Two Pieces or a rook and a pawn?

Personally in my matches, the rook always destroys the two pieces but that is just me.

It always depends on the position, but in the early stage of the game it is almost always a mistake to give up two developed pieces for a rook and a pawn. One reason is that you are usually exchanging off two of your developed minor pieces for a rook that isn't doing any thing much. Another reason is that the rooks are often the last pieces to get in the game. In the mean time, those pieces can run wild.

Towards the end of the game, those rooks have plenty of open files and ranks to maneuver on, and the rook and pawn can be stronger than the two minors

The 2 pieces are generally superior for strong players as these are more skilled in coordinating piece actions. A similar endgame is Q vs 3 minor pieces. Weaker players prefer to have the queen since they have trouble looking after the 3 pieces but GMs love the coordinated force of the 3 officers.

But you shouldn't be surprised when you see top players make the opposite choice. There are many, many exceptions and today's masters are very sensitive to the subtle nuances which accompany the asymmetrical material distribution.

I think the general consensus is that BBN -> Q and BNN ~ Q +/-

BNN is at least on par with the queen if not more.

Depends on stage of the game and development of the pieces.

'it depends' is not a complementary answer.

Yes the Rookster can take care of two to three minor pieces so never let a rook die or the game is over

'it depends' is the only good answer.

In general, rook + pawn is slightly better in an endgame, but 2 minors are much better in a middlegame. But even that is just a rule of thumb, everything depends on the position,

It depends on the two minors. Usually BB > RP, BN >~ RP and NN ~< RP

All the above. I'll add one qualifier: in the endgame if pawns are blocked and B+N are the 2, they can attack one pawn together. So the B+N side will have the option to trade down to a K&P endgame if she/he assesses it as winning.

There is an old game of Capablanca vs Lasker where Lasker defended and showed us how to defend w. rook as B+N. (as best I recall b;ocked and attack-able pawns -dont recall the number of pawns of each or which player was white-sorry).

Bill

Yes, I remember an OTB game of mine from a tournament about 2 years ago and I sacrificed my Queen for three minor pieces. I continued the game from there in a positional manner and went on to win a nice game

Related to the imbalance of 3 minors vs a Queen, I made a YouTube video a while ago on evaluating the imbalance of 2 Rooks vs a Queen. If anyone is interested, then feel free to check it out: