Same thing happened to me! I was playing black and after the moves 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 d6 3. d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 This is the main line of chess! I played 5...a6 going into a najdorf and the computer said that it was an inaccuracy! The computer recommended 5...e5 which is a bad move and allows white light square domination after 6.Bb5+.
Why computer analysis is useless?
Sort:
Jun 20, 2013
0
#3
I've heard that it thinks the Sicilian (1. e4 c5?!) is an inaccuracy and I know firsthand that it hates the Scandinavian (1. e4 d5?!)--it insists that I ought to play the French (1. e4 e6) instead. In general, with openings, I wouldn't trust the computer analysis. However, it's useful for later parts of the game.
It is typical to set computer analysis to ignore the opening phase of the game. If this setting is not possible in this situation, then the user still has the option of ignoring the output, which is what I would strongly recommend.
In truth, the opening and the endgame are two areas where it is easy to see where computer analysis is not perfect. It is not so easy to see in the middlegame, but it is probably true for that phase, too. In the middle game it is just so much better than we are that it doesn't matter how imperfect it is.
u dont learn very much also. the computer says stuff like "white has a descisive advantage" or "black has a moderate advantage". WHY? the compute almost never tells us why in a very good manner!
I just recently sent some games for the chess.com computer to analyze for me.
When I got them back. 1. d4. Nf6. 2. c4. c5. It says "You made a mistake! You went from an equal position to a slightly worse one!."
That opening is the benko. A perfectly valid opening. It's like this quite a bit. And I cannot help but think this feature as a rip off for my membership. I'd hardly call it an analysis.
Does chess.com plan an improving it at anytime in the future?