It's not a missed win because you have missed a mate/winning sequence. Sometimes it's just because you had a really strong attack, that would at least open a minor piece of advantage.
In this case, you missed d pawn takes e4. Forking bishop and queen with a pawn.
It considers a missed win because this gave the chance to bring a deffensor, which he did with Nc3.
After the trades, you will have a much stronger position to play.
A good example of why the new terminology chess.com added is stupid. There was already a term for when your move is much worse than the computer's first choice, a "blunder". No one really understands how the computer is distinguishing between a "missed win" and a "blunder". I wouldn't pay any attention to it. Look ONLY at what the computer calls "inaccuracies" (minor mistakes, only spend time if your curious); "mistakes" -- significant mistakes that can often be learned from. Good to at least look at them; and "blunders" very serious mistakes. "Blunders" are always useful to look at, although sometimes the computer's thinking might be too hard for you to decipher without help.
So "missed win" doesn't mean what I thought: failing to catch an immediate path to victory. It is not qualitatively different than a blunder, just a little worse numerically according to the scoring engine? I guess I will think of them as "superblunders" going forward.
In this case, the fianchetto on Bb7 was not as important as I'd believed and capturing with pawn, forking the queen/bishop, and forcing the trade would've been preferable.
Thanks for explaining!
Ah. So there is a "win" but this does not necessarily mean checkmate, or even an immediate capture! Understood.
Thanks for sketching that out for me. I sure do like how this looks
(following your exact scenario up to Qd3)
You were considered to be winning before that (evaluation of -3.78 with the best move played, "Black is winning"). However, after your move, it was considered drawish, though you still had the lead (evaluation -0.81, "Black has the advantage"). With best play in each line, you went from winning to drawing; therefore, it was a "missed win."
if you mouse over you see what it means. Here, missed win means a significant advantage, some material, or actual winning sequence was missed. A blunder is similar but the opposite: you lose material, position, or could get mated (sometimes, its mate in 20 or so) due to your move. In both cases you made a bad choice vs the ideal move.
So "missed win" doesn't mean what I thought: failing to catch an immediate path to victory. It is not qualitatively different than a blunder, just a little worse numerically according to the scoring engine? I guess I will think of them as "superblunders" going forward.
In this case, the fianchetto on Bb7 was not as important as I'd believed and capturing with pawn, forking the queen/bishop, and forcing the trade would've been preferable.
Thanks for explaining!
A missed win means there is a concrete forced sequence of moves that cannot be prevented by the opponent- in this case it is quite long but the computer does not see a refutation so that is why it gives it as a missed win for you, it goes something like this Bxe4 but then Nxe4,Qxe4, Bb7, Qg4 (only move as the g2 pawn and h1 rook fall). Then you have Bf6 attacking the rook on a1, so Ra2 Qd3 attacking the knight on b1 and stopping him from castling short- so he cannot castle has multiple weaknesses and then after Nc6 Nf3 you 0-0-0 and he is busted - once again the computer has an exact justification for all of these moves and the ones after 0-0-0.
In case you wonder how you could have seen this as human- you can with sufficient calculation skills but you don`t always have to - in this case all you need to see that after Qg4 , Bf6 you have a lead in development you have the initiative and he is totally uncoordinated and will have difficulty bringing his pieces out - this does not equate to a "forced win" if you only see this but is looking more than promising and something to definitely go for.
+1
So "missed win" doesn't mean what I thought: failing to catch an immediate path to victory. It is not qualitatively different than a blunder, just a little worse numerically according to the scoring engine? I guess I will think of them as "superblunders" going forward.
In this case, the fianchetto on Bb7 was not as important as I'd believed and capturing with pawn, forking the queen/bishop, and forcing the trade would've been preferable.
Thanks for explaining!
Yup, missed wins do not in all circumstances mean missed mate, though they occasionally do.
I can totally understand how dxe4 is a better move than Bb7. But I fail to see how it would lead to an inevitable win. Can anyone describe what moves would lead to such a win? Or better yet, a general way to get Analysis to tell you those next few steps?
(black's turn, move 9)