computer analysis wrong?


Apologies Vivinski, my first thread - was hoping that would work!

White to move.






I played 11. Nf6+. The analysis called this a mistake, although it wins Q for N. Instead it preferred

11. Ng5 Bxd4+ 12. Qxd4 Qe8 13. Qd3 g6 14. Nxc7 Nxe5 15. Nxe8 Nxd3 16. Nf6+ Kg7 17. cxd3 Kxf6 18. Nxh7+ Kg7 19. Nxf8 Kxf8 20. Bxb8

despite seeing the continuation

11. Nf6+ gxf6 12. Bxe6 fxe6 13. exf6 Nc6 14. c3 d6 15. Qd3 Rxf6  

Am I missing something?


Ah ok I see it now. Was it Fischer who said "if you see a good move, look for a better one"? Guess that's why I'm only 1500. Q for N usually does me!


Don't feel too bad, winning the queen is never bad, it was obviously still a good move


The computer must be wrong often.

For example, yesterday...

Made a bishop sac to strategically move opponent's queen where I wanted.

He bit the bait and took the bishop.

So the analysis says, "Blunder! You are now losing. -6.62 points" or something like that.

Very next move?


So the best move of the game where I set up checkmate and the computer thinks it was the worst move or a blunder and losing. LOL.

It may have been rated 2500, but I played better.


Learningthemoves: can't see the game from your link but your comment made me laugh out loud! One of my finest (so I thought!) recent victories was an 11 move "brilliancy" that I analysed to confirm my undoubted genius. Four of my moves were ascribed double question marks, while my opponent's sound play was praised! Funny game this chess...


very interesting reading. i will look at the computer analysis more carefully next time. thank you all. 


I had few times quite funny results, like "Qd1 is mistake, much better is Qd1".