the reviews are like a train wreck - i try not to look but can't help myself. I totally aggravates me how dang smart the computers can be when playing against them, but the generated reviews are almost useless. for instance, i was cited for making a bad move, but it was a sacrifice and the very next move i forked the king and queen that led to mate in just a few more moves. a lesson told me yesterday that the correct move was my white knight to e6 to attack the queen in the opening - when the pawn at f7 had yet to be moved. wtf? i may be a beginner, but i'll stack 2 pawns if it means winning a knight and saving my queen any day. i see examples like this ALL the time.
also - very often i get cited for a "great" or even "brilliant" move, when all i did was take an undefended piece sitting out in the open all by its lonesome, and not a peep when i cleverly manuever my knight into a 3-pronged KQR fork in a crowded middle game.
not really a question just a rant, so much of advanced chess is way over my head but then i turn around and see this kind of counter-intuitiveness.
am i missing something or do others see the same thing?
Can you provide the example where review said the move was bad?
the reviews are like a train wreck - i try not to look but can't help myself. I totally aggravates me how dang smart the computers can be when playing against them, but the generated reviews are almost useless. for instance, i was cited for making a bad move, but it was a sacrifice and the very next move i forked the king and queen that led to mate in just a few more moves. a lesson told me yesterday that the correct move was my white knight to e6 to attack the queen in the opening - when the pawn at f7 had yet to be moved. wtf? i may be a beginner, but i'll stack 2 pawns if it means winning a knight and saving my queen any day. i see examples like this ALL the time.
also - very often i get cited for a "great" or even "brilliant" move, when all i did was take an undefended piece sitting out in the open all by its lonesome, and not a peep when i cleverly manuever my knight into a 3-pronged KQR fork in a crowded middle game.
not really a question just a rant, so much of advanced chess is way over my head but then i turn around and see this kind of counter-intuitiveness.
am i missing something or do others see the same thing?