Are "Brilliant moves" in computer analysis just any decent sacrifice now? - Chess Forums - Page 14

francis20110 · 2020-05-08T23:35:15-07:00

Firstly I had never seen any in any of my games, I then went through a fair number of master games and never saw any there either!

manpuppy21

Mar 11, 2023

0

#261

I've never had one!

Optimissed

Mar 11, 2023

0

#262

ArthurEZiegler wrote:

Brilliant moves are rare, but out of the 87 games I played I have 8 brilliant moves! Interesting that some players rated much higher and have more games played may have only a single brilliant move. Perhaps because I play Daily chess where I have time to analyse and look for tricky moves.

For the same move in the same position, they are awarded to weaker players but not to stronger ones. Also there's a higher chance of getting one if you already made a bad mistake a few moves before.

Optimissed

Mar 11, 2023

0

#263

unbeatable209 wrote:

As far as I'm aware, a brilliant move constitutes a sacrifice which gives you a winning position. My first (and only recorded) brilliant move so far was Qxc1 in the picture below, winning a rook and forcing a queen trade. I don't think it necessarily means that the move you played is an extremely hard move to find as I found this one relatively easily as a 700 rapid player.

That isn't even a sacrifice and it's not very hard to find.

justbefair

Mar 11, 2023

0

#264

justbefair wrote:

They changed the definition of a "brilliant move" in 2021. (July 2021 in beta)

Here is the current definition:

Brilliant (!!) moves and Great Moves are always the best or nearly best move in the position, but are also special in some way. We replaced the old Brilliant algorithm with a simpler definition: a Brilliant move is when you find a good piece sacrifice. There are some other conditions, like you should not be in a bad position after a Brilliant move and you should not be completely winning even if you had not found the move. Also, we are more generous in defining a piece sacrifice for newer players, compared with those who are higher rated.

https://support.chess.com/article/2965-how-are-moves-classified-what-is-a-blunder-or-brilliant-and-etc

/ That explains why this thread started in 2020 and has a couple of pages of people saying they have had only one or have never had one and then all of the sudden, nearly everybody has them.

huddsblue

Mar 12, 2023

0

#265

They often award them for fairly simply sacrifices and mate in twos etc when one exclamation mark would do. I believe that two exclamation marks should only be awarded for truly exceptional moves.

LucidVanity

Mar 12, 2023

0

#266

Castling can also be a brilliant move apparently

Mr_Kocherga

Mar 12, 2023

0

#267

Let's congratulate each other.
By the way, I wanted to ask if they often do not give a ban

ArthurEZiegler

Mar 12, 2023

0

#268

So a brilliant move is defined as a good sacrifice and for the same position is more likely to be awarded a weaker rated player or someone recovering from a mistake? Well, I make a lot of mistakes and do a lot of analysis trying to work my way out of bad positions, so maybe that's why I have gotten several "brilliant" moves! But I'm not happy with that definition. I think a brilliant move should be one that's very difficult to see and that leads to a major improvement in your position. A queen sacrifice that gives you a mate the next move might be too easy to see to rate a "brilliant", perhaps something that requires looking several moves ahead would be really worthy. I also would like it if all "Brilliant" moves were judged purely on tactical considerations and not based on ratings of how you were doing in the game, that way there would be an equivalence between players that won them. You could not then say that they got a "brilliant !!" because of generosity towards a weaker or beginner player. Actually what I would like is a numeric rating for all "best" moves that shows the difficulty of finding it. I realize that really good players might see advantages in some moves not recognized by a computer.

Mr_Kocherga

Mar 13, 2023

0

#269

ArthurEZiegler написал:

So a brilliant move is defined as a good sacrifice and for the same position is more likely to be awarded a weaker rated player or someone recovering from a mistake? Well, I make a lot of mistakes and do a lot of analysis trying to work my way out of bad positions, so maybe that's why I have gotten several "brilliant" moves! But I'm not happy with that definition. I think a brilliant move should be one that's very difficult to see and that leads to a major improvement in your position. A queen sacrifice that gives you a mate the next move might be too easy to see to rate a "brilliant", perhaps something that requires looking several moves ahead would be really worthy. I also would like it if all "Brilliant" moves were judged purely on tactical considerations and not based on ratings of how you were doing in the game, that way there would be an equivalence between players that won them. You could not then say that they got a "brilliant !!" because of generosity towards a weaker or beginner player. Actually what I would like is a numeric rating for all "best" moves that shows the difficulty of finding it. I realize that really good players might see advantages in some moves not recognized by a computer.

like it is

CHRaclette

Mar 13, 2023

0

#270

.

mr_sam-urai

Mar 13, 2023

0

#271

I wonder if anyone has ever played en passant and it turns out to be a brilliant move.

nikx83

Mar 13, 2023

0

#272

bigswamper

Mar 13, 2023

0

#273

m_connors wrote:

They are very, very rare. I actually received one. In all of the moves from all of the games - one. And as some have noted, they have never received one.

The definition of Brilliant, I believe, is a best move hard to find. So, in my case, I think it was more luck than skill. Ok, all luck . . .

bros boasting about a brillient move

they arnt that rare

uqnu

Mar 25, 2023

0

#274

One requirement is that material is sacrificed

MagnusCarlson202020212022

Mar 26, 2023

0

#275

Yeah

GoldenArmorAlt

Apr 14, 2023

0

#276

2 years late but after a couple months got my first Brilliant move. https://www.chess.com/game/19bf42e0-db1e-11ed-9b57-73029701000f

Won the game by resignation. Not sure why it was brilliant but my accuracy in the game was lower than average but still fair

Zekkozen

Apr 14, 2023

0

#277

It's cool to get a brilliant move for a good sacrifice, but a lot of the time it either wont give you a brilliant move for a brilliant sacrifice, or it'll give you a brilliant move for a simple queen trade

feranard

Apr 14, 2023

0

#278

When the board gets stifled by excess positional play, sometimes a “good” or even decent sacrifice is needed.

Good sacrifices are one of the key characteristics of tactical play, aka Romantic Chess. It’s one of the things I wish to learn.

jetoba

Apr 15, 2023

0

#279

My only brilliant move was one that I do think deserved being a winning brilliancy but I was so enamored by it that when in the combination leading to it my opponent transposed two moves I overlooked a much simpler win that the transposition allowed (which would not have been deserving of a brilliancy).

I console myself by knowing that without the transposition the brilliancy was required to win, but I have to kick myself for missing a simple win.

PS K+N+P+P vs K+B with the Knight about to be kicked from defending a Pawn leaving the Bishop with lots of chances to sacrifice itself for the last Pawn. I intentionally aimed for the position and opted to sacrifice my Knight and move the Pawns so that one was attacked by the Bishop and the other was attacked by the King but if either one was taken then my King and remaining Pawn were positioned just right so that the other would Queen. I figured on winning a fairly easy K+Q vs K+B endgame.

DragonLimbo

May 19, 2023

0

#280

i got a brilliant by taking a pawn and if the other pawn takes back, I get mate with a queen and rook battery