very rarely.

 

It is of couse a somewhat different matter if the side with knight instead of second rook also has a pawn advantage or passed pawn/s

RoffleMyWafflez

It depends.

pfren

Show the other pieces- else the question is rather pointless.

JoshuaChess960

If you are just about to mate, the 2 rooks are better to use but if you want some development especially in the middle, the 1R and 1K is still an option.

dimitros

In the game above:if black is a bit better than white,then who has more chances to win?

pfren

Ummm, white to move he takes the rook... Undecided

dimitros
pfren wrote:

Ummm, white to move he takes the rook...


Edit:Sorry for the mistake,it's BLACK to move and i don't know why it shows me white.

pfren

I'd say black is lost: white's pawns are healthy, his knight lacks a useful outpost, the position is open...

dimitros

would you advice white to exchange a rook or not?

pfren

Indeed. White is not only an exchange+pawn up, but will soon win a second pawn, no matter if Black plays ...b4 or ...Rc5.