You are not winning material with Nf2 because after there is Bxd6 for white, winning your bishop and also attacking your own rook. Anyway, this is not so important as black is already very much worse. 13.Qe7 losing the queen is the big mistake, Qd7 would have been ok.
Why is Nf2 a blunder here?
Sort:
Thanks. Yeah game was over at this point, but still like to look back and try understand the analysis as a beginner.
There is a very important fact in chess that almost all beginners in chess don’t know: A bishop and a knight, or two knights, or two bishops... They are mosr stronger than a whole rook. In points, one pawn worths 1, a knight or a bishop is 3 points, and a rook is 5 points, and a queen is 9 points. So 3+3 is greater than 5, and two rooks is greater than a queen, for the similar reason.
Sep 26, 2020
0
#5
Fitzpasd wrote:
I don't understand why Nf2 is considered a blunder here when I'm forking the rooks (so trading a knight for a rook), and the best move is to trade bishops. Very new to chess
The position dictates play - always play the position. Generally, forking the Rooks would be a good tactic. However, take a look at your opponent's options. After Nf2 he takes your B, Bxd6 forking your Rook and Knight. So, after loosing a B you have to decide what to do. After moving your Rook (Rf7) he takes your Knight. You have lost a B and N without any compensation. Now you take one of his Rooks, but you then lose your Knight. This exchange has cost you 2 Knights and a Bishop. Not a good thing . . .
That you are doing the analysis is great. Keep it up and good luck. 
I don't understand why Nf2 is considered a blunder here when I'm forking the rooks (so trading a knight for a rook), and the best move is to trade bishops. Very new to chess