Are "Brilliant moves" in computer analysis just any decent sacrifice now?

https://www.chess.com/analysis/game/live/36337859937?tab=review

Here is a brilliant move I got yesterday. The piece I captured was a bishop. Quite surprising that such a simple "in-between" move got a brilliant rating by the engine!

I'll give you a tip to get brilliant moves(I guess) from which I got both my brilliant moves- 

I exchanged a knight for 2 pawns...... that got me brilliant moves 

Brilliant moves are not hard to find or counter-intuitive in any meaningful sense and they can be obvious. They are usually "best" moves. The word "brilliant" is being used to conjour up a sense of excitement among beginners, who often can't tell whether a move is good or why it's played. It could be thought of as a psychological device to get them interested in these things but it probably isn't a good one, because they spend more time getting excited about "brilliant moves", which are hardly ever brilliant and the chances are they'll never realise that, so it (the artificial device of arousing interest by awarding "brilliant moves") may be bad for their chess education, rather than good.

Optimissed I really hate to break it to u, but u seem to be really salty over not getting brilliant moves. U have been replying to everything in this thread for the past year lol

i do "great" moves that say its the only good move

Basically, they're meant to encourage weaker players and they don't reflect brilliance. I do get them occasionally but get more "great moves". It's always very embarrassing to get either of them, because it means you're being patronised by a machine.

I hate to break it to you.

I have a feeling that "brilliant" and "great" moves are becoming more common......never used to see them. I am not improving thats for sure.

They only started it less than a year ago. Maybe last Summer. I saw someone post about it, said they'd got one and it was a good move but the next one posted about wasn't brilliant ofr anything like that. Then began to notice a pattern .... weaker players more likely to get them and even more likely after they've blundered in a game. I got two or three and they were for run of the mill moves, like if there was no other decent move but the correct move wasn't hard to find. Then stopped getting them but got a few "greats" instead. "Greats" tend to be "only moves". Like, if you play anything else, you lose. "Brilliants" seem more random than that.

That's very interesting. The problem is that after Ke3, which is the only possible move, 9. Nd5 obviously just wins a pawn for black and the game is far from over. The engine must also show how black wins after the only other possibly correct ninth move by white, which is to support the knight by Ne2.

This means that in order for 6. ...Nxf2 to be a brilliant move, black has to calculate two lines that are much more difficult that the line followed in the game. This includes the line that the analysis tool "didn't bother" to show.

Since you would, no doubt, admit to not calculating either of these lines, the very idea of "brilliant moves" is complete therefore nonsense! It should be "Good Guess" instead!

They should at least add another type of move that matches the older brilliant move so as to not make the new brilliant move too banal

There's not much difference, if any.

The problem is that the analysis tool isn't even capable of calculating a really brilliant move. It's just a carrot for beginners, to counteract the fact that they're always getting "Blunder". Makes them happier to play on here.

I feel like like your somewhat jealous that more players are getting “brilliant” moves as compared to you. Ur obsession with this topic clearly shows your inability to allow actually process what other people are doing. Many people on here come in with questions about their “brilliant” moves and your response isn’t to tell them how their move was good or bad. Instead, being the narcissist you are, you immediately reply to them by stating that brilliant moves are only for “beginners” and that they aren’t even remotely interesting. I remember talking to you on here multiple months ago about one of my “brilliant” moves (Before the brilliant move update a while back), and you couldn’t even analyze it properly before making some fail of an attempt to try to refute the engine. You have been nonstop replying to every single comment. Most of the time, within hours. 

To sum things up,

either actually try to help newer players understand the moves they make, or don’t talk in this thread. No one likes a egotistical player who attempts to bring people down. Currently, that’s exactly what you are doing. People like you are the ones that make chess less enjoyable. 

i agree with this chad

Lol thanks

I really hate ppl who are constantly trying to bring others down

If u need an example, here’s one of your previous comments

here, you basically said :

Yeah so here’s a bunch of reasons the engine was not calculating correctly, blah blah blah. So yeah, in conclusion, you got lucky and ur move isn’t even remotely special. 

I really can’t talk about the lines themselves considering I’m not insanely good at chess, but what I can say is that trying to stop newer players from even appreciating the “brilliant”  moves they occasionally make is pretty scum of you. 

i make a lot of brilliant moves

If you didn't understand a word of what I wrote, why did you make a judgement? I reported you for abuse. Please don't do it again. Thanks.