Why is this move a blunder?

Usually, 2 minor pieces are considered better than a rook.

But hardly a blunder? Or what am I missing. Mistake perhaps...

After Nxd4 your threat against the rook is no longer available.

after exd4, white will play dxc6, gaining a knight.

it also ruins your position if you take the pawn back on c6.

Thx but look again

Giving away a minor piece (bishop or knight) is definitely a blunder.

borovicka75's analysis is correct. After White plays 11. c3 ..., you lose a minor piece. Since your Knight is being attacked by the d5 pawn, it should have been moved to a safe square instead, such as 10 .... Ne7 or 10 .... Nd4.

In your variation, Black would play Nxd4 in response to Nxd4, not exd4. Nxd4 would be a blunder for White.

ah, I see I got that wrong there. Now we’re on the same page. It looks like #3 is the correct solution.

can you give us the chess game details? This way we can all analyze what is going on.

Here you go OP.

The thing that needs to be understood is this. Rook vs 2 pieces is in most cases worse than it looks for the side with the rook. It seems like 1 point of material difference, but it is not really in practice.

As the game progresses the power of a rook usually increases, as the pieces are traded off. This is only early middlegame, and in some positions even rook and 2 pawns are not enough for 2 pieces, if they are active enough.

Here not only that side with the rook doesn't have a single pawn compensation for 2 pieces, but the side with 2 pieces will probably win e5 as well.

Another thing. That 4.h6 move is not good. In this position If he plays Ng5, you can castle, and if he takes f7 pawn, you are already winning when you retake with the rook. Another example where 2 pieces for the rook (in this case a rook and a pawn) are better. Why? Well, because he spent a bunch of moves developing those 2 pieces, and then just traded them off for an inactive rook and the pawn. So in this position your h6 is completely unnecessary.

By the way, even if he played 3.Bc5 instead of 3. Nc3, still h6 is not good. It is too slow, but that is more high level than what you have asked, and is not the topic here, so I will not talk about it more. If you aim to improve your chess, you should explore some other options to deal with Ng5 move.

You should read back. The best continuation for white simply wins a piece.

Also, it's no surprise that Game Review Guy is talking nonsense. Again. He babbles about leaving a knight "vulnerable to being captured" (what kind of Frankenstein monster sentence is that?!), when taking it isn't even the best move.

Game review is awful beyond words.

Actually, yeah, I didn't even consider c3 as a response to Bd4. dxc6 is still very good and winning, because it wins that pawn in the end (and the rest of what I said in my message stands), but this is much easier to evaluate, and easier to understand.

The most black can do (material wise) after c3 is to have a pawn for a piece.

Yeah that c3 move is great.

I wasn't talking about your post, I was talking about Game Review.

Game review is bugged. Again. It is supposed to be based on the engine lines, but still Game Review ignores the c3 move, and babbles about the c6 knight being "vulnerable to being captured". See the diagram in the opening post.

I understand you weren't talking about my post. I agree about the game review (that analysis is more useful).

But, I didn't considered c3, which is really a nice and simple solution to not even allow this rook vs 2 minor pieces and a pawn imbalance, so I wanted to address that it is simpler to go for that, in addition to my previous post.

For the engine both are almost equal, but for a human, certainly c3 continuation is easier to understand.

f

Why after a knight takes a bishop, if he has to take back a pawn and then he eats his knight with the pawn.