Considering the brailliancies, First, Ne6 and the evaluation goes up to +4. H5!! this is a move that
makes the position equal again. But after some exploration, I found Qe2 brings the evaluation back to +4. Considering this, maybe Qe2 was also a bralliancy.
Looking at the analysis from the Garry Kasparov vs Anatoly Karpov, the two Karpov brilliant moves seem to have one thing in common... that is the brilliant moves are not greedy. Sacking a rook for a bishop could be brilliant. Defending with a pawn move instead of trying to take the queen with your rook could be brilliant. The engine knows these moves are better, but they are not obvious; they are counter intuitive.
Edit:
In this image, apparently sacking the rook to take a knight is marked as brilliant. Not because the engine didn't see it, but seemingly because it's counter intuitive.
The engine knows that the next move, pawn to h5 is best, but I'm not sure why you would need to push the queen back, or why the queen wouldn't take the pawn on h5. Taking the rook on e6 is obvious... but why isn't pawn to h5 just sacking your own pawn? Probably needs an escape route, but after h5, why doesn't queen just take the pawn on h5? Why is it better for the queen to run? IDK, but the brilliant moves seem to be counter intuitive.
I don’t understand how Kasparov didn’t follow the engines recommendation on move 30 and fork the king and queen to exchange his knight for Karpov’s rook. Since it’s Kasparov that we are talking about, I am sure that his analysis was deeper than the engines, but I don’t understand it.
I don’t understand how Kasparov didn’t follow the engines recommendation on move 30 and fork the king and queen to exchange his knight for Karpov’s rook. Since it’s Kasparov that we are talking about, I am sure that his analysis was deeper than the engines, but I don’t understand it.
Ne6+; Rxe6; Qxe6 lose to Qb7 but instead of Qxe6 just Qd4+; Qe5; Qxe5; Rxe5; Rxd8 transpose in an endgame with a pawn up but ok maybe Kasparov missed it or thought what he had done in the game was stronger.
no
It looks like brilliant moves these days aren't appearing as much as they do before, and also they are getting erased from games and being renamed as another status, so if you do spot a brilliant move send the game link or a picture of it and post it in the forum and tell us the move that was brilliant.
WHITE TO PLAY Find the winning move. This is a position from a game played decades before there were chess engines.
This was a game I played a while ago I think Rxe6 was pretty good.
R1xe6 was a really good move but the reason that would never show up as brilliant is because it's an immediate idea that takes place with Qg6. So computers would see it as being really good, if not the best move, immediately
Solve #243
It looks like brilliant moves these days aren't appearing as much as they do before, and also they are getting erased from games and being renamed as another status, so if you do spot a brilliant move send the game link or a picture of it and post it in the forum and tell us the move that was brilliant.
I feel as engines get stronger, 'brilliant' moves will begin to just be considered as the best move in the position, because the engine won't think it's that crazy for a human to find
I’ve had 2... the first was a useless pawn move that anyone would’ve made in that situation.. however my second one I was quite proud of... thanks to Tactics training! Had a tactic set up and opponent didn’t see it.. It was the kind of 'high profile' move you might expect to see tagged with !!.... rook sac followed by queen sac: 25: Rxe5!!
what about 19. ,,,, Qxd4 for Black?
yes yes i have to do a swab 
i stinks
i got brilliant move: https://www.chess.com/analysis/game/live/5261784039 move 19. idk why its brilliant though
never had a brilliant move. I guess Im just not that smart
same here
A brilliant move is as good or better than the “best move” except the computer didn’t see it. I think.
This is a game I just played. My opponent played a brilliant move and directly after that I played a brilliant move.... 2 brilliant moves in a row. Both moves are really obvious. So, I believe it pretty much means nothing. https://www.chess.com/analysis/game/live/9145670961
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.
Yeah it's very rare two brillancy in a row, it's especially amazing that it's game from a world championship match between Karpov and Kasparov in 1984 .