Answers.Body: <p>Yes, a rook is worth less than two bishops (five versus six).</p>
  
  <p>But a rook offers more <em>concentrated</em> power in one piece. To utilize the "six," you need to move two pieces rather than one. Add your king to both the rook on one hand, and the two bishops on the other hand, and you realize that it is easier to manage two pieces rather than three.</p>
  
  <p>Even if the "three" are worth a little more. This is particularly true when the "third" piece is a knight rather than a bishop. The two bishops control squares of both colors between them, but the knight controls squares of opposite color to the bishop only half the time.</p>
  
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 3.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2016-09-08T04:58:31.293Z
Answers.LastActivityDate: 2016-09-08T04:58:31.293Z
Answers.UserDisplayName: Tom Au
Answers.Body: <p>Note, that a Rook alone can block a whole rank or file, enabling the king to get into position alone.</p>
  
  <p>B+B and B+N cannot do this.</p>
  
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 3.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2016-09-07T14:58:01.437Z
Answers.Text: B+B can block two adjacent diagonals, with is effectively the same as a rank or file.
Answers.UserDisplayName: Glorfindel
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 3.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2016-09-07T15:01:05.420Z
Answers.Text: @Glorfindel : not exactly. Maybe similar when the opponent's King is in the center, but not when near the corner. With a Rook you can repeat the same algorithm line after line.
Answers.UserDisplayName: vsz
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 3.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2016-09-07T15:04:21.597Z
Answers.Text: That depends on which algorithm, you need to be careful not to stalemate the King, both with KR and with KBB. The end-phase for KBB indeed more difficult.
Answers.UserDisplayName: Glorfindel
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 3.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2016-09-07T15:18:25.963Z
Answers.Text: @Glorfindel : It's simple if "keep your Rook far away from the opponent's King" is part of your algorithm. :) Not something you can do with Knights, or Bishops near the corner.
Answers.UserDisplayName: vsz
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2020-01-27T03:44:19.417Z
Answers.Text: Because the R is a long-distance piece, it often does not matter exactly where it is. Anywhere on the proper rank/file will do. As Glorfindel notes the same is true for BB in the early stages. For BN this almost never true.
Answers.UserDisplayName: Philip Roe
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 3.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2016-09-07T14:37:33.320Z
Answers.LastActivityDate: 2016-09-07T14:37:33.320Z
Answers.UserDisplayName: vsz
Answers.Body: <p>Points are irrelevant.</p>
  
  <p>Points vary all over the place depending on the actual position.  </p>
  
  <p>KR vs K has more useful mobility and work together easily to mate.</p>
  
  <p>KBB take more effort as you cannot remove a file/rank from the other kings possible moves so you have to think and envision squares that are covered by the Bs.  This takes more effort than visualizing a rook and the squares it covers.</p>
  
  <p>KBN is just the same but trickier as you envision the covered squares.  Top GMs see squares covered at a glance. Most weaker players have to work and count them to see what is happening. </p>
  
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2020-01-25T15:00:45.600Z
Answers.LastActivityDate: 2020-01-25T15:00:45.600Z
Answers.UserDisplayName: edwina oliver
Body: <p>When I was very young I remember learning the point values of the pieces. And then I ran into something very confusing.</p>
  
  <p>I was able to learn king and rook vs king mates pretty easily, but king and 2 bishops was trickier--and bishop/knight took me much longer to learn.</p>
  
  <p>This confused me. B+B/B+N = 6 points > R = 5 points. So I did not understand why the rook did things more quickly. Was it just me seeing things linearly, or was there something about how pieces interacted?</p>
  
  <p>I have some ideas for how to express this simply, but nothing concrete. It seems like there should be such an explanation.</p>
  
Comments.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 3.0
Comments.CreationDate: 2016-09-07T13:11:31.270Z
Comments.Text: It gets even more confusing if you add more pieces. KNN can draw against KQ, but KBN and KBB (in generally) do not. But as you probably know KNN  only draws against K alone, while KBN and KBB can win. And vs. KRB, KNN lose (even though RB is 8 points and a Q is 9), but KBB draw and KBN as well if the bishops have the same color.
Comments.UserDisplayName: Glorfindel
Comments.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 3.0
Comments.CreationDate: 2016-09-07T15:29:56.670Z
Comments.Text: If nothing else, more pieces required to mate means more pieces to move means it gets more complicated (as one of the answers points out, due to coordination)
Comments.UserDisplayName: Michael
Comments.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 3.0
Comments.CreationDate: 2016-09-07T16:07:22.103Z
Comments.Text: @Michael very plausible intuitive answer. With R, everytime you move, you improve a value 5 piece. With 2 minor, everytime you move, you improve a value 3 piece, so it takes longer.
Comments.UserDisplayName: jf328
Comments.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 3.0
Comments.CreationDate: 2016-09-07T21:13:09.390Z
Comments.Text: Is that an apples to apples comparison?  R+R = 10 points.
Comments.UserDisplayName: Raydot
Comments.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 3.0
Comments.CreationDate: 2016-09-08T06:14:42.210Z
Comments.Text: I guess a king and 4 white-squared bishops should be able to mate even faster than a king and queen? 12 points to 9, right?
Comments.UserDisplayName: bof
Comments.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 3.0
Comments.CreationDate: 2016-09-09T08:54:38.667Z
Comments.Text: That's the exception that proves the rule, I think, since this won't come up in practical play. But it triggered another way to look at it for me: a bishop sometimes isn't worth 3 points (and is worse than a pawn) if it's K&RP&B vs K & the wrong color.
Comments.UserDisplayName: aschultz
Comments.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 3.0
Comments.CreationDate: 2016-09-12T16:37:54.183Z
Comments.Text: Is there perhaps something also to do with rooks being interchangeable, while bishops aren't - one is always light-squared and one dark-squared? By contrast it doesn't matter which rook I have left.
Comments.UserDisplayName: EastNine
Comments.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 3.0
Comments.CreationDate: 2017-05-02T20:00:11.370Z
Comments.Text: @bof: Nice one!!
Comments.UserDisplayName: Philip Roe
Tags: <endgame><point-value><minor-pieces>
Title: Reasons why king and rook mate quicker than king, knight/bishop and bishop?
ThreadText: # Reasons why king and rook mate quicker than king, knight/bishop and bishop?
  
  (Asked by: username_0 on 2016-09-07)
  
  When I was very young I remember learning the point values of the pieces. And then I ran into something very confusing.
  
  I was able to learn king and rook vs king mates pretty easily, but king and 2 bishops was trickier--and bishop/knight took me much longer to learn.
  
  This confused me. B+B/B+N = 6 points > R = 5 points. So I did not understand why the rook did things more quickly. Was it just me seeing things linearly, or was there something about how pieces interacted?
  
  I have some ideas for how to express this simply, but nothing concrete. It seems like there should be such an explanation.
  
  **Tags:** endgame, point-value, minor-pieces
  
  > **Comments:**
  > **username_1**: It gets even more confusing if you add more pieces. KNN can draw against KQ, but KBN and KBB (in generally) do not. But as you probably know KNN  only draws against K alone, while KBN and KBB can win. And vs. KRB, KNN lose (even though RB is 8 points and a Q is 9), but KBB draw and KBN as well if the bishops have the same color.  
  > **username_2**: If nothing else, more pieces required to mate means more pieces to move means it gets more complicated (as one of the answers points out, due to coordination)  
  > **username_3**: @username_2 very plausible intuitive answer. With R, everytime you move, you improve a value 5 piece. With 2 minor, everytime you move, you improve a value 3 piece, so it takes longer.  
  > **username_4**: Is that an apples to apples comparison?  R+R = 10 points.  
  > **username_5**: I guess a king and 4 white-squared bishops should be able to mate even faster than a king and queen? 12 points to 9, right?  
  > **username_0**: That's the exception that proves the rule, I think, since this won't come up in practical play. But it triggered another way to look at it for me: a bishop sometimes isn't worth 3 points (and is worse than a pawn) if it's K&RP&B vs K & the wrong color.  
  > **username_6**: Is there perhaps something also to do with rooks being interchangeable, while bishops aren't - one is always light-squared and one dark-squared? By contrast it doesn't matter which rook I have left.  
  > **username_7**: @username_5: Nice one!!  
  
  ---
  
  ## 3 answers
  
  ### Answer by username_8 on 2016-09-08. Score: 3
  
  Yes, a rook is worth less than two bishops (five versus six).
  
  But a rook offers more *concentrated* power in one piece. To utilize the "six," you need to move two pieces rather than one. Add your king to both the rook on one hand, and the two bishops on the other hand, and you realize that it is easier to manage two pieces rather than three.
  
  Even if the "three" are worth a little more. This is particularly true when the "third" piece is a knight rather than a bishop. The two bishops control squares of both colors between them, but the knight controls squares of opposite color to the bishop only half the time.
  
  
  ---
  
  ### Answer by username_9 on 2016-09-07. Score: 2
  
  Note, that a Rook alone can block a whole rank or file, enabling the king to get into position alone.
  
  B+B and B+N cannot do this.
  
  > **Comments:**
  > **username_1**: B+B can block two adjacent diagonals, with is effectively the same as a rank or file.  
  > **username_9**: @username_1 : not exactly. Maybe similar when the opponent's King is in the center, but not when near the corner. With a Rook you can repeat the same algorithm line after line.  
  > **username_1**: That depends on which algorithm, you need to be careful not to stalemate the King, both with KR and with KBB. The end-phase for KBB indeed more difficult.  
  > **username_9**: @username_1 : It's simple if "keep your Rook far away from the opponent's King" is part of your algorithm. :) Not something you can do with Knights, or Bishops near the corner.  
  > **username_7**: Because the R is a long-distance piece, it often does not matter exactly where it is. Anywhere on the proper rank/file will do. As username_1 notes the same is true for BB in the early stages. For BN this almost never true.  
  
  ---
  
  ### Answer by username_10 on 2020-01-25. Score: 0
  
  Points are irrelevant.
  
  Points vary all over the place depending on the actual position.
  
  KR vs K has more useful mobility and work together easily to mate.
  
  KBB take more effort as you cannot remove a file/rank from the other kings possible moves so you have to think and envision squares that are covered by the Bs. This takes more effort than visualizing a rook and the squares it covers.
  
  KBN is just the same but trickier as you envision the covered squares. Top GMs see squares covered at a glance. Most weaker players have to work and count them to see what is happening.
  
  
  ---
  
  