New Game review - Chess.com badgering paying users into upgrading to diamond

Yes, it's a hit and miss. It's probably very good when you make a big mistake, blunder a piece, miss a tactic, etc. in other words when it's simple enough to understand it without any commentary. In all other cases, small mistakes and inaccuracies, in complex positions, when there's a lot of good moves, especially when they are good from human-style play against engine play, those explanations are not gonna do a lot of good. 

What I would like is, if the "Show Line" feature was clickable and browsable in the style of the Opening Explorer tree. That would make it easy to see ALL the moves that the engine suggests and explore the lines comfortably. 

Is there anyway I can turn this off? It's actually annoying me.. I just want to use the old Report function instead

No, you can't turn it off. The only members that don't get it are basic members and they will soon 

Goodbye good ol' Report function😂

Sucks to pay for something and have it vanish. I guess they thought the Game Review would be an upgrade, but it's definitely not. At least not yet.

Thanks for the reply. That's a pity. But I am sure it's getting changes so hope all will be fine.

I don't begrudge the analysis feature.  I do think calling going from the Report to the Review an upgrade is pushing the envelope somewhat.  I find the difference yet one more unnecessary and unasked-for annoyance, posing as an upgrade for commercial reasons. 

I only use the computer analysis tool for a quick blunder-check in blitz games, not even to see why I lose as that's generally pretty obvious to me but to expose my winning games for what they usually are: either opponents' mistakes or their failure to capitalize on my mistakes -so they're really lessons in reality and humility. 

Claiming such analysis, particularly one that basically gives lines and portents to be educational, whether in Report (simple) or Review (annoying) is a valuable asset seems counterproductive to me since it steers players away from the very one thing that is most productive for improvement (if that's one's goal) -- self analysis (which leads to a degree of understanding vs the superficiality of computer lines).

If you liked it too much, it's a bummer. However, for me, I found something that I like even more. After the game, it's the Game Review where I only look at moves statistics and accuracy, gasp in despair and head over to the analysis tab, where I switch on the Charts with Score graph. That way, everything is on one screen, honestly, I'm happy, don't miss the old report, don't care about new game review😂

There are multiple changes. The move classification system and accuracy algorithms were changed as part of the update, in addition to move explanations. I'm sure there were a number of other more minor changes as well 

Which alters nothing.

I agree, the playing pool is much interior to chess.com and I use the puzzles on both sites.

Chess Tempo puzzles just seem better to me... I've no idea why.

Anyway, I got diamond for the game report and lessons. Now, the game report is geared towards beginners (I am one, but you know what I mean). I do self-analysis anyway now, but... 

My opponent(black) blundered mate in 1, this is what the review had to say!

WHAT

If you mean this game, https://www.chess.com/analysis/game/live/29438412277, white is almost +8, which is essentially winning. While I personally agree that it's at least a mistake, when one side has a winning evaluation, the site apparently decided that a move that's still losing can be considered good. 

Hopefully that's something they'll look at changing as they improve the algorithm, because it is weird.

For comparison, dropping my advantage from +7.5 to +6.0 was judged a blunder on another site.

Yeah, a 2.0 decrease for me is normally a blunder, unless it doesn't change the overall evaluation from winning, where I might mark it as an inaccuracy or mistake.

Yeah... I think it should try to favour the moves that damage control the best. I lost a game today where I was +6.

It seems to me that missing the fastest win is an inaccuracy, but going from a win to equality is a blunder.

I had a game several months back that was completely winning and I made an unnecessary queen sac because it was cool. The computer hated it. I propose that whenever the cartoon guy advises you not to do such a thing, that he be wearing a wet blanket.