A 100% accuracy score would be impossible because most games don't end like that.
Right, thus the need for a short game. If your opponent drops a piece but staggers on putting up the best fight in a bad situation, I guarantee that the accuracy will drop, possibly quite a lot. I was shocked by the 100% figure but I make no claim at perfection.
i have a 100 game
with just best moves
and book
No
Short games can easily have very high accuracy for obvious reasons, getting 100 accuracy shouldn't be a surprise. 
I just did it in a 10min game
Book moves, then best/great, and opponent resigned
https://www.chess.com/analysis/game/live/55186285519?tab=review
I don't think I can analyze it with more depth as I'm not diamond, but would be nice to see if that makes a change
I just did it in a 10min game
Book moves, then best/great, and opponent resigned
https://www.chess.com/analysis/game/live/55186285519?tab=review
I don't think I can analyze it with more depth as I'm not diamond, but would be nice to see if that makes a change
It did not
It was 100, now it says 99.9 for some reason. Look at the comments for proof:
I guess only playing book moves for more then 5 moves, then clocking out(no resigning I think) will gift the one hundo
Here's a game against the maximum chess.com computer level of which I had 100% accuracy and also includes no book moves and one brilliant move: https://www.chess.com/analysis/game/pgn/4PQuyEKEHc
(Though please note that the starting position was inspired from the famous match, "Fro Trommsdorff vs Emil Joseph Diemer (1973)".)
I don’t think that counts, they played a variant that lets you start with a set position
We all know the routine now: short game, blunder, resign. If any of these people who claimed 100% accuracy played on, the % rate would drop precipitously.
We all know the routine now: short game, blunder, resign. If any of these people who claimed 100% accuracy played on, the % rate would drop precipitously.
No you've got to keep making the "best" move's.
We all know the routine now: short game, blunder, resign. If any of these people who claimed 100% accuracy played on, the % rate would drop precipitously.
No you've got to keep making the "best" move's.
In many games of mine that I go over the computer's analysis, I find that my move is considered an "inaccuracy" when I think it's the fastest way to get my opponent to yield OR to drift the game as quickly as possible into a safe win. The way a computer assesses the accuracy is not how people think or play.
We all know the routine now: short game, blunder, resign. If any of these people who claimed 100% accuracy played on, the % rate would drop precipitously.
No you've got to keep making the "best" move's.
In many games of mine that I go over the computer's analysis, I find that my move is considered an "inaccuracy" when I think it's the fastest way to get my opponent to yield OR to drift the game as quickly as possible into a safe win. The way a computer assesses the accuracy is not how people think or play.
But that doesn't matter that's how humans beat computers. The best moves are yet to be discovered, but not impossible to make. As Capablanca once said I only think one move ahead and that's the best move for that particular position. Look at this game. When the best "move's" are discovered chess will be solved like checkers.
https://www.chessgames.com/perl/chessgame?gid=1497426
We all know the routine now: short game, blunder, resign. If any of these people who claimed 100% accuracy played on, the % rate would drop precipitously.
No you've got to keep making the "best" move's.
In many games of mine that I go over the computer's analysis, I find that my move is considered an "inaccuracy" when I think it's the fastest way to get my opponent to yield OR to drift the game as quickly as possible into a safe win. The way a computer assesses the accuracy is not how people think or play.
But that doesn't matter that's how humans beat computers. The best moves are yet to be discovered, but not impossible to make. As Capablanca once said I only think one move ahead and that's the best move for that particular position. Look at this game. When the best "move's" are discovered chess will be solved like checkers.
But the "best" move is judged by the computer that doesn't think yours are any good. Thus the score will drop.
A 100% accuracy score would be impossible because most games don't end like that.