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

The question to ask is what does giving people a false impression of their play achieve? Does it help them become better players? What we all need is a realistic assessment and telling someone that a move they made completely by chance is brilliant isn't going to make a good player out of them, is it? So your opinion and my opinion of how best to encourage chess players differs. When you get people being abusive, just because their opinion differs, that will do far more to discourage players from even being here. That's why I reported you.

Just because I hurt your precious feelings doesn’t mean that it’s abuse lol. 

Also I don’t think what I’m stating is an opinion…

If you are constantly trying to bring down other players instead of giving them actual constructive advice, then you are indeed worse than scum

Your entire idea of brilliant moves is that they aren’t valid which actually is an opinion. I’m not attacking you because your opinion differs, I’m attacking you because that’s basically what you are doing to every single person that has replied in this thread.

If your only purpose in this thread is to invalidate people as chess players, then you don’t deserve to be in this thread. You are attempting to group yourself with every single other person here by saying that my “attacks” on you along with all other chess players here when in reality, you are the one that is dragging everyone down with you, not me. For the past 6 months, I get constant notifications from this thread and most of the time, it is just you attacking other people in this thread and invalidating the games that they just worked up enough courage to share. 

Saying the moves they make don’t mean anything is the equivalent of calling them a bad player. Your argument of using the telling them their moves aren’t valid to motivate them doesn’t make sense. You stated yourself that brilliant moves don’t necessarily make them good players. This is true, however the entire point of this thread is to discuss brilliant moves and frequencies. This discussion will obviously lead to a deeper understanding of that position thereby making them a better player. You obviously don’t seem to understand that and continue to push your your only argument that is brilliant moves aren’t valid in an effort to make them a better player. All you are accomplishing is demotivating them. Maybe brilliant moves they aren’t as great as they used to be, but keep in mind they are all still good moves one way or another. If you spent half of the time you did whining in this thread about how everyone’s brilliant moves aren’t valid and replacing all that time with actually explaining why everyone made (Brilliant moves/decent moves) one way or another, then maybe you could have actually accomplished something in this thread instead of just looking like a douche.

But hey, you don’t need to listen to my opinion 🥱 After all, the cold truth has clearly hurt you feelings enough to report me for “abusing” you. Kind of reminds me of the 8 year olds who report everyone when they have lost a match in pretty much any video game. 

You are entitled to you own opinions, just don’t drag others down with you 😎 

You were abusive. That is why it's abuse. Don't do it .... it isn't anything to do with feelings. It's to do with proper behaviour. Do you think you'd say something like that face to face to someone? What could happen to you if you did? Reported again.

When you use childish vernacular like "whining", "douche" and "scum" .... I have no idea what it all means but it seems like abuse, although I don't follow the latest, abusive ways .... it's unpleasant and it will put others off from contributing. Don't accuse others of acting like they're 8 when your entire approach to differences of opinion is that of a bad-mannered 8-year-old. Also, please explain why a move is brilliant, when the person who played it didn't even see the two main lines, let alone analyse them?

Keep whining about it

also a move can be brilliant even if the person didn’t completely follow through with the line. The point of a brilliant move is that it involves some creative tactic. It doesn’t have to be super great, sometimes it can be something as simple as a queen rook battery for a backrank checkmate. Other times it’s more complex. People come to these threads usually to discuss the more complex moves. Your deflation approach to everything is not even remotely progressive in this thread.

Also if you have no idea what it means, then what makes you think it’s abuse? Your approach to supportive chess analysis is more like trying to teach someone to learn an instrument by putting them in front of a concerto hall to perform in front of everyone. 

I can’t find where anyone invited you into this discussion  💀 

I'd like that. Not now, 1:20 am and tired.
I didn't know there were so many trolls still around: that's being honest. There are two kinds of trolls ... through ignorance and through mental infirmity. It can be difficult to tell.

Anyways 🥱 I think I have made my point clear.  Helping people analyze there moves regardless of which type of move is much more beneficial to this thread as a whole as compared to constantly trying to put people down by invalidating their chess games. I could honestly care less about your “feelings”. As for meeting you in person, based off of how you have CONSISTENTLY responded to every single post asking for constructive advice with your own invalidations, I would not hesitate to say anything to the face of a person who acts as egotistical as you. I think this argument is pretty much wrapped up considering in your latest responses, you are desperately hoping to win this argument in some way considering your main arguments have completely fallen. Now addressing your “unpleasant” feeling, Chances are, your “unpleasant” feelings are probably coming from the fact that you lost this argument the second I decided to reply to you after I got fed up with your behavior. You have dropped every single argument that you have presented previously and quite frankly, your only response to anything I have said is that brilliant moves aren’t necessary going to make people better at chess. I have very clearly responded to your ONLY argument by saying that it’s the analysis that helps people learn (Which you aren’t even remotely providing to people that request your help) No matter how much you try to use fancy “vernacular”, your arguments and logical reasoning are full of holes that can be revealed fairly easily. 
Continue replying to this thread as you normally do, I can’t convince someone who doesn’t even understand what his own viewpoints are. What I can do and successfully did was show you a glimpse of how many people in this thread feel about you. 
I’m done arguing now, my point has been made very clear. I’m tired of trying to drill this idea into your skull but maybe one day, you will be able to reflect on how you interact with people in this community…

I’m not going to reply to you anymore, Goodbye.

Incidentally, I'm telling the truth about "brilliant moves" being just a carrot to compensate for all the times weak players get told they've blundered because in my opinion, if people are serious about learning the game rather than being like the ones who've just been commenting here, who are just full of their own opinions, it's important that they should understand the processes involved here. Chess when analysed by engines is much less forgiving than chess at a club where a beginner might play a friendly and helpful person who doesn't constantly bombard them with info about how every move they play is a blunder. Here, it's all about inaccuracies and the engine really is badly designed. It tells people they've made mistakes or inaccuracies when they haven't and it tells people they've made great moves and brilliant moves when they haven't, to compensate for all the negative stuff. The puzzles are probably bad for people's chess rather than good because unless you follow the line that the engine or database likes, that's given as wrong, whereas it might still be a winning move but one move slower. So it damages people's ability to work out tactics because even among good players, different ones have different ideas about how to play and what kind of moves to make. I'm making these comments to help chess.com get it right. It's very easy to hire a "coach" who has dodgy ideas about how people learn best, and to believe that person because, after all, you're paying him.

Sorry but I didn't read this, except the last sentence. You didn't have anything positive to say previously. I didn't set out to talk to you but to others who are genuinely concerned about what things like brilliant moves really mean. Anyway thanks for allowing me to clarify. Well, forcing me to. Thankyou also for growing up a bit and telling me you won't reply.

I 've had 2 brilliant moves.

No you don’t. 🤷‍♀️ When was the last game with a brilliant move? Not in the last 10.

I never got one until they updated the analysis system, but since then, i've gotten at least 6-8.

I now have 3

I had this one in an OTB game yesterday - I've had a couple in such games. And a number online, but I have played a lot of games.

I actually had a brilliant move in here: https://www.chess.com/analysis/game/live/42801626759?tab=review

They changed the definition of a "brilliant move" late last year. (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.