Chess.com suggestion?
Sort:
I feel like we should get the chance to make arguments against the AI when we see our moves as better than what they are suggesting. For example, if I thought that a certain move the AI suggested would go nowhere, because the person I'm playing isn't the AI, I'd offer my feedback on why I didn't make their move, and why I saw the move I was making as the better one. This system of Justification might make Game Review more dynamic, or fun. This would allow you to see *why* the AI thought a certain way, or why * you* thought a certain way.
Maybe this is already a feature, and I'm not a premium user, and it shows. You can tell me if Premium has that as part of their "Personal Chess Coach" part of the ad.
Oct 22, 2023
0
#2
drzlfrank wrote:
I feel like we should get the chance to make arguments against the AI when we see our moves as better than what they are suggesting. For example, if I thought that a certain move the AI suggested would go nowhere, because the person I'm playing isn't the AI, I'd offer my feedback on why I didn't make their move, and why I saw the move I was making as the better one. This system of Justification might make Game Review more dynamic, or fun. This would allow you to see *why* the AI thought a certain way, or why * you* thought a certain way. Maybe this is already a feature, and I'm not a premium user, and it shows. You can tell me if Premium has that as part of their "Personal Chess Coach" part of the ad.
The engine is providing an objective evaluation of the position based on assumed best play. In most cases, you can't rely on your opponent not being able to see an idea and it's refutation.
I know there's some work around coach improvements, but what you're describing isn't something that's really possible.
If your move was still evaluated as a decent move, just not best, then your option was probably good enough in the situation, but it doesn't necessarily make it better from an engine standpoint.