In my understanding, an excellent move must be better than best move but the frase "Best move" must be by definition the best move, even better than excellent. Which is it????
I have seen it post really bad moves as "excellent", whereas the analysis tool's "best move" is rarely a losing move, even if it isn't the best move. So ignore the adjective "excellent". It's meaningless because it doesn't even always mean "OK".
We do not need to recreate the wheel. As we all have seen there are some standard signs for chess analysis. These signs are simple and standard and every normal man understand it. The language must be like that. (Brilliant !!, Good !, Interesting !?, Dubious ?!, Mistake ?, Blunder ??) Any person or programmer who has decided to make Chess.com analytics had to use that but they preferred to use some dramatic phrases like BEST MOVE. You can see such problems still exist in the puzzles even after improvement of calculating the scores, because you must find what ever move the players have done which are not the unique. Sometimes you can change the first move with the second one. Two reasons I guessed. One is to use real played games as puzzle but puzzle must have one unique answer for the first move then it can be a few branches and all the branches include score. Second is that the computer has found the answer must calculate all the right answers then makes score based on that.
Therefore I suggest chess.com programmers to work with chess standards.
I've been saying for ages that they need better programming.
Obviously, but not the point. A slower win may be a safer win, so obviously not a blunder.
The chess.com analysis makes no sense. You cannot call everything a blunder (??). The logical way is to call a move that changes evaluation from draw to loss or back from won to draw a mistake (?) and to call a move that changes the evaluation from won to loss as a double mistake or blunder (??).
Usually there are several moves that do not change evaluation. Then there is no best move.
Brilliancy has to do with esthetic appeal. A brilliant move is usually the unique winning move that involves a sacrifice, but is a quiet move, i.e. no check or capture. Example of a brilliant move: 30 Ba3
https://www.chessgames.com/perl/chessgame?gid=1031957
a brilliant move is a move where it is the only good move in a position and you have to play a correct combination of moves to guarantee yourself an advantage. it has nothing to do with whether or not the engine saw the move or if it is better than the best move
wrong the brilliant move is a move that the engine had to go higher depth to see why it is so good wich means its better than the best move
a brilliant move is a move where it is the only good move in a position and you have to play a correct combination of moves to guarantee yourself an advantage. it has nothing to do with whether or not the engine saw the move or if it is better than the best move
wrong the brilliant move is a move that the engine had to go higher depth to see why it is so good wich means its better than the best move
That's just what some people think; not an established fact. My own opinion is that "brilliant move" is awarded randomly. Best move is often what it says but not usually, because the computer isn't set for deep analysis. An excellent move may be poor and a good move could be the losing move.
I don't like it when it says "You could've checkmated faster" I don't care at least I checkmate.
Excellent moves are moves that are almost as good as the best move, they are not better.
every day i play chess with computer, i gets 6 or 7 best moves
Can you please explain the difference between all the moves, such as blunder, mistake, inaccuracy, missed, good, great, and brilliant moves?
An excellent move is a nice move that is not as good as a best move.
Think of an "excellent move" as an almost as good alternative to a "best move"
A brilliant move it is hard Deven a computer can not see it ef it does not have more depth nobody can ever get unless if you are a good player
Not true. Years ago some user came up with this nonsense, and even though it's obviously nonsense, it somehow lives and spreads like a virus.
The real definition: a brilliant move is a "sacrifice that is good". 99% of the time it's an obvious short-term sacrifice that's very easy to find.
A brilliant move is only brilliant when you can explain it.
An objective brilliant move that you cannot explain is in fact a blunder to this player. Like when you hang a piece by accident but it turned out to be good somehow.
In my understanding, an excellent move must be better than best move but the frase "Best move" must be by definition the best move, even better than excellent. Which is it????
The analysis is complete bollox. If you take the time to actually analyze your game on your own or with engine assistance you will find moves that are called inaccurate, good, or even blunder when your analysis concludes that it was the best move. Conversely, you will see moves called best that turn out to be stinkers upon further analysis. Also, engines are dumb and have no concept of strategy (except maybe Alpha Zero and Leela) I wouldn't even use the feature to be completely honest with you, it's a waste of time. It is wrong there are people better than the analysis
In my understanding, an excellent move must be better than best move but the frase "Best move" must be by definition the best move, even better than excellent. Which is it????
The analysis is complete bollox. If you take the time to actually analyze your game on your own or with engine assistance you will find moves that are called inaccurate, good, or even blunder when your analysis concludes that it was the best move. Conversely, you will see moves called best that turn out to be stinkers upon further analysis. Also, engines are dumb and have no concept of strategy (except maybe Alpha Zero and Leela) I wouldn't even use the feature to be completely honest with you, it's a waste of time.
if engines like stockfish are bad then beat stockfish, and your analysis could be wrong when the computers are right, so stop talking like youre an experienced chess player when all of the top players disagree with you