Couple things, firstly, you're using chess.com's engines which are worse engines than basically everywhere else with low depth/hash and secondly their review annotation system isn't very accurate so don't put a whole lot of stock into it, and lastly engines often repeat moves until one move before threefold which they then make the "best" move. This is just a feature it has, as you can see at the end of what you said was a repetition, the engine ended suggested the same Re1. I bet if you played out the repetition moves and then played Re1 it would say it was the best move. Overall, it's not that big of a deal and in the end you should be evaluating the position based on the engine. You can't expect it to tell you everything.
Help understanding the analysis lines
Sort:
Jan 16, 2025
0
#3
Thanks for the feedback! I kind of figured it was more or less just a matter of not taking the engine too literally all the time for human moves. If not chess.com, what analysis engine do you recommend? Aren't they just using Stockfish? Or is it just because of the depth/hash? I could run stockfish locally even, but what is generally accepted as "better" than here for analysis? For a beginner is it even worth it to go beyond the low depth stuff anyway?
Thanks!
Chess.com just has poor free to play assistance and in general all of their features are worse than most other sites like lichess, chess.com is only good for its UI and interface. That being said, if you're going to analyze on chess.com make sure to switch to stockfish 17 (not lite) and make sure its of a good enough depth (30+ at least) to get an accurate read of the position. At your level it's not a huge deal, but definitely change those settings for better results in general. If you want to do opening prep for example I'd recommend using either lichess or some local engine like you suggested (i use chessbase but tbh it's archaic and an unnecessary purchase, just use something like encroissant, it's free and does basically the same thing).
So to sum, if you're going to use chess.com's analysis, make sure to use SF 17 and have it on a high enough depth to where it can give you an accurate read and isn't ridiculously switching evals. Also for the game review make sure it's on a high enough depth or the annotations will be misleading. But in general for your level I wouldn't worry about the other stuff I mentioned, just useful information to know incase you decide to get more seriously into chess/prep.
Engines are sometimes poking fun.
I might be misreading the analysis, but I was trying to analyze a recent game and I ended up in this position (I'm playing as white - white to move):
So I went Qxf7+ which means Kh8 is forced. The analysis then says Qf8+. Kh7. Qf7+. (which it hilariously labels as a "Great move!" despite it being the exact same position we were just in...) then Kh8.
Then it says Re1, but labels it as an inaccuracy with Qf8+ being the "best move"! But that's just pointlessly moving us closer to a draw by repetition... how is Re1 an inaccuracy? Why would I keep perpetually checking?
The first line tells me to play Re1 as the best move, right? But then if I do, it gives me the other screenshot calling it an inaccuracy saying I should've played Qf8+ again.
Surely in this position a draw isn't the best outcome? I can follow the analysis through to a win and understand generally what the lines are talking about, but I don't get the accuracy/inaccuracy/etc. sometimes. If I go back one move to where the king is forced to h8 (again) after the "Great Move!" then the analysis looks like this:
Same with the second line. Then the 3rd and 4th lines are essentially just more checking and dancing back and forth checking repeatedly from 'different' squares to avoid the repetition.
So what am I misreading here? Is Re1 not the best move that isn't just repeatedly checking with no end in sight? Why does it call it an inaccuracy then when I do it? Also, in general why does analysis seem to prefer the repeated 'check dancing'? What's the point of doing it multiple times before playing a different move (like Re1). Wouldn't I just go Re1 immediately after I took the pawn on f7? (Qxf7+. Kh8. Re1...)
I'm slowly getting my head around the analysis, but I'm starting to think sometimes you just have to ignore its criticisms a bit. Is that all I'm missing here? Or is there some genius to playing the checks repeatedly and forcing the king h8, h7, h8, h7, h8...