Why Great Move?

Sometimes what is clearly the only realistic move receives a "great move" rating in the analysis. Why is this?

1. fid,mnmjd

   ---

   ,nhfn v,z

I didn't understand that second reply.

Again tonight I got a "great move" rating for taking someone's queen, when it would have been a blunder not to. Hmmm?

So chess.com's programmer decided that when only one move is good, all others are bad, that one move will be called "great". And that's it.

It would seem more logical to call that the "best" move wouldn't it? If ever I managed to play a great move, I would think that would have been one that I would have to have calculated at least a few moves deep, rather than responding to someone hanging their queen.

Brilliant move: A move that literally knocks out your opponent, like he is fried, it is too much for him to handle.

Great move: A move that gives an advantage, however the advantage is not too large. The opponent can still fight but if you play correctly, eventually he will lose.

Best move: the move that will help you the most. Like in a losing position, best moves are moves that will prolong the game the most.

The move classifications have been designed by the marketing department, not by a chess coach. They sound overly positive and encouraging. Personally I find the terms 'excellent' and 'good' much worse. Because they indicate that you didn't play the best move. This means you can lose a game when you play too many excellent moves. What?

I don't mind the 'Great' move, because at the very least it's the best move, by a wide margin even. But if we're taking semantics, the word 'crucial' would be my preferred term. The term 'best' is not as meaningful for every position. Sometimes it's crucial and sometimes the second best is perfectly fine too.

Great move, the definition is a bit more subtle though.

These are moves that were critical to the outcome of the game, such as turning a losing position into an equal one, an equal position into a winning one, or finding the only good move in a position.

For an algorithm it's really hard to determine how hard a move is to find. Finding the best move in a really tough spot is indistinguishable from a very obvious hanging Queen. So you will have false positives, moves that are labeled as great that aren't really. But at the same time, they are the most important moves that you really shouldn't miss.

But for the record, not all moves that are the only good move are called great. Not always at least. For example in this position taking the Rook (Rxc8) is the only move, but won't be classified as great. Just as best,

What is the point of posting complete nonsense like this one? The real definitions are not hard to find.

"Great move": the only good move in the position.

"Brilliant move": a sacrifice that is good.

There are many games where a sac is a great move. Do you know that?

Yeah, why not?

The main point is that your first post had nothing to do with the truth.

I searched online what it is. Blame me if you want but it's the top result.