who has an advantage?queen vs two rooks and 1 bishop
Sort:
Captn_obnoxious
Jul 2, 2017
0
#1
the pawn position and king safety are equal for both sides
will it be better to have 1 queen or two rooks and 1 bishop?
Jul 2, 2017
0
#3
two rooks vs a queen is still being debated so two rooks and a bishop is far better than a queen
In most cases the coordination of two rooks and a bishop should be able to outpower a lone queen, because two rooks and a bishop most likely target more squares on the board than a single queen can do. However, if the queen is able to capture pawns at a rate faster than the opponent's three pieces combined can, or if the queen can capture one of the rooks or the bishop safely somehow, then it becomes another story.
The rooks and a bishop since there are more pieces, but depends on the position
As in what I meant is that the position matters, as you mentioned. Like if the two rooks and bishop and nicely coordinated, and not loose all over the board, then two rooks and a bishop should be able to outplay a lone queen. The placement of the pawns also matter (I am not so sure if the king safety can ever be equal in such games). In one of my games I dropped my knight in a game by a blunder, leaving myself with a queen and an open king (with some pawns) versus a team of two rooks, a bishop and a knight. I predicted that I cannot endure the harassment of the four pieces combined, so I resigned immediately after losing the knight.
Queen = 9 points
2 rooks and a bishop = 5+5+3 points
as easy as that
2 rooks and a bishop = 5+5+3 points
as easy as that
madhavciccio wrote:
Queen = 9 points
2 rooks and a bishop = 5+5+3 points
as easy as that
2 rooks and a bishop = 5+5+3 points
as easy as that
your also saying that a knight vs. two pawns and the knight has more points so the knight is better which is wrong.
Yes but here we are not talking about pawns
@madhavciccio
The point system can be used to determine the total relative strength of the pieces combined, so yes, 13 points are better than 9 points, but the point system should not be used as a sole factor in the decision making of the situation.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
To everyone who posted the above, including Captn_obnoxious,
If the three pieces and the king are poorly placed, like this (with White to play),
then the side having the queen wins with correct play (the number of pawns are the same for both sides but the relative king safety may not be equal). Using the point system is pointless in this case (ok it sounds a bit weird to say that). In most cases though, the side having the three pieces will be clever enough to let the two rooks protect each other or use them hand in hand to harass the opponent's queen. I cannot guarantee that the side having the three pieces will win, but most likely the side having the queen will have a hard time trying to endure the three pieces (for example by useful checks to the enemy king) to even out the game.
Jul 4, 2017
0
#11
In general, two rooks alone are very slightly better than a queen. Throw in the bishop and the queen should NOT be able to cover/attack very much.
@eric0022
Well, I have to say u are right about not using points system as the only factor when making decisions
Well, I have to say u are right about not using points system as the only factor when making decisions
I just counted the material....
@madhavciccio
In most cases though, players would not just hang piece like that. Most of the time the two rooks and a bishop should win. One such example appears in one of my games, in which the game had this final position where I resigned.
In another game below I also resigned immediately after getting my knight pinned. After losing that knight I will only have a queen and a pawn for four White pieces.
Great explanation.... Thanks
ZlyphrrPlayz wrote:
madhavciccio wrote:
Queen = 9 points
2 rooks and a bishop = 5+5+3 points
as easy as that
2 rooks and a bishop = 5+5+3 points
as easy as that
your also saying that a knight vs. two pawns and the knight has more points so the knight is better which is wrong.
The knight is better!
An interesting variation of this is queen and rook versus two rooks and bishop. 14-13 but essentially even.
https://gyazo.com/5ad9b365de55c794bef6444ca93effd7
Two rooks and a minor piece will almost always be better than a lone queen - to an extent that the player with the lone queen ought to be looking for a perpetual check scenario to salvage the draw.
Interestingly, I've played both sides of the scenario of two rooks and a knight versus a queen and rook numerous times, and the two rooks and knight have won every time. As long as the rooks stay connected and the minor piece is supported, there's nothing the other side can do short of giving up an exchange, to dislodge the minor piece.
There is an inherent weakness in not having any minor pieces when your opponent has them, and still further weakness of having a lone queen, in that lesser pieces of the opponent can be readily outposted on extremely potent squares.
May 30, 2018
0
#20
Dsmith42 wrote:
Two rooks and a minor piece will almost always be better than a lone queen - to an extent that the player with the lone queen ought to be looking for a perpetual check scenario to salvage the draw.
Interestingly, I've played both sides of the scenario of two rooks and a knight versus a queen and rook numerous times, and the two rooks and knight have won every time. As long as the rooks stay connected and the minor piece is supported, there's nothing the other side can do short of giving up an exchange, to dislodge the minor piece.
There is an inherent weakness in not having any minor pieces when your opponent has them, and still further weakness of having a lone queen, in that lesser pieces of the opponent can be readily outposted on extremely potent squares.
in some cases even a bishop and a rook can be enough to win vs a queen ive been on both sides of it and it can be hard if the pawns are equal and the bishop, rook and king move is one its very strong