which is better? 2 knights or 1 rook?
Sort:
hum veeeerrrryyy good question
Sep 28, 2021
0
#22
In the middle game, I’d take two knights almost every time. In the endgame? Depends on pawn structure.
llama47 wrote:
Guys... stop mentioning that two knights can't mate...
The question isn't "is it better to be ahead by a rook or to be ahead by two knights"
That's not the question because it's a stupid question. You're completely winning either way.
The question is that one player has a rook, and the other player has two knights.
i have read all the comments and yes this comment too has a certain logic. knights CAN mate but at very rare situations.
Polar_Bear_Peat wrote:
hum veeeerrrryyy good question
thanks dude.
also thanks everyone for posting their opinions/comments. much appreciated
MARattigan je napisao:
Arnaut10 wrote:
... But when it comes to the endgame two knights + king without any pawns are useless and cant be compared with rook + king without any pawns on the board. Reason is simple, first one can't force a mate and second one is 100% winning. I hope this helps.
Except second is hardly ever winning. (Not even if it's a theoretical win. Try playing the position in #10 as Black against a tablebase.)
against lone king in both cases
