Trading Pieces

I've been following a rule that I've found in a chess book:

If you are behind in material, trade pawns, not pieces.

If you are ahead in material, trade pieces, not pawns.

Thoughts on this? I think it's a sound piece of advice, and I try to follow it.

1WK: Slightly chipped cross, good weight, boxwood.

Want: 1WK. Perfect condition, good weight, boxwood.

?????

This is correct, it is like this becuase it can be hard to win even when your up say a knight but have no pawns.  Where as keeping pawns and trading minor pieces when your ahead in material should make it easier to queen.

You're right.  Generally speaking, trading away pawns opens up lines and complicates the position, which would favor the one behind in material.  Keeping the pawns on the board would create a less dynamic position, which would favor the a head in material since there would be less surprises to deal with and the material advantage can be used to slowly win the game.

So,when to trade knight and bishop

Sounds reasonable.  But keep in mind that such "rules" are like the rungs of a ladder: they will initially help to pull you up but there will come a time when you'll need to let go of it if you went to keep rising.

Some other "rules"...

- the attacker wants to keep as many pieces as possible; the defender wants to exchange

- the side with a much safer king, wants to keep queens on the board

- R+B is better than R+N

- Q+N is better than Q+B

- etc.

Of course, each of these is very general and every position must be considered specifically.  Plus, often the "rules" contradict each other, so can't follow them all. Etc.

So, I suggest that you don't just follow the rule but more specifically ask things like "does the rule apply here?" or "is there something that breaks or supercedes the rule"?  i.e. don't hold onto any "rules" too tightly or dogmatically.

Damned you for stealing my thunder!!