chess question for advanced chessnigs: 2 major pieces for 1 pawn + rook exchange?

[sonatine]

Example:



So, black bishop takes pawn at f2 for check, rook takes, knight takes rook, king takes knight.

Bishop & knight = 6 points
Rook + pawn = 6 points

At what point does this sacrifice make more sense? At what point does depriving someone of the strength of 2 rooks become most advantageous? What texture board favors this sort of exchange?

Gut instinct is this makes sense if you feel the game is going to be decided by a passed pawn, aka the asymmetrical defensive strength of a pair of rooks vs a passed pawn threat might be worth mitigating early on, then slashing and burning through center control, mobilizing the kind, and marching.

I get the feeling this is one of those things that a lot of 19th century texts expounded on and computers eventually solved, but Ive never heard much said about it, and I have watched tons of high level games where this exchange is avoided...

[DJ_Chaps]

[Muck Ficon]

The correct answer is to activate your bishops.

[matos]

If you make this exchange in the above position, you now have no pieces developed, so white looks to be far ahead. There are probably instances in if you have more pieces developed and can develop a good threat on the king this exchange makes sense. This question is probably better asked on a chess forum though...

[sonatine]

obv but we have a few chess types in the mix here.

the above jpg scenario simply demonstrates the F2 exchange dynamics, there is virtually no real development but hopefully the scenarios are elaborated on enough in text to provide some depth/variation.

[RegGaymer]

There doesn't seem to be any advantage in this exchange. Plus they're called minor pieces, not major.

[4Dragons]

Example:



So, black bishop takes pawn at f2 for check, rook takes, knight takes rook, king takes knight.

Bishop & knight = 6 points
Rook + pawn = 6 points

At what point does this sacrifice make more sense? At what point does depriving someone of the strength of 2 rooks become most advantageous? What texture board favors this sort of exchange?

Gut instinct is this makes sense if you feel the game is going to be decided by a passed pawn, aka the asymmetrical defensive strength of a pair of rooks vs a passed pawn threat might be worth mitigating early on, then slashing and burning through center control, mobilizing the kind, and marching.

I get the feeling this is one of those things that a lot of 19th century texts expounded on and computers eventually solved, but Ive never heard much said about it, and I have watched tons of high level games where this exchange is avoided...

[GrenadaRoger]

no trade on f2...black trades two active pieces for a semi-developed rook and a undeveloped pawn plus opens a file for the remaining white rook to use; time loss results

anyway, to answer your question, if the pawn you were obtaining was advanced past the 4th rank + the rook out on the board + the bishop traded off was hemmed in by pawns, then such a trade makes sense...or perhaps if the trade created an isolated pawn or other pawn structure weakness, it's better

in the position given i believe it is better for black to finishing developing, and if he is spoiling for a fight, castle queen side to unbalance the position and advance pawns on the king side to create an attack, or even a fishing pole sortie with H5 right now