When to trade pieces?
Sort:
When your opponent tries to trade queens when they are behind (time/material), they are basically resigning but don’t have the dignity to do so!
Sep 13, 2018
0
#22
Bag_of_Hydration wrote:
I often begin the game with a +1 or +3 advantage, but later in the game I simply don’t have the mental capacity to defend them all and I lose the game. I heard that you’re not supposed to exchange pieces just because you have a lead but avoiding it makes it so much harder for me - I keep getting pushed back and my pieces get in each other’s way. Then I spend turns improving their positions while the enemy simply attacks. What gives...? When are you supposed to exchange? Like, should you never exchange when an enemy pawn can recapture and thereby move into the central 4 squares? Is there a rule or something?
If you are wining trade pieces, if you are losing trade pawns, trade your passive pieces for actives ones, trade queens if you have less space, trade to deny counterplay and trade to ruin pawn structures (if it's worth enough).
Aug 20, 2021
0
#23
The winning player trades pieces but not pawns while the losing player trades pawns instead of pieces. If trades are forced, the side with more material will win.
Aug 20, 2021
0
#24
Whenever you have financial issues, you can trade your pieces in exchange of cash.
A piece for a piece does not always have to be the case. In the Italian, a common trade i see is trading off a knight and bishop for an attack on the castled king, a pawn and rook. While theoretically, this trade is equal, it is often not due to black being down a piece. Points do not equal pieces.
Feb 23, 2022
0
#26
Sometimes the trade is made to then double up the opponents pawns. In the end, you must ask yourself if I make these trades am I in a better position to get an advantage. I disagree that just because you are ahead you should trade. If you don't see down the road the trade may lead to something like your opponent having a better chance at advancing a pawn storm.