Answers.Body: <p>Another aspect of the phrase you provided is how English uses &quot;up&quot; and &quot;down&quot;. A player is considered &quot;up&quot; if they have an advantage. Likewise, being &quot;down&quot; mean a player has the worse position or piece count.</p>
  <p>Because rooks are generally more valuable than pawns, whichever player still has the rook is in a better position and would be considered &quot;up a rook for a pawn&quot;.</p>
  <p>Combining these two ideas, &quot;white is down a rook for a pawn&quot; means that white has the worse end of the trade involving a rook and pawn. This means that white has lost a rook and only captured a pawn as compensation.</p>
  
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2021-03-23T22:55:04.233Z
Answers.Text: Is in a better position? All else being equal, sure. The position on the board might counter the material advantage, or even make it irrelevant.
Answers.UserDisplayName: Deduplicator
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2021-03-24T12:40:46.340Z
Answers.Text: @Deduplicator "generally more valuable than pawns". Feel free to make an edit if you think my answer isn't precise enough or needs improvement.
Answers.UserDisplayName: ryanyuyu
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2021-03-24T15:04:42.827Z
Answers.Text: @ryanyuyu Since you posted the answer so recently, we should leave it up to you to make edits. And yes, I think this answer could use an edit. The first paragraph only speaks generically about advantages and disadvantages. The second player uses the phrase “better position”. I suspect a *native* English speaker unfamiliar with chess could find this confusing, never mind a non-native speaker.
Answers.UserDisplayName: Brian Drake
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2021-03-24T21:28:51.557Z
Answers.Text: @BrianDrake I don't think my answer needs clarification. Make/suggest the edit so I can see, and I'll keep it if it's good.
Answers.UserDisplayName: ryanyuyu
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2021-03-25T13:48:17.477Z
Answers.Text: @Deduplicator: "position" here refers to _what the speaker is focusing on_, which is not necessarily the positioning of the pieces (though I concede the ambiguity in a chess context, this question and answer is more related to general English). If you have to pay twice as much rent than me, even though we live in similar housing, then _rent-wise_ you're in a worse position than me, _regardless_ of you having a higher income than me or not.
Answers.UserDisplayName: Flater
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2021-03-27T13:09:35.460Z
Answers.Text: @Flater “Position” has a special meaning in chess. If we want a more generic meaning, why not use a more generic word like “situation”?
Answers.UserDisplayName: Brian Drake
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2021-03-23T20:19:34.860Z
Answers.LastActivityDate: 2021-03-23T20:19:34.860Z
Answers.UserDisplayName: ryanyuyu
Answers.Body: <p>It means that white is down a rook, and up a pawn compared to black. So black has one more rook than white, and white has one more pawn than black</p>
  
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2021-03-23T22:52:17.610Z
Answers.Text: As that statement is *only about material*, black could actually have the advantage anyway due to position.
Answers.UserDisplayName: Deduplicator
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2021-03-24T10:47:21.300Z
Answers.Text: @Deduplicator Both OP and this answer weren't talking about advantage, it is indeed only about material.
Answers.UserDisplayName: Mast
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2021-03-24T17:21:38.603Z
Answers.Text: @Deduplicator thanks for that note. As someone just starting out learning chess, that wasn't obvious to me. Makes sense, just had to reflect.
Answers.UserDisplayName: BruceWayne
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2021-03-23T10:54:54.363Z
Answers.LastActivityDate: 2021-03-23T10:54:54.363Z
Answers.UserDisplayName: Sinan Yaman
Body: <p>I am not a native English speaker and I'm learning to play online chess.
  I often find a sentence with this pattern.</p>
  <blockquote>
  <p>White is down a rook for a pawn.</p>
  </blockquote>
  <p>What does it mean? Could you elaborate on this sentence and make it much more understandable for me?</p>
  
Tags: <terminology>
Title: What does "White is down a rook for a pawn" mean?
ThreadText: # What does "White is down a rook for a pawn" mean?
  
  (Asked by: username_0 on 2021-03-23)
  
  I am not a native English speaker and I'm learning to play online chess.
  I often find a sentence with this pattern.
  
  > White is down a rook for a pawn.
  
  What does it mean? Could you elaborate on this sentence and make it much more understandable for me?
  
  **Tags:** terminology
  
  
  ---
  
  ## 2 answers
  
  ### Answer by username_5 on 2021-03-23. Score: 33 | Accepted answer
  
  It means that white is down a rook, and up a pawn compared to black. So black has one more rook than white, and white has one more pawn than black
  
  > **Comments:**
  > **username_2**: As that statement is *only about material*, black could actually have the advantage anyway due to position.  
  > **username_6**: @username_2 Both OP and this answer weren't talking about advantage, it is indeed only about material.  
  > **username_7**: @username_2 thanks for that note. As someone just starting out learning chess, that wasn't obvious to me. Makes sense, just had to reflect.  
  
  ---
  
  ### Answer by username_1 on 2021-03-23. Score: 15
  
  Another aspect of the phrase you provided is how English uses "up" and "down". A player is considered "up" if they have an advantage. Likewise, being "down" mean a player has the worse position or piece count.
  
  Because rooks are generally more valuable than pawns, whichever player still has the rook is in a better position and would be considered "up a rook for a pawn".
  
  Combining these two ideas, "white is down a rook for a pawn" means that white has the worse end of the trade involving a rook and pawn. This means that white has lost a rook and only captured a pawn as compensation.
  
  > **Comments:**
  > **username_2**: Is in a better position? All else being equal, sure. The position on the board might counter the material advantage, or even make it irrelevant.  
  > **username_1**: @username_2 "generally more valuable than pawns". Feel free to make an edit if you think my answer isn't precise enough or needs improvement.  
  > **username_3**: @username_1 Since you posted the answer so recently, we should leave it up to you to make edits. And yes, I think this answer could use an edit. The first paragraph only speaks generically about advantages and disadvantages. The second player uses the phrase “better position”. I suspect a *native* English speaker unfamiliar with chess could find this confusing, never mind a non-native speaker.  
  > **username_1**: @BrianDrake I don't think my answer needs clarification. Make/suggest the edit so I can see, and I'll keep it if it's good.  
  > **username_4**: @username_2: "position" here refers to _what the speaker is focusing on_, which is not necessarily the positioning of the pieces (though I concede the ambiguity in a chess context, this question and answer is more related to general English). If you have to pay twice as much rent than me, even though we live in similar housing, then _rent-wise_ you're in a worse position than me, _regardless_ of you having a higher income than me or not.  
  > **username_3**: @username_4 “Position” has a special meaning in chess. If we want a more generic meaning, why not use a more generic word like “situation”?  
  
  ---
  
  