Answers.Body: <p>Despite the difference in evaluation, e4 is not really a mistake. White is a rook ahead and will win this game anyway, provided that they don't blunder. Perhaps Nxc4 leads to a victory a few moves faster, almost within the engine's search horizon; that's probably why the engine prefers it over e4.</p>
  <p>However, even humans should prefer Nxc4. <strong>If you're this far ahead, you should exchange material; every exchange means less chance of threats from your opponent.</strong> A two-to-one advantage is much more decisive than an eight-to-seven. Black's knight is also more active than White's, that's another reason to exchange it. (That the engine indicates that <em>Black</em> should exchange knights after e4 is surprising, but it only underlines how bad Black's position actually is.)</p>
  <p>The advice about exchanging when you're ahead is of course not a rule set in stone. You should always keep in mind the (potential) activity of the exchanged pieces. And if you're only a pawn ahead, that doesn't need to be decisive enough for the win. Rook endgames and endgames with opposite bishops are notoriously drawish, and there are more examples out there, but you don't have to worry about them for now.</p>
  
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2021-02-12T07:53:16.477Z
Answers.Text: Should you really consider white a full rook ahead in this position?  I feel that the bishop at h8 is basically dead.  (But I do not play chess)
Answers.UserDisplayName: Taemyr
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2021-02-12T09:03:41.480Z
Answers.Text: @Taemyr: it's not at all dead, it isn't under attack and can safely go back to e5.
Answers.UserDisplayName: RemcoGerlich
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2021-02-12T18:48:25.950Z
Answers.Text: The engine isn't completely wrong. White exchanging knights isn't an exchange but wins a pawn outright as soon is the bishop is safe.
Answers.UserDisplayName: Joshua
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2021-02-12T21:09:39.077Z
Answers.Text: The engine is probably suggesting black exchange knights because it's an even exchange while allowing white to do so costs a pawn.
Answers.UserDisplayName: Loren Pechtel
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2021-02-13T03:13:34.197Z
Answers.Text: But why is trading with the *only* Knight the *best* option? I would rather keep a Knight and a Bishop than two Bishops. So I guess my question is, why is trading black's Knight with the Bishop not equally as good as trading with the Knight?
Answers.UserDisplayName: RoundHouse
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2021-02-11T19:47:24.450Z
Answers.LastActivityDate: 2021-02-11T19:47:24.450Z
Answers.UserDisplayName: Glorfindel
Answers.Body: <p>Strategy aside, Nxc4 also simply wins another (center!) pawn, while developing the light squared bishop to a nice square (assisting to continue to attack Black's kingside).</p>
  <p>On top of limiting Black's options for counterplay, as the other two answers correctly state.</p>
  
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2021-02-12T07:25:36.700Z
Answers.LastActivityDate: 2021-02-12T07:25:36.700Z
Answers.UserDisplayName: Annatar
Answers.Body: <p>e4 is still winning but not necessary because you are giving away the f4 square to Black's knight, which gives them some counterplay. There is no good reason to give f4 to your opponent.</p>
  
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2021-02-11T21:21:24.740Z
Answers.LastActivityDate: 2021-02-13T02:56:52.757Z
Answers.LastEditDate: 2021-02-13T02:56:52.757Z
Answers.UserDisplayName: pkr
Body: <p><a href="https://i.sstatic.net/1iolh.jpg" rel="nofollow noreferrer"><img src="https://i.sstatic.net/1iolh.jpg" alt="enter image description here" /></a></p>
  <p>Why is exchanging these knights the best move for white? I'm trying to understand how to get better with strategy and tactics.</p>
  
Comments.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Comments.CreationDate: 2021-02-12T13:41:49.340Z
Comments.Text: You're winning a pawn
Comments.UserDisplayName: David
Comments.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Comments.CreationDate: 2021-02-13T14:15:49.443Z
Comments.Text: subjectively/personally i find this like, even though an objectively good question (i upvoted), not a bad question but like a wrong question. or maybe a good question like better questions could be asked. i mean, white is already winning, and both moves are still winning for white, so who cares? i think it's better to ask about winning games that were lost/drawn or games that are about even and then there's particular move that swings the evaluation bar. i mean would you bother to continue analysing a game after a point where your opponent should've resigned already? of course in general...
Comments.UserDisplayName: BCLC
Comments.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Comments.CreationDate: 2021-02-13T14:17:57.503Z
Comments.Text: ...you'll benefit from any analysis or question. but i believe we must maximise our benefit given our limited time to play. some questions/analysis may have more benefit than others (eh just some unsolicited non-professional advice)
Comments.UserDisplayName: BCLC
Tags: <analysis><learning>
Title: Why is exchanging these knights the best move for white?
ThreadText: # Why is exchanging these knights the best move for white?
  
  (Asked by: username_0 on 2021-02-11)
  
  [![enter image description here](https://i.sstatic.net/1iolh.jpg)](https://i.sstatic.net/1iolh.jpg)
  
  Why is exchanging these knights the best move for white? I'm trying to understand how to get better with strategy and tactics.
  
  **Tags:** analysis, learning
  
  > **Comments:**
  > **username_1**: You're winning a pawn  
  > **username_2**: subjectively/personally i find this like, even though an objectively good question (i upvoted), not a bad question but like a wrong question. or maybe a good question like better questions could be asked. i mean, white is already winning, and both moves are still winning for white, so who cares? i think it's better to ask about winning games that were lost/drawn or games that are about even and then there's particular move that swings the evaluation bar. i mean would you bother to continue analysing a game after a point where your opponent should've resigned already? of course in general...  
  > **username_2**: ...you'll benefit from any analysis or question. but i believe we must maximise our benefit given our limited time to play. some questions/analysis may have more benefit than others (eh just some unsolicited non-professional advice)  
  
  ---
  
  ## 3 answers
  
  ### Answer by username_3 on 2021-02-11. Score: 13
  
  Despite the difference in evaluation, e4 is not really a mistake. White is a rook ahead and will win this game anyway, provided that they don't blunder. Perhaps Nxc4 leads to a victory a few moves faster, almost within the engine's search horizon; that's probably why the engine prefers it over e4.
  
  However, even humans should prefer Nxc4. **If you're this far ahead, you should exchange material; every exchange means less chance of threats from your opponent.** A two-to-one advantage is much more decisive than an eight-to-seven. Black's knight is also more active than White's, that's another reason to exchange it. (That the engine indicates that *Black* should exchange knights after e4 is surprising, but it only underlines how bad Black's position actually is.)
  
  The advice about exchanging when you're ahead is of course not a rule set in stone. You should always keep in mind the (potential) activity of the exchanged pieces. And if you're only a pawn ahead, that doesn't need to be decisive enough for the win. Rook endgames and endgames with opposite bishops are notoriously drawish, and there are more examples out there, but you don't have to worry about them for now.
  
  > **Comments:**
  > **username_4**: Should you really consider white a full rook ahead in this position?  I feel that the bishop at h8 is basically dead.  (But I do not play chess)  
  > **username_5**: @username_4: it's not at all dead, it isn't under attack and can safely go back to e5.  
  > **username_6**: The engine isn't completely wrong. White exchanging knights isn't an exchange but wins a pawn outright as soon is the bishop is safe.  
  > **username_7**: The engine is probably suggesting black exchange knights because it's an even exchange while allowing white to do so costs a pawn.  
  > **username_8**: But why is trading with the *only* Knight the *best* option? I would rather keep a Knight and a Bishop than two Bishops. So I guess my question is, why is trading black's Knight with the Bishop not equally as good as trading with the Knight?  
  
  ---
  
  ### Answer by username_9 on 2021-02-12. Score: 8
  
  Strategy aside, Nxc4 also simply wins another (center!) pawn, while developing the light squared bishop to a nice square (assisting to continue to attack Black's kingside).
  
  On top of limiting Black's options for counterplay, as the other two answers correctly state.
  
  
  ---
  
  ### Answer by username_10 on 2021-02-11. Score: 4
  
  e4 is still winning but not necessary because you are giving away the f4 square to Black's knight, which gives them some counterplay. There is no good reason to give f4 to your opponent.
  
  
  ---
  
  