stop talking about this nonsence im just giving a recommendation to chess.com for an option in blitz is there a reason to do such dumb stuff here ??? so then all of u guys make a forum for urselves named "talking nonsence" there u can talk all use less stuff u doing here go away
this was on a other fourm and i think its mean anybody else with me??????
I cant find any brilliant moves according to the analysis when looking at your games.
@cheappotatox I analyzed your game at a higher depth and the engine is saying 86. Qc2 is brilliant but oddly enough the eval bar goes from -10 to 0.00, and then to -4 after 86... Kf3, which is strange, since with best play, the eval bar shouldn't have moved from 0.00
you may have not looked, but when i anlyzed it with stockfish for the 5th time, each of yo played a brailliant
Please behave in the chat, there are more then one way to say a fact.
said "lol wrong" but then proceeds to say exactly the same thing
He might have been gracious but given that I clearly explained what a brilliant move is and he still could not interpret it.I was more than correct to point to him that he should read my statement again.
Both of you are actually both pointing out the most important thing which makes a move "brilliant" - a move that engines would not find as quickly* as other solutions. Be it due to search depth (as hikarunaku said) or being completely unseen until played (What Jalaal was talking about) because of some "horizon effect" (wrong evaluation due to evaluating partial trees?), I think that this is not something to get too heated about!
Brilliant observation X)
Is there a way to find a brilliant move with a filter in your history? I had one or two that I remember but cant find the games.
i've never seen a brilliant move for or against me in the analysis. but also i dont analyse regularly and a free account so i can analyse only a couple of times in one day.
It seems that nowadays brilliant moves don't appear as much as they used to. What's more, it even seems that they are eliminating them from games that have already passed! For instance, one of the brilliancy that this guy shows us (Bxd2) was taken down... just take a look https://www.chess.com/analysis/game/live/3534963234
In fact, already all the games that this guy shows us have no brilliant move/s anymore
this could be true. i've seen hikaru, levy etc games in youtube but never seen brilliant moves.
Wow nobody can agree on the definition of a brilliant move!
Brilliant moves are very ambiguous, you can never tell. Chess.com engines sometimes make super obvious moves brilliant and good moves are just "best".
I have analyzed some games with brilliant moves. It seems to me that what they have in common is brilliant moves largely improve your engine evaluation in your favor and at the same time ALL the other possible moves you had would largely decrease it. Basically means that you found the only move that put you ahead when all the other possible moves would basically make you loose. On the contrary, when you find a best move there were other possible moves that are decent. Does this make sense?
The engine anaylizes the position so quick, that in fact, it misses some moves like simple opposition
in this thread everyone says the same thing and tells everyone else they're wrong
It seems that nowadays brilliant moves don't appear as much as they used to. What's more, it even seems that they are eliminating them from games that have already passed! For instance, one of the brilliancy that this guy shows us (Bxd2) was taken down... just take a look https://www.chess.com/analysis/game/live/3534963234
In fact, already all the games that this guy shows us have no brilliant move/s anymore
this could be true. i've seen hikaru, levy etc games in youtube but never seen brilliant moves.
That's probably because they know so much theory they've become computers
I have never seen this before! This game has two brillancy in a row (whites then blacks) 
: https://www.chess.com/analysis/game/pgn/57VtdgDZSW
I have never seen this before! This game has two brillancy in a row (whites then blacks) : https://www.chess.com/analysis/game/pgn/57VtdgDZSW
Thank you for sharing this one!!! This is amazingly brilliant.
Okay. Thanks for the explanation.