I did an analysis were the computer didn´t see a backrank mate in one... Conclusion: if you are not a premium member, dont bother using it :)
Improved Computer Analysis

Sorry, But I really liked the old version better No bugs found in my analysis but the other 5 I am waiting on for around 2 days now? I really liked the older version!

I had a game sitting waiting for analysis for a few days. The game is no longer in my archive (free members don't get permanent storage i assume), but I can't analyze any other games as it says I am currently maxed out.
My analysis seems okay, although I'm not sure.
Here's the problem. I am rated 1907 while the person that beat me is rated a
2393. The computer is rated a 2500.
I'm not trying to be humorous here, but how do I know if the analysis is accurate
or not. If I knew that I wouldn't have made the errors in the first place. So
when the computer tells me I made 6 inaccuracies how do I know if
that is correct or a bug?
Thanks.

My analysis seems okay, although I'm not sure.
Here's the problem. I am rated 1907 while the person that beat me is rated a
2393. The computer is rated a 2500.
I'm not trying to be humorous here, but how do I know if the analysis is accurate
or not. If I knew that I wouldn't have made the errors in the first place. So
when the computer tells me I made 6 inaccuracies how do I know if
that is correct or a bug?
Thanks.
God forbid you analyze the game as well.....
That's not my point. What I am saying is I don't really comprehend the games over 2000, so it is not whether I analyze them(which anyone can do, God forbid) but
whether I can grasp them.

That's not my point. What I am saying is I don't really comprehend the games over 2000, so it is not whether I analyze them(which anyone can do, God forbid) but
whether I can grasp them.
thanks frank. a bug wouldn't be in the subtelty of the analysis, it would be something obvious to you (like "white is better" when black is about to checkmate, or something)
erik,
Thanks. I didn't know you meant something that obvious. I was thinking along the lines of distinguishing between inaccuracies and so forth.

I look forward to seeing the new analysis in action.
The old one at ~2200 level wasn't quite so useful for me personally, as it often saw less than I did in my analysis during the game, and frequently was outright wrong -- mostly because it evaluated the position strictly at the end of 6 moves, with no view forward on what might happen on, say, move 7 (where things might turn around 180 degrees).

try resubmitting your game analysis!
I tried to resublit it, but it said that I have already submitted this game and the analysis is processing.

I submitted a bunch of games yesterday and they are still "processing".
Is this a bug, or should >24 hours be expected with the backlog?

Ok I just got my 5 games through. I am currently going through the first one and something spotty happened.
My opponent blundered into a mate in 5. After Ne5?? it evaluates at -Mate in 5, and gives the line for mate. Then after I miss the mate in 5, it says that the move I played was a blunder, I should have played Qc3 evaluated at 6.44.
Something to this effect happened earlier too, however with the evaluation differences being less severe.

Ok I just got my 5 games through. I am currently going through the first one and something spotty happened.
My opponent blundered into a mate in 5. After Ne5?? it evaluates at -Mate in 5, and gives the line for mate. Then after I miss the mate in 5, it says that the move I played was a blunder, I should have played Qc3 evaluated at 6.44.
Something to this effect happened earlier too, however with the evaluation differences being less severe.
which game please?

http://www.chess.com/livechess/game.html?id=8841665 , move 23.
Also in this game analysis seems to have just stopped after the 16th move.
Nice! Does it give "verbose" analysis (á la Fritz), or just numerical evaluations?