I was playing a game on lichess against a computer in a easy draw position (famous tactic and just for fun), and chess.com considered the only legal move to be a great move when it is not even great?
Screenshot:
It was not the only legal move.
exd7 is also legal.
I was playing a game on lichess against a computer in a easy draw position (famous tactic and just for fun), and chess.com considered the only legal move to be a great move when it is not even great?
Screenshot:
I don't know if the computer needs to go all the way out to depth=100 to see the draw but that makes sense since a threefold repetition can probably be avoided.
/ So I guess it might have been a great move after all.
there are only 2. thats wahat i mean
there are only 2. thats wahat i mean
So now you at least have to agree that it was legitimately called a great move.
Chess.com analysis is sometimes stupid. Plus, if you take the rook you lose and you called the only good move "great". I'm talking to the computer
Chess.com analysis is sometimes stupid. Plus, if you take the rook you lose and you called the only good move "great". I'm talking to the computer
hmm idk
I was playing a game on lichess against a computer in a easy draw position (famous tactic and just for fun), and chess.com considered the only legal move to be a great move when it is not even great?
Screenshot:
I take the "great move" label with a grain of salt. I analyze most of my games and sometimes the computer says "great move" for a forced move. Sometimes the computer says its own move is a "great move!'
I was playing a game on lichess against a computer in a easy draw position (famous tactic and just for fun), and chess.com considered the only legal move to be a great move when it is not even great?
Screenshot: