“inaccuracy” vs. “mistake”
Sort:
calbitt5750
Oct 12, 2022
0
#1
What’s the difference?
Ones bad the other is worse
Mistakes / Blunders are always bad, and generally result in a loss of major material.
Inaccuracies usually mean you’ve just lessened your position somewhat against your opponent. Well, in the mind of the chess-bot, anyway.
UNLESS, of course, you’re Magnus. Has anyone ever studied his games? He’ll purposely insert these crazy inaccuracies at just the opportune moment to flummox a Nepo, a Caruana, a Vishy, etc...
Inaccuracies usually mean you’ve just lessened your position somewhat against your opponent. Well, in the mind of the chess-bot, anyway.
UNLESS, of course, you’re Magnus. Has anyone ever studied his games? He’ll purposely insert these crazy inaccuracies at just the opportune moment to flummox a Nepo, a Caruana, a Vishy, etc...
@1
Inaccuracies do not exist.
A move either changes the game state or it does not.
If a move changes the game state, then it is a mistake.
If a move does not change the game state, then it is not inaccurate.
tygxc wrote:
@1
Inaccuracies do not exist.
A move either changes the game state or it does not.
If a move changes the game state, then it is a mistake.
If a move does not change the game state, then it is not inaccurate.
Not only is this nonsense, it is also a deliberate misinformation of other players. This is not how chess.com uses those terms. Or any other chess website. Or any engine. Or any human except yourself.
@7
That is sense and how chess.com should use it, the way chess.com uses those terms is nonsense.
Strong humans treat it like that, e.g. GM dr. Hübner:
'I have attached question marks to the moves which change a winning position into a drawn game, or a drawn position into a losing one, according to my judgment; a move which changes a winning game into a losing one deserves two question marks ...
I have distributed question marks in brackets to moves which are obviously inaccurate and significantly increase the difficulty of the player's task ...
There are no exclamation marks, as they serve no useful purpose. The best move should be mentioned in the analysis in any case; an exclamation mark can only serve to indicate the personal excitement of the commentator.'
Oct 13, 2022
0
#7
calbitt5750 wrote:
What’s the difference?
For the definition used here: https://support.chess.com/article/2965-how-are-moves-classified-what-is-a-blunder-or-brilliant-and-etc
Overall, how one classifies a move is somewhat subjective.
@10
"Dr. Robert Hubner had a somewhat unique way of seeing things" ++ Yes, he was scientific.
"the depth of his analysis" ++ Yes, all these !? and ?! are nonsense: a move is either good or bad. If you do not know, then you should analyse deeper and find it out instead of a meaningless !? or ?!
"Maybe in that too he was ahead of his time." ++ Also Kasparov analysed the same way.
It's like any sport or profession. An inaccuracy is like kicking the ball toward a player instead of to the space in front of him. A mistake is to pass it to another player. A blunder is to kick it to an opponent.
Oct 13, 2022
0
#10
Thanks everybody. According to the official chess.com explanation, both reduce the chance of winning, a mistake twice as much. Inaccuracy is suboptimal positionally at least. Mistake may lose material, maybe survivable. Blunder is a torpedo below the water line.
